Microsoft Already Starting on Windows 8

[JonnyDough]

I would like to address that some of you posting about how MS makes an OS designed to fit everyone's need. I don't want an OS that addresses everyone's need. I want one that addresses MY need. I want it to be slim, fast, and reasonably priced. I use my PC for gaming, internet browsing, and office docs. That's ALL I use it for. Why can't I get an OS for $100 or less that is designed specifically for these tasks? If I want a server, I'll buy a server OS. If I want virtualization support, I'll purchase an add-on that enables it. If I want to do fancy networking, or run a business, I'll buy those seperately too. I don't give a crap about a fancy GUI. When I'm playing a game I'm not even looking at it. When I'm writing a paper, I want simplicity so I can focus on my work. When I'm messing with my family photos, I want software that makes it easy. Where is the GUI then? I don't need 20 ways to get to a program. I want ONE. Otherwise it just becomes confusing as all hell. I don't want a google toolbar, that's what a home page is for. I hate that I DL software to read acrobat files and it installs toolbars. When is the PC going to get SIMPLE again?

 

[touchdowntexas13]

[citation][nom]JonnyDough[/nom]I would like to address that some of you posting about how MS makes an OS designed to fit everyone's need. I don't want an OS that addresses everyone's need. I want one that addresses MY need. I want it to be slim, fast, and reasonably priced. I use my PC for gaming, internet browsing, and office docs. That's ALL I use it for. Why can't I get an OS for $100 or less that is designed specifically for these tasks? If I want a server, I'll buy a server OS. If I want virtualization support, I'll purchase an add-on that enables it. If I want to do fancy networking, or run a business, I'll buy those seperately too. I don't give a crap about a fancy GUI. When I'm playing a game I'm not even looking at it. When I'm writing a paper, I want simplicity so I can focus on my work. When I'm messing with my family photos, I want software that makes it easy. Where is the GUI then? I don't need 20 ways to get to a program. I want ONE. Otherwise it just becomes confusing as all hell. I don't want a google toolbar, that's what a home page is for. I hate that I DL software to read acrobat files and it installs toolbars. When is the PC going to get SIMPLE again?[/citation]

Sadly, if you wanted someone to make an OS custom fit for you, you would have to pay someone to do it for you for probably in excess of $500. Seeing as that is unreasonable, you will have to be like the rest of us and try and customize the generic OS to fit our needs. And yes you will be paying for a part of every feature and innovation that Microsoft implemented into their OS. If you don't want to pay for it, skip to the end of my post. there is a "free" suggestion.

I don't quite understand what you are asking for here, because nothing you are asking for is feasible. All i get from that post is you, you, and you. Well i doubt we will be seeing "Windows for JonnyDough" anytime soon. If you want a cheaper, slimmed down OS, then buy vista basic and turn off the fancy GUI. An OS has to fit everyone's needs and not just the dude down the street that only has to concern himself with gaming, web browsing, email, and office apps (I fall into that category too.)

1)other people spend a lot more time looking at the GUI than you do, so maybe some would like the special effects and such. turn them off if you don't

2)How has an OS made your writing a paper more complicated? The process seems pretty straightforward to me.

3)if you want better software for editing photos, you will have to buy it. but i doubt you will find anything more basic and stripped down than windows photo editing. And the GUI is there, it's in the very windows you have opened. the GUI is included in everything you do, apart from fullscreen games and apps that have their own "GUI". this includes any windows, menus, radio buttons, icons, etc., etc., etc.

4)desktop shortcuts, my computer pathway, start menu, command prompt. those are the only ways i have ever used to start a program and each has its own advantages vs. the other. I myself could probably be able to function without command prompt, but really if you take any of the others away, things get more complicated for me instead of more simple. if you want i can even explain how.

5)this is just retarded. the purpose of google toolbar or any search toolbar is to give the ability to search on the fly. that way if i want to do a quick search of something while on a site i can just type it in the toolbar. the toolbar has nothing to do with your homepage, in fact having a toolbar will keep you from having to return to your homepage in order to make a search. uninstall a toolbar if it really bothers you...do i need to explain that as well?

6)Don't download software that comes bloated with toolbars. that's your own freakin fault. besides, all software installations i have ever completed have given me the option to not install the included toolbars. just make sure you aren't doing an "automatic" or as i like to call "user-handicapped" install. do a manual install and select the components for installation.

7)the PC will NEVER be simple again simply because the lives of individuals are increasingly more rapid, complicated, and more dependent upon computers themselves. This is the year 2009. people spend a lot of time on computers, and therefore they need the excess of options and features so that they can pick out what applies to them.

My suggestion to you. Download Linux. It's free, and you can use it when you only want the basic stuff (not gaming). Or go spend your life savings on a mac. But you will still need windows for most games.

Have a nice day, and remember that neither you nor i am the general pc population, and therefore Microsoft isn't going to design an OS for your every whine and complaint.

 

[Guest]

If it wasn't for my addiction to games, I'd never use Microsoft operating systems. I've experimented with Linux since the early days. I've broken away from it for several years. In the past five years, things have changed. I built a 64 bit system and decided to install a 64 Linux operating system on it. The Linux operating system has constantly evolved and improved since I began using the 64 bit versions. I'm really amazed at the hardware support and stability it has. I now find it easier to use and maintain than Windows. I now use Linux on both my desktop and laptop. Old habits are hard to break, so I have one drive in my desktop with windows XP. However it is just used for gaming.

 

[nirvanabah]

[citation][nom]ossie[/nom]m$ started the work on the "next" windblow$ version after the monumental vi$hta (aka DRM o$) flop. "$even" is just an interim contingency plan (aka vi$hta SP2 w/lipstick - 6.1 means exactly that) for the dumb con$umer - maybe he'll gulp the bait - hook, line, and sinker - and shell out some more $$$.Maybe, by just an extremely slim chance, if m$ would let away it's characteristic greed - don't really count on that - "8ight" won't be 6.2.[/citation]

Using $ signs for all your S's doesn't make you seem smart...

 

[solymnar]

[citation][nom]Cryogenic[/nom]Since when rewriting the OS core is called a service pack?> The core engine is also being reworked to provide dramatic performance improvements[/citation]

Its making light of the idea that many people (myself included) often wait until sp1 is out before getting the next MS OS because its usually at that point that the OS runs smoothly and has the bugs worked out.

Part of my desire to be funny also stems from me being amused that they are talking about win8 before 7 has even launched. In a sense that's a bit like stealing your own thunder. If there is all this headroom to make the core OS run significantly better it partly implies that the core of win7 isn't very efficient.

"My new product is soooo much better than my new product...both of which are not released."

Just strikes me as funny. /shrug

 

[tenor77]

So programmers finished their project and started on a new one? Stop the presses, this is big news!!!!!!!!!!

 

[solymnar]

Touchdown has my feelings pegged well in regards to the notion of having the OS make it easy to disable/enable various features. It would be handy to simply have basic and advanced options. Much like what you would find in some graphics settings.

Basic options let you adjust sliders to increase performance but reduce aesthetics without having to know much about the OS.

Advanced options break things into categories and let you hand pick which ones to disable with small explanations of what they do and how much they cost in terms of start up speed and CPU/memory usage.


You can pretty much do all this now if you know where to look and what commands to run but it isn't overly user friendly or consolidated.

Not much has changed for me personally with windows since 95/NT4 came out.

Networking has gotten a little better, diagnosing problems and functionality of the OS itself has changed marginally. The main tangible difference from one release to the next for me being the scope of what it supports.

 

[gwolfman]

The core engine is also being reworked to provide dramatic performance improvements.

Hopefully it'll have their micro-kernel

 

[Master Exon]

[citation][nom]touchdowntexas13[/nom]Sadly, if you wanted someone to make an OS custom fit for you, you would have to pay someone to do it for you for probably in excess of $500. Seeing as that is unreasonable,[/citation]

Actually, that's the advantage of Linux. Ubuntu makes the basic core OS like Microsoft makes Windows, and then many different groups see that users like Johnny Dough exist and they will modify the original Ubuntu package to apeal to this group of users.

 

[touchdowntexas13]

Well I did recommend Linux as a free alternative, but when i mentioned the $500 i was referring to having someone write/modify the Windows OS. Of course i was just throwing a number out there. I really have no idea how much something like that would cost, but I don't think it would be cheap.

 

[Guest]

First, you're forgetting about Windows 286. Yes, it existed.

Secondly, it's Microsoft here people - they have to keep up the development or they don't get their $400 from 50% of the population every so many years.

Personally, I hopped off that bandwagon several years ago by switching to Linux, and I am still not disappointed I have done so.

Converting just takes time, not money. I like that.

 

[cablechewer]

Why does this always surprise people? Planning for the next generation of a product always starts before the release of the product they are working on. As you develop the current product and bugs/feature requests appear you have to decide whether they will be addressed immediately, in a service pack or pushed to subsequent full version. The company should also have a vision that extends out 2-3 versions with upcoming features tentatively slotted into each one. I have dealt with some companies that actually had a small team dedicated to version +2 while they developed version +1. They did this so they would have design documents, vision statement and a feature list ready to roll for developers the day version +1 went gold. Developers are expensive to keep around. You let them have a short break after a major project finishes and then get them working on the next version ASAP

 

[solymnar]

Planning ahead is understood and assumed in most cases. Its not like anyone expects the software design engineers to take a yearlong break after they've nailed out the core design of win7.

The irony to me is MS talking about how great win8 will be before people have even started purchasing 7. Its a bit poor on the marketing tactics side of things. 😉

 

[tpi2007]

[citation][nom]Thomaseron[/nom]Windows 7 is the seventh gen 32-bit windows, just like core i7 is seventh gen 32-bit processor.[/citation]


I'm afraid your're wrong in both cases.

Unless you show A+B how you got to that conclusion.

Everybody knows it is very difficult do defend these new 7's.

In my opinion they're marketing. And there's nothing wrong with that. The minor problem is Microsoft (I don't recall Intel claiming what you say) trying to say this is the "seventh biggest release in the Windows Family" (whatever that is). I actually like the sound of "7", and maybe they did some market research and found the number 7 to be a worthy trademark. After all is has many cultural meanings.