"Microsoft Windows 8 Professional 32 Edition" Sorry, but if you're a professional user then you need to be using the 64bit version. And if you're missing a driver then MS need to pay to get it written even though it is not their hardware, it's why you 'pay' for this OS. I think all 32Bit versions should go, if you're shipping 32bit x86 only hardware then use Win7, the hardware is old stop supporting it then you can concentrate on fixing bugs.
I honestly think it's a good idea to integrate the Metro UI right onto the Desktop. But forcing users to start ON the Metro UI was a horrible idea for Desktop users. Omitting the Start button was even worse. I have yet to see the functionality/usability of Windows 8 after having a lot of programs installed onto it. Where would we...um...Start? I've gotten as far as installing Mozilla Firefox onto my Windows 8 VirtualBox and the icon is on the Desktop, but, there's only so much Desktop space.
I REALLY dislike the name "Charms". It just sounds...ugh, I can't say that anymore. You get what I'm saying...maybe.
Well if higher Windows versions came with more features, then it's not so bad. But with Windows, it feels more like they're removing features for lower end systems. Just look at Windows 7. (http://windows.microsoft.com/en-US/windows7/products/compare) A feature that IMO should be with even the lowest end Windows is "Work in the language of your choice and switch between any of 35 languages." To have to buy the highest tiered Windows just to use another language is a little silly. Now bitlocker and whatnot, sure go ahead an limit those into higher tiers, but language?
And I'm sure they won't release all of these, as there aren't enough features to justify these many versions. Not to mention not nearly these many subgroups of consumers. You have casual home users, business users, IT administrators, and hardcore geeks. 4 versions tops is the way I see it.
Actually using a professional 64bit system is usually a bad thing, especially if the print server is a 32bit OS. 64bit desktop OS's have a very hard time accessing a 32bit print server. I deal with this day in and day out and we deploy all computers now with a 32bit version. There is no reason to go to 64bit unless you really want to go above 4GB of memory.
Windows should have one version and not be so overpriced. Instead, they strip features away so that the product is less usable for no reason other than to squeeze more money. I skipped Windows 7 in anticipation for Windows 8, but I everything I've heard has either not impressed me or made me wonder WTF they're thinking.
The list is certainly confusing the two professional editions leave me guessing. It would make more sense if Ultimate was no longer present but there it is...
[citation][nom]kcotton[/nom]Being annoyed due to there being 8 sku's? [/citation]
I hope you aren't serious and are attempting to troll and doing poorly at such.
[citation][nom]kcotton[/nom]Not only that but the idea that you want fewer options is ridiculous. [/citation]
It isn't consumer convenience friendly in this case. The naming scheme of them alone makes people raise a eyebrow and that isn't good for the consumer or Microsoft. When providing varying editions of the same core product you want to make it easy to understand giving too many options can easily get in the way of this. Just imagine if we were talking laundry detergent.
Tide Stain remover
Okay so we have 3 and they are easy to understand Normal detergent, one that is more powerful removing stains and one for dark colored clothes. Now lets do it the Windows 8 way.
Tide extra strength
Tide extra strength +
Not so easy to find what you actually want now is it? No longer maintains consumer convenience of understanding right away. Can you find the one I intended to mean to wash dark clothing? If I had done my job correctly you as a consumer should be able to identify what you want without hassle.
Microsoft however is failing to do this.
If they simply can't bring themselves to offer just two or three versions at most, why not just go totally modular with Windows, and sell a vanilla Windows 8 at a minimal price (the gamer version??), and then sell the add on "features" as separate modules, say for $15 or $20 each? That way you pay for what you want, and you don't pay for what you don't need. Would that be feasible?
[citation][nom]jescott418[/nom]Just another reason for me not to upgrade to Windows 8. I look for Windows 7 to become the next Windows XP. because who wants to deal with this?[/citation]You can't handle it, huh? Complete overload. Look, just ask for help in the forums. I'm sure they'll be more than happy to give you the Dell and HP websites, so you won't have to bother with choosing an OS or assembling a PC.[citation][nom]NuclearShadow[/nom]It isn't consumer convenience friendly in this case. The naming scheme of them alone makes people raise a eyebrow and that isn't good for the consumer or Microsoft. [/citation]99% of consumers buy a system (phone, laptop, tablet, desktop, whatever) with the OS preinstalled. This won't affect consumers in the slightest. Most of them will get a machine with Win8 Home Premium. Just about any PC you can walk into a store and buy will have this installed and will get the job done.
Now for business/IT and advanced users, there might be some actual decision making involved. You know, some of those insignificant features that only took them "like 5 minutes to make, bro", and should be completely free for some reason? Those might come into play. But if you're in that situation and you're not capable of figuring out what you/your business needs because "oh noes tere's multoople vershins!!1" then you should go ahead and find yourself a nice career in burger flipping instead.
I agree they should eliminate all but one 32-bit version. The 32-bit version should be aimed primarily at businesses and should be called Windows 8 Legacy Edition. It would have a lot of the enhancements of Windows 8 but would obviously be more compatible with legacy hardware and software. If you need additional 32-bit machines deployed (or are replacing faulty/insufficient machines), why put Win7 32-bit on them when Win8 32-bit would carry additional improvements? You have to pay for an OS license for the new box, why not get the newer faster OS?