My Inner Struggle with Desktop Operating Systems

[lopri]

You're losing me, Jack. Yes, this is an enthusiasts forum and you're being an MS apologist here.

- Enthusiasts ask: Why can't you give us the option to choose, if you're so confident of your innovations?
- Your answer is: It is for your own good. MS knows what's best for you.

And my take is: It is for MS' own good, and MS is definitely not into catering enthusiasts. Metro on desktop is likely destined to doom just as its prior attempts (Zune, XP Tablet Edition, KinPhones, Windows Mobile, Windows ME, Windows Vista, Vista "capable," PlaysforSure, Games for Windows, Games for Windows Live, Microsoft Money, ... the list is literally endless)

 

[slugg]

Microsoft Money. LOL! I forgot about THAT pile of poop.

 

[Andrmgic]

they're not giving you the option to choose, because they want developers to write apps for their new API.

If you could turn off metro, there would be no incentive for developers to make those apps and stop using win32. Most of these apps will work on Windows RT arm-based tablets as well as intel-based computers.

Microsoft is essentially trying to use their desktop dominance to jumpstart a marketplace for their tablets. There are even rumors that the next xbox will run a version of windows 8.

You do have a choice.. and that is to stay with windows 7. Extended support for that OS is currently slated to end in 2020.. if we're still actually using desktops by then who knows what will be the dominant player..

 

[JackMDS]

And my take is: It is for MS' own good, and MS is definitely not into catering enthusiasts. Metro on desktop is likely destined to doom just as its prior attempts (Zune, XP Tablet Edition, KinPhones, Windows Mobile, Windows ME, Windows Vista, Vista "capable," PlaysforSure, Games for Windows, Games for Windows Live, Microsoft Money, ... the list is literally endless)

At least they (MS) are trying, which is Not the case with the continues "Whining" about $39.99 Upgrade to whats look like "voted" by the mass to be the future of computing.

Enthusiast on the other hand have No problem spending hundreds of $$ on fancy 1500W PSU that are put as a "Snake oil" into computer that uses less than 1000W.

That said I am an Enthusiast for longer than most of you, but that does not mean that I endorse every "bizarre idea" that is held by some Enthusiasts.

BTW, I started with mainframes and that was my My first PC (of sort).

 

[slugg]

At least they (MS) are trying, which is Not the case with the continues "Whining" about $39.99 Upgrade to whats look like "voted" by the mass to be the future of computing.

Enthusiast on the other hand have No problem spending hundreds of $$ on fancy 1500W PSU that are put as a "Snake oil" into computer that uses less than 1000W.

That said I am an Enthusiast for longer than most of you, but that does not mean that I endorse every "bizarre idea" that is held by some Enthusiasts.

BTW, I started with mainframes and that was my My first PC (of sort).

Will it run Crysis?

 

[JackMDS]

Will it run Crysis?

Well, it was used to be online hooked to EEG amp. to analyze brain waves during REM periods (REM period is the Dreaming time during sleep).

So I guess that if you dream about Crysis you might say Yes - :thumbsup: - .

BTW, this first generation of PCs, it did not have a Video component the I/O communication with the computer was through teletype.

Here is a full working station.

Cost $16,000 4K RAM.

 

[lopri]

If you could turn off metro, there would be no incentive for developers to make those apps and stop using win32. Most of these apps will work on Windows RT arm-based tablets as well as intel-based computers.

Microsoft is essentially trying to use their desktop dominance to jumpstart a marketplace for their tablets. There are even rumors that the next xbox will run a version of windows 8.

You do have a choice.. and that is to stay with windows 7. Extended support for that OS is currently slated to end in 2020.. if we're still actually using desktops by then who knows what will be the dominant player..

That's exactly what I alluded to in my earlier posts. But that is not what Jack wants to admit.

As for the "choice," I do not fully agree. Windows has become a "governing" force in the entire tech industry (i.e., monopoly), and the choice you can make is very limited if you were to do anything productive. Sure you have a choice not to buy a car but how true does that ring to a person living in a suburb, for example? Is it really a "choice" whether to have a phone in 2012?

Having said that, the jury is out there. Yes, there are limited choices and consumers will vote with their wallets AND their voicse in the forums which in turn influence others' wallets.* Despite some sub-forums being infested by employees, investors, or other financially motivated group of people, the OS forum has seen much less of those thanks to Windows being de facto standard on desktop. (kind of a sad reality, really)

@Jack: I am not sure what to make of your posts in this thread any more. You're babbling on non sequiturs and veiled ad hominem. What does enthusiasts purchasing expensive PSUs have anything to do with discussion of Windows 8's merits? (Forget that those extravagant "enthusiasts" are likely a small minority, since that still has nothing to do with Metro) Somehow Jack thinks the existence of expensive PSUs (or "bizzare ideas" held by some enthusiasts - whatever those might be) justifies Microsoft "trying" something new.

Well, at least that says something, I guess. You were accusing some of us to be "drama queens" earlier but as it is your posts are the most drama-laden, it seems. I have to say it's pretty difficult to comprehend your posts in this thread except that I get a vague sense that what you're trying to do is to defend Microsoft and its products. But I don't know how successful you have been in that regard.

*It's also telling that the price of Win 8 is so low, compared to what MS used to charge for its predecessors. It is a typical drug-dealer dilemma that occurs in a market where competitions have been systematically weakened. (See: Internet Explorer's history)

 

[Zxian]

There's one big thing that a lot of people forget about Microsoft's main selling point in the corporate world - reliable, clearly defined support terms (term as in time period - not terms and conditions, although those are pretty clearly defined as well).

I'm not sure about more recent versions, but have a look back at Leopard and Snow Leopard. Apple simply cut out part of it's support base (while still offering $3000 G5 based Mac Pros) when it unveiled Snow Leopard.

Linux support.... just isn't. Yes, you've got a community who could contribute, but you have no actual guarantee that it will happen.

When you purchase a license of Windows, that version is ensured to have support for at least 7 years after its release.

This is not a personal attack in any way, but I've seen lxskllr mention libre office as a very good alternative and that he can fix the problems with it himself. That's all fine and dandy for the technologically inclined, but that's simply not the typical user base. Go and ask the average joe to file a bug report. They'll likely give you a blank stare. That's not even getting into the codebase themselves. Support needs to be provided by a central source. There are far too many branches of Linux for it to be a viable competitor to Windows or OSX/iOS or Android.

If the Linux community were to actually join forces and come out with "Linux" and not the multitude of distros we've got today, then you'd actually start to see some more acceptance in the market.

Want Windows? You buy Windows 7 today.
Want a Mac? It comes with Mountain Lion.
Want Linux? Well... which version do you want? There's Debian, Ubuntu, Fedora, Mint, Arch, CentOS, Suse, etc, etc, etc.

Too many choices leads to confusion and incompatibility. All throughout my university history, I had the hardest time collaborating with software developed from other research groups. Why? Because their software was designed to work on Debian and our servers were CentOS. I spent almost as much time getting the software to work as I did using it to do my work. Developing it all from scratch was not a viable alternative either. Had both groups been working in Windows environments, the software would have (more than likely) just worked when installed on my system.

Again, not a personal attack in any way - just a personal opinion and IMO healthy debate.

 

[Zxian]

*It's also telling that the price of Win 8 is so low, compared to what MS used to charge for its predecessors. It is a typical drug-dealer dilemma that occurs in a market where competitions have been systematically weakened. (See: Internet Explorer's history)

It's more than likely that Microsoft is planning on shifting its revenue stream to sources such as online services and profits from the Microsoft Store.

There's also the simple supply/demand scaling to go along with the low pricing as well. Lower prices mean that more people are likely to buy it. Afterall, it's "only" $39 compared to the $125 that it cost you to upgrade to Win7. It will also make OEM licensing costs lower, which allows Windows-based tablets and laptops to be sold at a more competitive price point to their Apple or Android based counterparts.

 

[JackMDS]

In my family,business, and research environment, I have Windows, Apple, Android. On Desktops Laptops, Tablets, and Dedicated computing devices for research.

There is No general Good or Bad, there is One thing Good for some tasks and other better for another tasks.

I will upgrade some of my computers to Win 8; others are probably OK with Win 7 for the time being.

@Lopri. The quote above from one of the previous post describe my status and my functional steps concerning Win 8.

The other post are in the same spirit of the post that they are related to.

There is No point in dissecting them as related to the way specific posts in this thread. If some understand the core of what I am talking about that's Good. Otherwise, Live Long and Prosper. :thumbsup:

 

[slugg]

Zxian, I couldn't agree with you more. On every point. Well done.

I'd like to ad that in my case, I am capable of diving into source code and fixing bugs. However, I don't want to! So Microsoft's reliability isn't just for the layman, it's for people that have better things to do with their time. I just don't think we should have to put up with terrible usability and bugs when quality, non-free productivity suites have been around forever and do a great job. One thing I'd like to ask the Linux crowd: is any software worth paying for, to you?

I think of OS X almost as a super polished Unix system. Doesn't have the same issues faced by the Linux crowd, but it's still a barrier for most people needing to get stuff done in the corporate world.

 

[JackMDS]

Zxian, I couldn't agree with you more. On every point. Well done.

This is my sentiment too.

 

[Dominato3r]

they're not giving you the option to choose, because they want developers to write apps for their new API.

If you could turn off metro, there would be no incentive for developers to make those apps and stop using win32. Most of these apps will work on Windows RT arm-based tablets as well as intel-based computers.

Microsoft is essentially trying to use their desktop dominance to jumpstart a marketplace for their tablets. There are even rumors that the next xbox will run a version of windows 8.

You do have a choice.. and that is to stay with windows 7. Extended support for that OS is currently slated to end in 2020.. if we're still actually using desktops by then who knows what will be the dominant player..

That right there

 

[lxskllr]

Linux support.... just isn't. Yes, you've got a community who could contribute, but you have no actual guarantee that it will happen.

When you purchase a license of Windows, that version is ensured to have support for at least 7 years after its release.

This is not a personal attack in any way, but I've seen lxskllr mention libre office as a very good alternative and that he can fix the problems with it himself. That's all fine and dandy for the technologically inclined, but that's simply not the typical user base. Go and ask the average joe to file a bug report. They'll likely give you a blank stare. That's not even getting into the codebase themselves. Support needs to be provided by a central source. There are far too many branches of Linux for it to be a viable competitor to Windows or OSX/iOS or Android.

If the Linux community were to actually join forces and come out with "Linux" and not the multitude of distros we've got today, then you'd actually start to see some more acceptance in the market.

You can get commercial support for GNU/Linux. RedHat is a big player, and Canonical has commercial stakes also. For individuals, filing bug reports, and doing self-fixes may be a bit much to ask of some, but having open code is a powerful tool for corporations. With libre code, anyone can write a fix. The nerd at the CAD station, a sysadmin, or a 3rd party contractor. You aren't locked into the whims of a single company for support.

 

[slugg]

You can get commercial support for GNU/Linux. RedHat is a big player, and Canonical has commercial stakes also. For individuals, filing bug reports, and doing self-fixes may be a bit much to ask of some, but having open code is a powerful tool for corporations. With libre code, anyone can write a fix. The nerd at the CAD station, a sysadmin, or a 3rd party contractor. You aren't locked into the whims of a single company for support.

How does that saying go? Too many chefs spoil the Linux? I forgot.

 

[Remobz]

"I've been using Microsoft OS's my whole life. At the age of 3"

Wow!! I didn't start until I was 24 years old (first computer purchase).

Damn, I feel old now

 

[lopri]

It's more than likely that Microsoft is planning on shifting its revenue stream to sources such as online services and profits from the Microsoft Store.

There's also the simple supply/demand scaling to go along with the low pricing as well. Lower prices mean that more people are likely to buy it. Afterall, it's "only" $39 compared to the $125 that it cost you to upgrade to Win7. It will also make OEM licensing costs lower, which allows Windows-based tablets and laptops to be sold at a more competitive price point to their Apple or Android based counterparts.

The first paragraph I agree to. The second, however, only proves how prices work under a monopoly or something similar to it. You see, given a period of time, memory prices go up and down. Hard disk prices go up and down. SSD prices go up and down. TV prices go up and down. Monitor prices go up and down. Video card prices go up and down. Heck even game prices also are very responsive to the supply/demand.

But Windows license largely stays at what MS calls throughout its lifespan. Same for Adobe Acrobat until a new version hits. And the same for Intel CPUs. Yet no one seems to question this market-defying nature of certain products as if they totally forgot about the economics class they've taken in their first year of college. (There is a bit more complex economics at work but this isn't a place to discuss it, I suppose)

If some understand the core of what I am talking about that's Good. Otherwise, Live Long and Prosper. :thumbsup:

You are being disingenuous. So all you meant to say was that you had been content to choose from whatever MS has offered to you in a sheep-like manner? (pardon my choice of word but I could not think of a better, non-offensive one at the moment)

If that's all you had said in this thread I would not have engaged. I would have recognized our differing views and agreed to disagree. But you went way beyond that. Starting with "Drama King," you went on and on about how "enthusiasts" are an ungrateful bunch, while ignoring a substantive criticism on Windows 8. And that's what I thought needed a proper response.

 

[Zxian]

You can get commercial support for GNU/Linux. RedHat is a big player, and Canonical has commercial stakes also. For individuals, filing bug reports, and doing self-fixes may be a bit much to ask of some, but having open code is a powerful tool for corporations. With libre code, anyone can write a fix. The nerd at the CAD station, a sysadmin, or a 3rd party contractor. You aren't locked into the whims of a single company for support.

You're still mixing up the notion of "possible" and "responsible". At work, our group uses a proprietary in-house java software to do our work (www.youtube.com/javasimulation for some examples). I've likely logged close to 50 bug reports since I started there at the start of the year. However, my role is not a programmer - I am an analyst (the person using the software to do the work it's designed for). Yes, with my background I'm quite sure that I could fix the bugs for which I've filed reports, but it's not my responsibility nor do I have the time to fulfill such a task. I have my own timeline and schedule to meet, and it's simply impractical for me to have to fix the bugs myself. We have dedicated programmers in our group who are the responsible ones to fix the bugs and add the features that are needed.

Until we get to a future where currency doesn't drive most of what we do, money is king. My work gets billed by the hour (to our clients), and we would not be a competitive company if we were to be inefficient with our hours by having the analysts do a programmer's job (and likely end up with a lower quality product in the meantime).


@lopri - Comparing pricing of a "stable" commodity such as a license to a market that is as volatile as computer hardware (flooding, nVidia 680 shortages, raw material price fluctuations) is comparing apples to oranges. An Intel CPU is most expensive at its release, and only goes down in price from there until it reaches some set pricing. The only time I've seen a particular model of hard drive go up in price was after the flooding last year. Name a hardware product that is on the market that has gone up in price since its release (ignoring sale price fluctuations or EOL products) without a corresponding external effect to explain it.

Licenses are essentially infinite supply. It's a matter of finding a price point at which the developer will recuperate their costs in a given timeframe (usually until the next version comes around). There are more devices coming out in the next few years on which a Windows8 license will operate (Phones, tablets, PCs vs just PCs for Win7). If Microsoft can sell more licenses at a lower per-license cost they'll likely meet their revenue targets which is what matters most to them and their shareholders. In many ways, CPUs are in the same class since you're paying primarily for the R&D that's gone into the device and not the material cost. The actual cost of the metals and semiconductors in the die is a small fraction of what you paid for. If the cost of raw silicon goes up by 50%, Intel could probably absorb that without worrying too much. By comparison, if the price of iron ore went up by 50% you'd most certainly see an effect on car prices.

 

[lopri]

@Zxian: Yes I am aware of that. "Patents" may be a better term than "license". It's a very difficult and frankly messy legal/economic area and I did acknowledge that as much. But to the extent you try to explain the difference, the other markets aren't THAT different so long as there is no monopoly. (which goes back to "patents," and I think we'll need a different thread for that discussion)

 

[Fox5]

For better or worse, I'd say Ubuntu has already achieved a status as "defacto" Linux OS for most people. Sure, there's a ton of Linuxs out there, but unless you have reasons to need a specific one, you may as well go with the biggest one.

I'd also say that Linux/Ubuntu has been better than Windows XP for years, pretty much since it's launch really. I would take it over Vista. The situation is a little different for 7 and 8 though...
Windows will always win on media support, and I game and watch enough movies that Windows has the advantage. Even when games or flash video run on Linux, they run best on Windows. That said, I think Ubuntu is sufficient for the casual Mac or Windows user who just checks email or watches a few flash videos and browses the web. The Windows 7 desktop is pretty good, and though I rely on/make heavy use of open source software, the big ones are available on Windows and the rest I can use in a Linux VM.
As for Windows 8...well Ubuntu was looking like a good choice for tablets and netbooks, but Windows 8 runs way better on just about anything that supports DirectX9, whereas the state of graphics cards drivers on Linux is such a mess that Ubuntu's Unity interface runs sluggish on just about anything that isn't intel integrated graphics.

 

[theevilsharpie]

Too many choices leads to confusion and incompatibility. All throughout my university history, I had the hardest time collaborating with software developed from other research groups. Why? Because their software was designed to work on Debian and our servers were CentOS. I spent almost as much time getting the software to work as I did using it to do my work. Developing it all from scratch was not a viable alternative either. Had both groups been working in Windows environments, the software would have (more than likely) just worked when installed on my system.

You've made a common mistake. To better highlight that mistake, let me reword your example slightly by replacing your research group's Linux distro with another one:

Too many choices leads to confusion and incompatibility. All throughout my university history, I had the hardest time collaborating with software developed from other research groups. Why? Because their software was designed to work on Android and our servers were CentOS. I spent almost as much time getting the software to work as I did using it to do my work. Developing it all from scratch was not a viable alternative either. Had both groups been working in Windows environments, the software would have (more than likely) just worked when installed on my system.

Linux's problem is branding, not choice. CentOS and Debian are different operating systems: they have different software packaging mechanisms, different versions of system libraries, different kernel versions, different boot and service initialization processes, etc. Both are built on the Linux kernel, GNU userlands tools, and usually a common set of end-user applications, so the work to port applications to function on both is usually minimal, but it's not non-existent. Unfortunately, the fact that both are referred to as 'Linux' implies an inherent degree of compatibility, and when software designed for one doesn't "just work" on the other, the Linux ecosystem as a whole is blamed by people unfamiliar with how Linux (the platform) works. Android avoids this by avoiding the 'Linux' brand, even though it's also technically Linux.

Windows isn't immune to the problem of compatibility, either. Software designed on Windows XP won't necessarily work on Windows Server 2003, and vice versa. Although this has become less of a problem in recent years as the desktop and server versions of Windows now share a common codebase, there are still enough differences between different versions of Windows to require some effort by Windows app developers to ensure their applications are compatible across versions, just as Linux app developers have to do.

 

[Zxian]

But in the end, the problem is choice. While Android is a specific flavour of Linux, it's taken a large commercial entity to actually make the choice "simple" for us. You want a Linux-based tablet? You get Android. Google has simplified the choice for us. Another example is Steam. You want to play Steam games on something that isn't Windows? Get Ubuntu. The choice has been made for you.

Windows in many regards is the "simple" choice, which leads to a lot fewer headaches when dealing with application maintenance for changes to the operating system. Since 2000, consumers have seen three major Windows versions, OSX has gone through eight major versions, and many of the Linux brands/versions/flavours have gone through several major version changes in as many years. How much time has gone into re-writing documentation and instructions for the same task for each version?

 

[theevilsharpie]

Perhaps I've just been involved in the Linux ecosystem for too long, but I'm really not seeing what your point is. Yes, there are many different Linux distributions, but the only distributions that matter (not counting Android and custom embedded distributions) from a software developer's prospective are Red Hat and Debian. If you're developing an application, and you distribute the software as a DEB, an RPM, and a tarball for those using other distributions, you're pretty much covered.

As far as choice goes, operating system choice is dictated by what the application developer supports. For commercial software, that will almost always be Red Hat (for back-end applications) or Ubuntu (for end-user applications). You could use other distros, and the software would probably work, but you'd be relying on the community for support.

 

[happysmiles]

I've been using Win 8 since CP first released and now I'm using RTM.

for me it was "it's not so bad" to "oh to hell with this" to "I like it and want it on my net laptop"

Winkey + I is all you need. I don't bother with Metro to me that still has another year to fully mature anyway.

Either way you guys choose what is best for you and no amount of arguing will change that

 

[theevilsharpie]

So up to this point, I haven't used Windows 8. I've seen news reports about it, I've seen others use it (or attempt to, anyway), and I've seen videos of it, but I haven't used it myself or paid much attention to it.

I now have Windows 8 in a VM, staring at me. I've used pretty much every version of Windows since Windows 3.1, and I'm no stranger to having to explore the system to figure out where Microsoft decided to put stuff this time around. But Windows 8? Holy shit, it's different. There may have been a brief tutorial during the install process that I may have missed (I was busy and didn't really pay attention), but after signing in, all I have is some tiles. I've been using Windows for nearly 20 years, and I have no idea where to even begin. I know how to get to the desktop (although it took me a minute to figure out where the tile was), and I know how to return back to the Start screen, but that's basically it. Where is the control panel? Where is the network setup? How do I configure the rest of my shit?

Even Android started you off with a brief tutorial showing you around, and Android is already pretty intuitive. With Windows 8, Microsoft is just content throwing you into the deep end, I guess. Microsoft is completely delusional if they think they can get away with shedding their legacy user interface experience and dumping people into a completely different interface with nothing to guide them in the transition. There hasn't been a change this jarring since the introduction of Windows 95, and Microsoft had plenty of on-screen instructions telling people where things were located during that transition.

OEMs are going to have to take up the slack or face some very irate customers.

Edit: I didn't mean to post my rant in this thread, but I'll leave it here since it's somewhat on topic.