Death of Windows 7 OEM Sales Posted in Error

[exfileme]

Windows 7 for OEMs still may have some life left.

Death of Windows 7 OEM Sales Posted in Error : Read more

 

[killabanks]

still not getting it

 

[goodguy713]

Yea I was thinking they would shoot their selves in the foot if they pulled the plug on windows 7 .. I still wont use windows 8 until they make more changes and Im not interested in modding my windows 8. i might upgrade to 8.1 but the differences are so minimal that its like why? when windows 7 dose every 8 will. call me old school or what not if you like but i honestly think tablet interfaces have no place on the desk top unless your using a touch screen and .. I would never buy touch screen monitor i would have to wipe down every 10 minutes.

 

[SteelCity1981]

love windows 7 I have no intentions of upgrading to windows 8. I hate the fact that there is no real start menu, no real aero glass which makes the taskbar and windows frame ugly to look at and no way to disable metro.

 

[tburns1]

First time I saw the Metro interface, I thought it looked like something you could do on a commodore 64 screen. "Wow, 16 colors! Let's play Jumpman!.

 

[dextermat]

They are forcing windows 8 because people will have to go on windows store to get software. Therefore, piracy will disappear further down the line. I am guessing that with windows 10, you will have to go through windows store for software.

 

[house70]

That kinda big oopsie, ain't it?

 

[ta152h]

The answer for Microsoft is not Windows 7, as it's outdated and slow. Windows 8.1 adds a lot of nice things, and it significantly faster. Windows 7 must die, there's no point in it. It's too slow. Windows XP is at least fast and doesn't consume so many resources.

The answer is Windows 8 done right. So far, it's been shackled with a miserable interface, that requires user customization to make it productive. Windows 8.2 is supposed to be what we want - a better Windows 7, and it better be.

Windows 7 sucks. I use 8.1 and don't want to go back to it. It's obsolete and slow. It has no reason to exist, except Microsoft keeps being stupid with Windows 8.

Windows 8.1 is clearly better than Windows 7 for most people here, since we can customize it and make it work the way we need it to, but that's not the point. The mass of people that have to deal with the excruciatingly annoying interface and don't have the skill to customize it properly are being disserviced by this idiotic tablet interface.

But, folks, we should be happy about all this. Microsoft thought they could bludgeon the market and force whatever they wanted on it, and failed miserably. Now they know they have to answer to us, because we finally, collectively, rejected their BS product and forced them to change it.

Buying something that requires extensive customization to work properly on its intended device, or being forced to use an obsolete OS instead is not acceptable, unless you have no choice. Now we have choices, and Microsoft has to make better ones because of it.

It looks like 8.2 will be what we want. If it is, you'll forget about Windows 7, if it isn't, you'll forget about Microsoft. It's up to them.

 

[Patrick Tobin]

Windows 8.1 is great. It may not have a ton of better features but they're all in the right places.

 

[Geef]

I'm just glad that way back when I upgraded to windows I did it by buying the Windows 7 Family pack 3X. So I will always have three copies.

 

[dimar]

Windows 8.1 allows you to go straight to the desktop (Taskbar properties, Navigation, ...go to the desktop instead of start). Then use Classic Shell to get the Start Menu. I prefer Classic with two columns. The new Task Manager and Copy interface with graph is worth it.

 

[billgatez]

@ ta152h. How is 7 slow and out dated. It's boot time's are only a second slower then Win 8 and it runs every thing that 8 can other then those crappy Apps that no one uses.

 

[adamhc]

Hmm... I have Windows 8 on my new laptop. Is it worth the learning curve? That all depends. Windows 8 does have some nice features (for touch screen machines) but other than that I see no reason for Microsoft or OEMs to "force it upon us unless there are some real improvements to the usability aspect. Yes I can downgrade legally to windows 7 with the windows 8 key but IMHO its not worth the trouble. As far as Windows 8.2 goes they need to fix the mouse lag issues with windows 8.1 first!!

 

[punahou1]

I wouldn't mind trying the upgrade from 7 to 8.1 The only problem is that the Microsoft site says I have to reinstall all my software and that is going to take some time. Plus I have already used my three licenses of Office 2007 and so I'm guessing that's going to fail right off the bat. I sure wish Microsoft could develop a more user friendly upgrade path....

 

[RCguitarist]

Haha, ta152h must work for Microsoft. Windows 7 is fast, not slow at all. I have used windows 8.1 on a family member's pc and it is actually slower than 7. I honestly cannot find a single thing I like about it. I'll keep my dual boot XP/7 setup until Microsoft gets itself together and actually releases an improvement.

 

[colson79]

Yep, ta152h is on something. Windows 8 isn't significantly faster than Windows 7 as he states. It is sightly faster as a few things but nothing noticeable. I have Windows 8.1 on my work laptop but I run 7 at home and I hate windows 8.1 The interface sucks.

 

[catswold]

@punahou1, your difficulty is irrelevant, Office 2007 doesn't work with 8.1. The clever b'tards didn't include support when the revised 7.

Microsoft, always forward thinking . . . /rolleyes

 

[ta152h]

@Billgatez It's not one second faster, I'm guessing you already know that. They did tests and the bootup and shutdown times are significantly faster than Windows 7.

They also did the normal slew of benchmarks, which show Windows 8.1 isn't much faster, maybe 6% or so. This includes games, of course. But, I read the review on this, and was pretty surprised by such a low number (6%), until I read the final verdict. When you use Windows 8, it just does everything faster. Everything seems snappier. 6% seems low to me, but it all depends on what you're measuring.

After being surprised by the low number, the reviewer than said that it made a big difference, because it didn't have all the choppiness of Windows 7, but I guess that part didn't show up.

I'm not going to lie, I was prepared to hate Windows 8.1. I bought it because I could get the retail version for $110 instead of $300 for Windows 7, that's it. After I installed it, I was pretty surprised at the speed. You'd have to use it to see what I mean. After I customized it and learned all the new features, I prefer it to Windows 7.

I use Windows 7 at work still, and I can't say I hate it by any stretch, while I do hate some things about Windows 8, but it feels really old in a way that Windows XP never felt to me when Windows 7 came out. Windows 8 is a better OS, no question there, and the answer isn't to keep using a miserable OS like 7, which truly sucks, just not as bad as Vista. It's just too slow, and too demanding of resources. Windows 8 fixed that part, at least somewhat, and added nice features. The answer isn't going back to the obsolete and inefficient Windows 7, it's to use the superior OS in Windows 8, and make the interface actually usable on the desktop.

I could understand people like Windows XP (I preferred Windows 2000), because it did what you needed, didn't require a lot of resources, and did things fast. Windows 7 is a bloated, flatulent pig. We only accepted it because Vista was such a nightmare, it seemed good, and because Windows 8 has an absurd interface for the desktop. But, it's only good by comparison with two failures, not on its own merit.

That's why XP still commands over 30% of the market, despite being replaced over seven years old. People don't want the Windows 7 bloat, so they have to cling to a very old OS, because the new one still sucks.

They fixed one problem, and then created another with the stupid interface. When they move to an appropriate interface, and with the Windows 7 gas problem less of an issue in Windows 8, they'll have a winner.

They haven't since Windows 2000 in my opinion, or Windows XP in the opinion of many others. That's why they still hold on. If Windows 7 were truly a good OS, Windows XP would be virtually forgotten. As it is, it will only disappear due to lack of hardware support (which is the only reason I didn't use it).

 

[thxext]

Windows XP is still around because it costs companies an arm and leg to upgrade and the majority of home users just don't care. We are the minority in this and that is why MS does not care what we say.

 

[DjEaZy]

Death of Windows 7 OEM Sales Posted in Error? It better be!!!

 

[antilycus]

10 years and MS will lose it's spot. Developers will move to Anroid / Linux where all this " doesnt work with this" or "force to upgrade to that" isnt jammed down their throat. Office is slowly losing it's edge to the free programs like LibreOffice which let you open, create and save in any document format including office 2013. Free vs 100+ hmmm I wonder. I see more and more ODT (Open Document standard which means nothing propertary) more and more in teh work place and in personal life.

 

[Alpha the Mage]

For ta152h -Win xp is the best os made by microsoft. That is why is still being used. It's true it is a magnet for hackers and malware but there are free solutions that solve this problem even without updates. Microsoft tried to make the users move from xp by introducing vista-failure. When win 7 came out, it was a breath of fresh air. Different from xp (the look) but had the same functionality. People opted between the old or the new. After creating 2 great operating systems, microsoft thought they can make more money from users and developed a hybrid platform for tablet and pc (no doubt they used ubuntu as inspiration). Win 8 was rushed on the market and advertised as being greater than the titans (xp and 7). Failure was around the corner. Metro and desktop didn't mix very well. Win 8 was released with major bugs and no start button. In a year they fixed that. 8.1 came and there was little improvement in the look and feel. The security is better in win 8 that 7 (maby 10%). It has the same crappy firewall as win 7 and the same detection rate for the MSE or DEFENDER (same thing). They took win 7 and strapped tablet interface on it. Win 8 has advanced smart filter but only in ie. If you use other browser same security. It has the same bootup time as win 7. True, for metro interface it is faster but when you click desktop tile you get the same result. You say that win 7 is slower and resource hogger NOT TRUE. I installed win 7 on a pentium 3 machine with 512 ram. It used only 312. Tried to do the same with win 8-i got 1 hour of installation time and the system used over 800 mb ram-used from virtual ram. It ran very slow. I upgraded to 1 gb ram. The experience was better but still slow. On a modern machine with 8 gb of ram win 8.1 consumes 2 gb in ide. I repet 2 gb. Win 7 consumes on the same machine only 700 to 900 mb. So what system demands more resources? Win 8 consumes over 30 gb with updates, win 7 almost 20. Why adopt win 8 when win 7 offers the same functionality without the useless stuff? Want a tablet? Buy an ipad. Is better. You say that win 7 is miserable? When you click desktop tile you get the miserable win 7 interface. So why use windows at all? Switch to apple os. All versions have the same interface. I wrote too much but deh, your comment irritated me and i saw i wasn't the only one. So, in conclusion, the titans (xp and 7) are much better than the hybrid. If you dont have touch why bother with it?

 

[Alpha the Mage]

For ta152h -Win xp is the best os made by microsoft. That is why is still being used. It's true it is a magnet for hackers and malware but there are free solutions that solve this problem even without updates. Microsoft tried to make the users move from xp by introducing vista-failure. When win 7 came out, it was a breath of fresh air. Different from xp (the look) but had the same functionality. People opted between the old or the new. After creating 2 great operating systems, microsoft thought they can make more money from users and developed a hybrid platform for tablet and pc (no doubt they used ubuntu as inspiration). Win 8 was rushed on the market and advertised as being greater than the titans (xp and 7). Failure was around the corner. Metro and desktop didn't mix very well. Win 8 was released with major bugs and no start button. In a year they fixed that. 8.1 came and there was little improvement in the look and feel. The security is better in win 8 that 7 (maby 10%). It has the same crappy firewall as win 7 and the same detection rate for the MSE or DEFENDER (same thing). They took win 7 and strapped tablet interface on it. Win 8 has advanced smart filter but only in ie. If you use other browser same security. It has the same bootup time as win 7. True, for metro interface it is faster but when you click desktop tile you get the same result. You say that win 7 is slower and resource hogger NOT TRUE. I installed win 7 on a pentium 3 machine with 512 ram. It used only 312. Tried to do the same with win 8-i got 1 hour of installation time and the system used over 800 mb ram-used from virtual ram. It ran very slow. I upgraded to 1 gb ram. The experience was better but still slow. On a modern machine with 8 gb of ram win 8.1 consumes 2 gb in ide. I repet 2 gb. Win 7 consumes on the same machine only 700 to 900 mb. So what system demands more resources? Win 8 consumes over 30 gb with updates, win 7 almost 20. Why adopt win 8 when win 7 offers the same functionality without the useless stuff? Want a tablet? Buy an ipad. Is better. You say that win 7 is miserable? When you click desktop tile you get the miserable win 7 interface. So why use windows at all? Switch to apple os. All versions have the same interface. I wrote too much but deh, your comment irritated me and i saw i wasn't the only one. So, in conclusion, the titans (xp and 7) are much better than the hybrid. If you dont have touch why bother with it?

 

[Alpha the Mage]

For ta152h -Win xp is the best os made by microsoft. That is why is still being used. It's true it is a magnet for hackers and malware but there are free solutions that solve this problem even without updates. Microsoft tried to make the users move from xp by introducing vista-failure. When win 7 came out, it was a breath of fresh air. Different from xp (the look) but had the same functionality. People opted between the old or the new. After creating 2 great operating systems, microsoft thought they can make more money from users and developed a hybrid platform for tablet and pc (no doubt they used ubuntu as inspiration). Win 8 was rushed on the market and advertised as being greater than the titans (xp and 7). Failure was around the corner. Metro and desktop didn't mix very well. Win 8 was released with major bugs and no start button. In a year they fixed that. 8.1 came and there was little improvement in the look and feel. The security is better in win 8 that 7 (maby 10%). It has the same crappy firewall as win 7 and the same detection rate for the MSE or DEFENDER (same thing). They took win 7 and strapped tablet interface on it. Win 8 has advanced smart filter but only in ie. If you use other browser same security. It has the same bootup time as win 7. True, for metro interface it is faster but when you click desktop tile you get the same result. You say that win 7 is slower and resource hogger NOT TRUE. I installed win 7 on a pentium 3 machine with 512 ram. It used only 312. Tried to do the same with win 8-i got 1 hour of installation time and the system used over 800 mb ram-used from virtual ram. It ran very slow. I upgraded to 1 gb ram. The experience was better but still slow. On a modern machine with 8 gb of ram win 8.1 consumes 2 gb in ide. I repet 2 gb. Win 7 consumes on the same machine only 700 to 900 mb. So what system demands more resources? Win 8 consumes over 30 gb with updates, win 7 almost 20. Why adopt win 8 when win 7 offers the same functionality without the useless stuff? Want a tablet? Buy an ipad. Is better. You say that win 7 is miserable? When you click desktop tile you get the miserable win 7 interface. So why use windows at all? Switch to apple os. All versions have the same interface. I wrote too much but deh, your comment irritated me and i saw i wasn't the only one. So, in conclusion, the titans (xp and 7) are much better than the hybrid. If you dont have touch why bother with it?

 

[demonhorde665]

ok first i'll ask that you guys don't thumb me down for this first part and pleae read through my whole comment.

As a home user i see nothing wrong with Win 8/8.1) been using it most of this year and some games seem speedier on it than they did in win 7 (due to win 8's slightly better usage of memory). that said we've all been though the various win 7 win 8 arguments so not doing that here. but i will say MS's timely closure of win7 is just plain dumb. while Win 8 is perfectly fine in a home enviroment.. conducting buisness with it is a nother story. employee will need re training time will be lost and well time is ... ecetera ecetera.

I really think MS should contnue selling win 7 just for the buisness sector alone. ok they want to push win8 into homes that's fine .. in a average home enviroment most people won't be affected by the win 8 changes much .. but as it stands with retail of win7 going out buisnesses both small and large will turn to third party software dealers to get win 7 or they will use a different OS and well MS will not make money on those.

Ms isn't just shooting them selves in the foot ... people and companies survive that sort of self injury all the time .. what MS is doing is akin to shooting themselves in the d---. there's no cumming back from that.