Windows 8 Uptake Falls Behind Windows Vista Pace

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
Windows 8's sluggish attraction is undoubtedly related to its new Modern UI interface. Both the consumer and enterprise sectors have expressed a desire to postpone upgrading from even the older Windows XP platform, possibly believing that the new interface has completely taken over, making customers reluctant to change. On the contrary, Microsoft's Modern UI is merely an overlay that ties together the desktop, laptop, touch-focused tablets, Windows Phone 8 platform and gaming consoles. Underneath the modern exterior is mostly the same desktop consumers have grown to love over the years, hindered by the lack of a Start menu.
Click to expand...
:sarcastic:
Tech guys can love the UI all they want; however, that does not quell the main, as I see it, business aspect of yet another upgrade which is, namely, cost.

Where have you guys been? Most businesses have just upgraded to Windows 7 at considerable cost, yet somehow, 8 loving tech writers fail to realize this. Why they fail to realize this baffles me.

The business world, IMHO, is not likely to upgrade to 8 because the cost does not justify the "improvements" that have appeared in 8. IMHO, it is much more likely that the business world will wait until Windows 9 or 10 for their next upgrade, and without the business world buying in, any version of Windows will not succeed.

Sorry to say this, but the business world is not driven by the same got to have the latest greatest toy urge that 8 loving tech writers seem to be. Wake up to reality, guys. No matter how much you guys love this OS, it will not be a big hit mainly because it is too costly for the business world to upgrade after just having upgraded to 7.
 
I called it at the very beginning: businesses would run from Windows 8 as the cost of retraining is far, far too high. Consumer uptake is not exactly surprising either but I have a feeling that also has quite a bit to do with the general home computer market, which is sluggish anyway.

My personal experience of Win 8 so far is that it's quite irritating on a laptop. I'd describe it as a claustrophobic sensation of being strangled or restrained by the new interface and the way it interacts with the traditional desktop environment. It almost feels as if I have to make excessive use of the mousepad as well, which of course isn't brilliant as mousepads are crappy human interface devices.

What surprises me most is of how little use the new interface seems to be. It doesn't appear to... well, to 'do' anything. I can't configure my entire system through it (try changing the mouse acceleration/scroll speed via Metro... go on). I can't explore files and folders through it - at least, I've not seen a file browser in there so far. I have to search for things if it isn't clear they are immediately navigable (at least search works well). It seems it's only useful as a pretty window from which to launch the occasional app.

Bizarre. It's just really bizarre. At least the novelty is entertaining.
 
[citation][nom]wiyosaya[/nom]Tech guys can love the UI all they want; however, that does not quell the main, as I see it, business aspect of yet another upgrade which is, namely, cost.Where have you guys been? Most businesses have just upgraded to Windows 7 at considerable cost, yet somehow, 8 loving tech writers fail to realize this. Why they fail to realize this baffles me.The business world, IMHO, is not likely to upgrade to 8 because the cost does not justify the "improvements" that have appeared in 8. IMHO, it is much more likely that the business world will wait until Windows 9 or 10 for their next upgrade, and without the business world buying in, any version of Windows will not succeed.Sorry to say this, but the business world is not driven by the same got to have the latest greatest toy urge that 8 loving tech writers seem to be. Wake up to reality, guys. No matter how much you guys love this OS, it will not be a big hit mainly because it is too costly for the business world to upgrade after just having upgraded to 7.[/citation] Exactly. Windows 7 and even Windows Vista was, at least, very similar to XP (imagine how crazy that sentence sounded back when 7 came out). Comparatively little to learn when it comes to basic operation. Businesses would avoid it because of factors involving app/environment compatibility, the need for system upgrades, as well as the new OS not being of much benefit overall compared to the already functional systems.

Now, though... now there's this whole new UI which gets in the way. It does not simply sit on top of the old desktop. It's intrusive and has been built to be a core part of the Win 8 experience. Now, as well as the concerns businesses had with Vista/7, they must contend with users, even competent users, not having a clue how their own computers operate.

If you're an IT department trying to support a business of hundreds, thousands or tens of thousands of computers, are you really going to take on that challenge? The cost would be enormous. Productivity down. Training. Resolving all the inevitable issues people will have. Even ignoring the money, the raw impracticality of it just can't be justified.

We're still on XP over here. We will be dragging the company kicking and screaming towards Win 7 this year, but forget Win 8.
 
[citation][nom]DjEaZy[/nom]... it's a crap OS... period!!![/citation]
no, at its core, its a great os...
the problem is forcing people to use metro
and complete removal of the start menu, and than making damn sure you cant put it back in through registry edits.

yea, i know 3rd party programs can fix that crap, but i shouldn't have to pay more money to fix what shouldn't have been removed.

i may look into 8 after service pack one, when they will without a doubt add an option for the start menu and no metro.
 
[citation][nom]wannabepro[/nom]Not surprised. You'd think M$ would know what their customers want instead of shoving something stupid down their throats.[/citation]Seriously. It blows my mind that not one person in MS in a position of power sat down and thought "hang on, won't a massive fundamental change to the operating principles of Windows cause issues for consumers and businesses alike?".
 
Fact: Windows 8 has overtaken Linux already. I don't see everyone calling Linux a failure, even though it clearly is! Metro is here to stay, deal with it, you will see more of it in Windows 9 or whatever comes next. Hopefully the desktop is finally abolished outright by then, and note the creator of Metro has been promoted in Microsoft. God Bless Windows 8, a real operating system for all true patriots!
 
There was only 800 million active Windows computers when Vista Launched compared to the 1450 million active Windows computers now.

So which is more, 2.2% of 800 million or 1.6% of 1450 million? Vista had 17.6 million units. Windows 8 has 23.2 million.

Here's the numbers.

Here's one from Gartner stating 1 billion active users in June of 2008. (can't find the link where I got my 800 million number)

http://www.gartner.com/it/page.jsp?id=703807

"Gartner Says More than 1 Billion PCs In Use Worldwide and Headed to 2 Billion Units by 2014"

STAMFORD, Conn., June 23, 2008—
The number of installed PCs worldwide has surpassed 1 billion units, according to Gartner, Inc. Gartner analysts estimate the worldwide installed base of PCs is growing just under 12 percent annually. At that pace, it will surpass 2 billion units by early 2014."

Remember, this is ALL pc's. Windows was roughly 90% market share of this 1 billion, making roughly 900 million, but in June of 2008. Beginning in 2007 (when Vista launched) was roughly 800 million active Windows users.

http://c-i-a.com/pr02012012.htm

"PCs In-Use Reached over 1.6B in 2011 USA has nearly 311M PCs In-Use"

Once again, Windows is roughly 90% of that number. Roughly 1.45 billion active Windows users as of End of 2011 / beginning 2012.

Percentages mean nothing unless you know the total numbers at the time of these percentages.

My numbers maybe off slightly, (but not by much) but the point is this comparison between Windows Vista and Windows 8 is flawed.
 
[citation][nom]DjEaZy[/nom]... it's a crap OS... period!!![/citation]
[citation][nom]alidan[/nom]no, at its core, its a great os...the problem is forcing people to use metroand complete removal of the start menu, and than making damn sure you cant put it back in through registry edits. yea, i know 3rd party programs can fix that crap, but i shouldn't have to pay more money to fix what shouldn't have been removed. i may look into 8 after service pack one, when they will without a doubt add an option for the start menu and no metro.[/citation]
... ok... if you compare it to a car... it haz a powerful and efficient engine mounted in to crap... not a car body on wheels and stuff, no... just crap...
 
Windows only needs a new version when there is significant features for it, perhaps in the early years of windows 95-2000 that was every 2-3 years but now it is 5+. touch screen and a new UI is not enough nor is making new versions of direct x exclusive (when it clearly is no real work to make backward completable). If windows 8 was 5-10% faster then windows 7 then probably the older base would have stomached Metro UI and would learn to live with it. So yeah windows 8 will fail and windows 9 will sell as windows 7 did. I predict windows 10 fail
 
I LOL'd when microsoft said it could take up to 6 weeks to like windows 8. Who's going to stick with an OS they hate for 6 weeks? It's obvious that this is the first OS from microsoft that was designed for content consumption instead of content creation and it's destined to fail for that reason alone.
 
It's not the fact that the interface sucks (desktop mode is fine, and there's always Classic Shell), it's:

1: The fact that you can't buy a cheap normal copy of Windows 8. I don't want an upgrade copy, I want a full copy, WITHOUT the premium price tag.
2: The fact that Windows 8 constantly connects to Microsoft's servers without user permission.
3: 64-bit Windows are supposed to be backwards compatible with 32-bit software. Why is it then that some of the 32-bit software I was using on XP don't work in 64-bit Windows 8? To say I'm peeved off about this would be putting it lightly.
 
It's a schizophrenic system with Metro to do some stuff and desktop apps to do others... some configuration can be done in metro but the control panel is on the desktop... Metro apps are over simplified for PC users to the point where they are almost useless.

Way too many steps to do things that are simple with the start menu...
Having to type to search for things like control panel items, programs, etc.
Some programs are not available as metro apps...
Annoying Store... hell, I couldn't even find a proper search function in the store interface.

The whole system jut seems clobbered together like one big unhappy dysfunctional family.

A mess, in other words.

The fix is ridiculously simple:

Give me back the start menu and the option to boot straight to the desktop with none of this Metro nonsense. and I'm on board.

As it stands now, they can keep their tablet OS. I'm not even paying $40 to "upgrade".

IB
 
Open letter to stupid Microsoft:
Your big mistake is that you designed Windows 8 mostly for touch users and you are angering and alienating all current Windows users who still use keyboard and mouse.
I will never use your horrible, abysmal and very irritating Windows 8. I waste time with it instead of doing my work and be productive. I curse all your idiot designers who are responsible for Windows 8.
I understand that you now realize your huge mistake and are working very hard and fast on the new Windows 9 which may be released this summer. You better correct and fix all your mistakes with Windows 8 and this new Windows 9 be just perfect and useable, otherwise you will declare bankruptcy very soon.
 
What did people expect. Totally not comparable, Vista came after a long run of XP, that was getting long on the tooth, and was full of bugs. 8 is coming out after a relatively short run of 7 which has all the Vista bugs out of it and is a good and stable OS.
I am currently running machines with XP, 7 64bit and 8 64 bit and all are running fine even 8 has features I like.
If people do not like 8 stop moaning, nobody is forcing it on you, just buy 7!
 
Just picked up the physical copy of Win 8 on a $40 rebate. Have used the betas since February without issue, and that goes for the full version now. I'm not going to waste my breath on what I personally see as ignorance on how to use it, impatience with learning a few different things, and/or abject and senseless hate. What I will say is that Microsoft as a company isn't going to up and die just because 8 didn't catch fire. The same way Vista became an exceptionally cheap windfall for those who gave it a chance and had the wherewithal to experiment with it, 8 will be a cheap and useful upgrade for at least a couple years. Love it, hate it, doesn't really matter anymore.

MSFT isn't going to release a new OS until at least late 2014, if not 2015 given their OS production time with betas and what not. $40 for an OS that will be good for two years isn't a bad deal in my view. But I suppose that doesn't matter to most people, who have stuck with XP for a decade now...
 
[citation][nom]rolli59[/nom]What did people expect. Totally not comparable, Vista came after a long run of XP, that was getting long on the tooth, and was full of bugs. 8 is coming out after a relatively short run of 7 which has all the Vista bugs out of it and is a good and stable OS.I am currently running machines with XP, 7 64bit and 8 64 bit and all are running fine even 8 has features I like. If people do not like 8 stop moaning, nobody is forcing it on you, just buy 7![/citation]
I beg to differ, if you have been under a rock all these years, you would know that yes it is being forced on people through support and application compatibility. You want to run the apps and programs you want, yet through artificial limitations, it is made "Newest OS only" compatible. thus forcing you to choose between not running your app or running the OS you can't stand.
 
Windows is great get use using these control and will not have problem. You will even find that windows more intuitive than windows 7.

Search
Win+Q: Search apps
(tip: an even easier way to search apps is to just begin typing from the start screen)
Win+W: Search settings
Win+F: Search files
Windows 8 Apps
Win+Z: Get to app options
Win+.: Snap app to the left
Win+Shift+.: Snap app to the right
Ctrl+Tab: Cycle through app history
Alt+F4: Close an app
Desktop
Win+D: Open Desktop
Win+,: Peek at desktop
Win+B: Back to desktop
Other
Win+X: Open system utility settings menu
Win+PrntScrn: Take screenshot and save to Pictures
Win+Tab: Open switch list
Win+T: Preview open windows in taskbar
Win+U: Open Ease of Access Center
Ctrl+ESC: Start screen
Win+Enter: Open Windows Narrator
 
Windows 8 works great, and everyone thinking metro will be going away is wrong. The mouse will become impractical for day to day operations before a touch / motion / voice enabled interface does. Welcome to technology. You can choose to embrace it or stick to using a slide rule, it makes no difference to me.

The big fix for metro and windows 8 will not be a service pack. It will be something along the lines of Kinect 2, or using a Leap Motion device along with voice software from Nuance. If you have not yet seen these dots connecting, then maybe the internet really does make people stupid.
 
Can´t stand this kindergarden os, I hate the tiles, the lack of the start menu. I loved aero, missed now.

There is no option of skipping metro so they can sell their tablets and phones, but i will not buy none of them, bye ms
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom