Win 8.1 update 1--will this be enough ? ETA April

[Imaginer]

You forget Win8 is a hybrid OS,it would be very easy to go back to a simple desktop OS and that would please 95% of IT users out there,obviously Microsoft have to decide if they are going to stick with a hybrid OS,if they do then it will take time for them to find the middle ground that pleases a lot of users out there on both sides.

As to positive again that's down to the user in question.
The big question is which way will Microsoft go with Win9 ie desktop or hybrid OS?

I applaud Microsoft for trying something new and not rehashing a 18+ year old UI,now hopefully they can build on that even if they do decide to redesign a whole new UI from scratch.

This. Windows 8 by itself, is OK. (I mentioned time and time again, the issue with the Start screen is more pointer travel time, and more grating on mouse and trackpad users, All programs listings is not ideal...).

But Windows 8's true strength, is the redesign of the tenants of a Tablet PC. Ones that are not limited in the app sources, functions, and do not need a secondary device to have power options. It also can transition from any interface, peripherals, depending on the task.

This is no more apparent than with devices like the Surface Pros, Lenovo Yoga 2 Pros, and down to the cost cutting measure Venue 8 Pros and Iconia Windows (not RT) tablets.

The thing about the tablet PCs of the past, most if not all relied on a bulky chassis, and an even bulkier mechanical swivel monitor hinge. All of the OEMs are stuck on keeping the keyboard as part of the main computer chassis. It was not until the ASUS Transformer debuted that can separate the two and keep all the major components with the screen. Samsung did this too with the ATIV Smart PC Pro. But in my opinion, having to remember to redock for the keyboard is just the same as carrying a separate dedicated bluetooth keyboard. The difference is, most of those docks have extra ports.

Enter Lenovo's Yoga 2 Pro and Surface Pro and Surface Pro 2. While the Surface Pros CAN allow you to detach the keyboard cover, many people just flip them back for a tablet use, and flip them forward for keyboard typing. The Yoga, does this, but the keyboard is still attached. I seen initial complaints about "feeling the keys" in the back as a disconcert. But it doesn't matter once used to it - those keys are deactivated by default when folded back (and this is hardware on that side of things - like the debate of console controllers and mouse and keyboard).

I gave my points in several threads, forums, etc. If one wants to look, they are all there about Windows 8.

This hybrid mentality, would be here to stay. I believe for the better. A true PC that I can do things beyond apps (I still can install and run any signed and unsigned programs of choice (past and present) on the tablet PC) to even get into a integrated development environment of choice to make my own (sole tablets, can't do this). I can conversely switch to things of leisure, or even have both at the same time - on the go. The bolded part is the main point of Windows 8's intent.

Before this, there was just tablets of the Apple and Google side of things. And just the laptop form factors. I am sure some laptop users have to hold theirs as a serving tray, one handing and trackpadding their laptop in that manner... Which leads most of them to be deskbound.

Cost? Many want a good tablet, many want a good laptop. The combination is the same or about the same in monetary cost, but the biggest cost savings (other than monetary) is the travel considerations and bulk carry considerations (weight can come in to this, but I am concerned with volume - hence bulk).

I would also fault Microsoft too. Remember old-timers of Windows 95 days when there was an actual tutorial from that transition of Windows 3.11 for Workgroups to 95? The tutorial in Windows 8 was NOT AS ROBUST. Especially for another drastic change (if upgrading or coming from a previous Windows system before.


I have OVERALL not mind what Microsoft has done. They have done something I would have never seen of any company when it comes to the Tablet PC (like hell I am going to get that insane Modbook Pro - weight wise and expense wise). Handwriting, virtual keyboard, pen tablet computing? It isn't Windows 8 exclusive but can be seen even in the XP days if not earlier.

Could it be smoother? Sure, but when you are being pushed in many external directions (users, market, computer hardware vendors) and try to take a middle ground at the same time (not closed as Apple, being more unified than Linux) then that is a fairly big position to take.


TL,DR Windows 8 gave me my Surface Pro and Surface Pro 2. I like this direction.

 

[ninaholic37]

Win 8.1 update 1--will this be enough ? ETA April

Enough for what? The only question I can think of that would probably have a Yes answer would be: "would it be enough to keep them from going bankrupt by 2015/16?".

 

[pmv]

The beauty of all this is that, by paying with their purse, the public will very effectively dictate the direction Microsoft is going with Windows.

And it gives me a warm fuzzy feeling inside to the see all the same people that defended ME, Vista and now Windows 8, getting disproven, ONCE AGAIN, by Microsoft, and exposed for the hypocritical holier-than-thou fanboys they are.

I'm never going to see eye-to-eye with the die-hard windows8 fans, for sure. There are good bits under the hood but the GUI (and the MS strategy it seems to represent) goes against the interests of a huge proportion of its user base. I don't want MS to get any encouragement in going further along that route.

Though I don't personally recall _anyone_ defending windows ME! Perhaps I missed it.

And I'd sort-of defend Vista, in that it started out badly but there wasn't anything particularly wrong with it in the end (just shortly after that point 7 came along and did the same thing slightly better).

 

[pmv]

Enough for what? The only question I can think of that would probably have a Yes answer would be: "would it be enough to keep them from going bankrupt by 2015/16?".

Don't they make most of their money on products other than the O/S? So I don't see any prospect of them going bankrupt. Just slowly continuing to lose their one-time dominance is all that's likely to happen.

 

[jkauff]

Don't they make most of their money on products other than the O/S? So I don't see any prospect of them going bankrupt. Just slowly continuing to lose their one-time dominance is all that's likely to happen.

They're certainly not going to go bankrupt, but I wouldn't buy any of their stock. I think that outside the enterprise, Windows as a brand is pretty much cooked.

My daughter and her friends are in their mid-20s, and none of them use Windows unless it's at work. If they need a home computer, they buy a Mac laptop or a Chromebook. Otherwise they get by with their iPads and Android smartphones (iPhones are for old people now).

 

[MustISO]

Won't change my feeling about it. I run Windows 7 on all my PC's but I work on many Windows 8 laptops and desktops. There's nothing about Windows 8 that would make me switch.

 

[blankslate]

If the majority of the people using your product find it difficult to use *because of your design decisions*, then the designer has failed to properly design that product for its target audience and has done a poor job, you can't reasonably shift the blame onto the users and write them all off as "afraid of change."

but you some will try....

You forget Win8 is a hybrid OS

It should behave better though.

If it's on a desktop without touch screen it should start up in a desktop mode with a start menu. If you switch out that non-touch monitor for one with touch capabilities one day the OS should respond to the new monitor with something like "Hey, would you like to try the Metro touch oriented UI with your new monitor?"

A UI change shouldn't be something to try and gain market share in another device category by forcing the user to learn a new UI to be about as fast when doing different things on the computer as they were with the old UI.

Previous versions of Windows allowed the user to use an older style UI if they wished. Not including that option for users was solely Microsoft's mistake not their customers no matter how anyone tries to spin it.



......

 

[blankslate]

And I'd sort-of defend Vista, in that it started out badly but there wasn't anything particularly wrong with it in the end (just shortly after that point 7 came along and did the same thing slightly better).

Well, Vista wasn't entirely the fault of MS.

It was partly the fault of manufacturers who ignored the notice that they would have to change the way they wrote drivers for Vista from the old way with XP and some computer vendors who thought hey 512 or 256 was enough for XP it'll work with Vista too.

There were real issues with Vista but SP1 fixed most of them.

As a previous poster noted Windows 7 could be seen as Vista SP 3 since it is pretty much the same kernel which performance oriented tweaks with a slightly different UI that actually improves usability for the users.




.....

 

[escrow4]

They're certainly not going to go bankrupt, but I wouldn't buy any of their stock. I think that outside the enterprise, Windows as a brand is pretty much cooked.

My daughter and her friends are in their mid-20s, and none of them use Windows unless it's at work. If they need a home computer, they buy a Mac laptop or a Chromebook. Otherwise they get by with their iPads and Android smartphones (iPhones are for old people now).

I'm in my 20's and when I wanted a home PC I built a 4770 workstation with some 1TB SSD's. When I'm looking now for a new laptop it will be with a i7 4800 with 16GB RAM, an mSATA SSD and a fat HDD for storage as a minimum. I'm not going to buy a locked down toy like an iPad or a Chromebook which don't even have real OS's. Microsoft isn't going anywhere. It has what, 80-90% of the OS share? What are you going to replace Windows with?

The locked down ecosystem of Apple where you then are inevitably sucked in to buy more tightly integrated products? The fragmented mess that is Linux which has come fairly close but is still coming up short? ReactOS? Repurposed Android? Metro isn't going anywhere, mobile/app stores are where the money is and all of the future MS OS's will have some mobile slant to them. In the meantime feel free to use Win 7, which come next January is onto security support only and will not get any platform updates and is already 5yrs old.

 

[ViRGE]

I appreciate Microsoft trying to rectify their mistakes. But I think I'd be happier if they stopped changing the UI defaults on Windows 8. For better or worse (okay, mostly worse), it shouldn't change between 8/8.1/8.1u1. This is one of those annoying traits from mobile devices that's out of place on a mature platform like a desktop OS.

 

[Torn Mind]

I still prefer the Windows way of running programs and doing OS maintenance, even though OS navigation has a taken a relatively minor dip in pleasantness in 8, one that is either rectified through a Start Menu program or simply getting used to the new steps of tasks that used to be in the Start Menu. My main quips with Metro is that the top left corner can be accidentally activated when a Metro app is open and that the All Apps screen should either be minimized to folders from the Start or have a more convinient way of doing that task. That is not enough for me to "kill 8" like so many others have.

8.1 brought in solid improvements. The new "Start button" fixes an issue with stylus-based notebooks that can't double click into the "Power menu" and going to the All Apps screen has an arrow button that moves the screen down into it, making people feel more "secure" in the new Start Screen. I anticipate 9 to be the next 7, which means Windows will remain, as it had been since they stuck it big in the 90s, the OS for "most people".

I can even turn an Android tablet into a makeshift 8 tablet, although with higher latency in response times, with an RDP client on the Droid tablet. Although, this feature is more of a novelty at the current moment.

 

[Torn Mind]

I'm never going to see eye-to-eye with the die-hard windows8 fans, for sure. There are good bits under the hood but the GUI (and the MS strategy it seems to represent) goes against the interests of a huge proportion of its user base. I don't want MS to get any encouragement in going further along that route.

Though I don't personally recall _anyone_ defending windows ME! Perhaps I missed it.

And I'd sort-of defend Vista, in that it started out badly but there wasn't anything particularly wrong with it in the end (just shortly after that point 7 came along and did the same thing slightly better).

The following describes Vista vs 7.
Vista is a bloated 7. Vista is 7 with driver issues. Vista is 7 stuffed onto Pentium 4 single cores or dual cores with 512 MB or 1GB of RAM. Vista is 7 with a much more annoying UAC.


Windows 8 is 7 without Aero Glass, is 7 with a new user interface, and for some folks, 7 with some driver issues or backwards compatibility issues.

ME should have been on like list. Its GUI seems like a predecessor to XP. Since, after all, GUI is all that matters, backend robustness be damned.

 

[Ranulf]

Back end robustness doesn't matter that much when the front end has many glaring design inconsistencies and problems thus it is disliked by a majority of users.

As to

Can't educate the misinformed sheep once they make up their tiny sheep minds. Here buy this SHINNNNNNY ipad. :whiste:

Well, according to many, including the supposed MS UI designer who posted to Reddit the other day, they designed Metro/Modern UI for the shinny loving masses and put it on the forefront for all computers/tablets to get people used to it.

In the end, the only logical explanation I see for all of this is that Microsoft wants to create their own walled garden with their app store and is willing to levy their business/desktop customers to get into the mobile computer market. And for all the talk of a hybrid OS, they did a pretty crummy job of it, even for a first try. On top of that, the hybrid argument falls flat due to them splitting Win8 into two versions with WindowsRT for the low end mobile market that couldn't run the full version of 8. That happened just over a year later with things like the Dell Venue Pro, aka sub $300 tablets.

 

[bgt]

Can't educate the misinformed sheep once they make up their tiny sheep minds. Here buy this SHINNNNNNY ipad. :whiste:

:thumbsup:

 

[showb1z]

If the majority of the people using your product find it difficult to use *because of your design decisions*, then the designer has failed to properly design that product for its target audience and has done a poor job, you can't reasonably shift the blame onto the users and write them all off as "afraid of change."

Win8 has been tainted from the start by it's bad internet rep, and OMG they removed the start button!111!1! (that hardly anyone even used anymore anway). There is nothing MS can do to salvage it, other than release W9.
I've put together a bunch of systems with W8 for people who missed all the controversy (as non-techies tend to do), and there is none of this outrage. Afterall, the desktop they've been using all their lives' is still right there with all it's functionality intact (improved even), only now they've also got this other screen with a bunch of big icons. They don't care at all.
So when I see some of the posts on tech forums from people claiming W8 is unusable, I can only conclude it's bias and hyperbole. Calling W8 a difficult to use OS is just ridiculous to me.

 

[pmv]

The following describes Vista vs 7.
Vista is a bloated 7. Vista is 7 with driver issues. Vista is 7 stuffed onto Pentium 4 single cores or dual cores with 512 MB or 1GB of RAM. Vista is 7 with a much more annoying UAC.


Windows 8 is 7 without Aero Glass, is 7 with a new user interface, and for some folks, 7 with some driver issues or backwards compatibility issues.

ME should have been on like list. Its GUI seems like a predecessor to XP. Since, after all, GUI is all that matters, backend robustness be damned.

I don't understand this post at all.

As I understand it, apart from outright nasty bugs that needed fixing with a service pack, Vista was just too demanding for the standard of hardware available at launch. It was a bit bloated and 7 fixed that, but by that time hardware had improved to the point where that was less of a show-stopper anyway. 7 was an incremental improvement, and did enough to make it worth upgrading to from XP (which Vista kind of didn't).

Your last comment is just passive-aggressive foolishness. Nobody says "a GUI is all that matters", you need to work on your logic a bit. That a _bad_ GUI can be a deal-breaker doesn't mean 'a GUI is all that matters'. Those are in no way equivalent statements.

ME was less reliable than its predecessor and didn't seem to bring any useful improvements (I seem to remember MS trying to hype 'web TV' as its great advantage). I wonder if it only came to exist in the first place in order to meet some internal commitment in MS and give someone something to talk about in their job review!

 

[pmv]

Win8 has been tainted from the start by it's bad internet rep, and OMG they removed the start button!111!1! (that hardly anyone even used anymore anway). There is nothing MS can do to salvage it, other than release W9.
I've put together a bunch of systems with W8 for people who missed all the controversy (as non-techies tend to do), and there is none of this outrage. Afterall, the desktop they've been using all their lives' is still right there with all it's functionality intact (improved even), only now they've also got this other screen with a bunch of big icons. They don't care at all.
So when I see some of the posts on tech forums from people claiming W8 is unusable, I can only conclude it's bias and hyperbole. Calling W8 a difficult to use OS is just ridiculous to me.

Its harder and more annoying to use than Win 7 for most desktop users. It doesn't meet my needs as well as 7 does, end of story. Don't patronisingly tell me its all about 'internet rep', I've seen it, read about it, thought about it, don't want it.

What I find mildly interesting is that elderly relatives who had to drop XP (for PC that only does basic web stuff and word processing) seem to be getting on perfectly fine with Ubuntu now. For a cheap basic PC I don't see there's any reason to pay good money for Windows, unless you are using serious productivity applications or gaming. That's a change from when I was younger. Though I suppose actual young people are just using their bloody smartphones and tablets (on which they play their overpriced crappy app or facebook games! Tsk!)

 

[Morbus]

Though I don't personally recall _anyone_ defending windows ME! Perhaps I missed it.

I remember. Of course people tend to forget such idiocies. Who now remembers the people who defended Windows Vista? And Windows Vista was a much better OS in comparison to XP than Windows 8 is in comparison to 7. In some machines it was faster, had support for more technologies and whatnot... And it sold faster than Windows 8 is selling now...

 

[Mem]

I remember. Of course people tend to forget such idiocies. Who now remembers the people who defended Windows Vista? And Windows Vista was a much better OS in comparison to XP than Windows 8 is in comparison to 7. In some machines it was faster, had support for more technologies and whatnot... And it sold faster than Windows 8 is selling now...

I defended Vista,I personally used it from day one with no issues,OEMs were to blame for some issues ie OEM PCs shipped with Vista below minimum recommended spec for Vista,companies were also lazy getting drivers out the gate for Vista too and then the FUD spread did some damage,when Win7 was released it had Vista drivers as backup and being based on Vista with two years more polish could not really fail to succeed.

No OS is perfect and they all got better after a service pack even Win7,to be honest only two operating systems I did not like was Win3.11 and WinMe.


Getting back on topic Win9 is due next year so regardless of Win8.1 being good or bad with further refinements ,all eyes will be on 9.
I'm still very curious to see if they stay with a hydrid OS or redesigned Metro,guess only time will tell then we can all have a friendly new debate on that .

 

[JEDIYoda]

Poor design is poor design.

Whats interesting is those who never gave win8 a chance.....
those who for whatever reason be it intelligence or stubbornness could never use the original win8, before the update....
Then you have those who just need something be it anything to wine and moan about.....

 

[Insert_Nickname]

I defended Vista,I personally used it from day one with no issues,OEMs were to blame for some issues ie OEM PCs shipped with Vista below minimum recommended spec for Vista,companies were also lazy getting drivers out the gate for Vista too and then the FUD spread did some damage,when Win7 was released it had Vista drivers as backup and being based on Vista with two years more polish could not really fail to succeed.

^^This

I switched to Vista SP1 once I got an x64 capable CPU. Never looked back. No issues what-so-ever.

Just for the record XP had plenty of issues pre-SP1... :whiste:

 

[Torn Mind]

^^This

I switched to Vista SP1 once I got an x64 capable CPU. Never looked back. No issues what-so-ever.

Just for the record XP had plenty of issues pre-SP1... :whiste:

XP always had security issues. Using IE exacerbated the problems. NOT FUN having a semi-ruined system thanks to evil random popup ad that you can't "escape" from.

 

[Torn Mind]

I don't understand this post at all.

As I understand it, apart from outright nasty bugs that needed fixing with a service pack, Vista was just too demanding for the standard of hardware available at launch. It was a bit bloated and 7 fixed that, but by that time hardware had improved to the point where that was less of a show-stopper anyway. 7 was an incremental improvement, and did enough to make it worth upgrading to from XP (which Vista kind of didn't).

Your last comment is just passive-aggressive foolishness. Nobody says "a GUI is all that matters", you need to work on your logic a bit. That a _bad_ GUI can be a deal-breaker doesn't mean 'a GUI is all that matters'. Those are in no way equivalent statements.

ME was less reliable than its predecessor and didn't seem to bring any useful improvements (I seem to remember MS trying to hype 'web TV' as its great advantage). I wonder if it only came to exist in the first place in order to meet some internal commitment in MS and give someone something to talk about in their job review!

7 is more similar to its predecessor and successor than different in the way it functions.

I cannot feel the massive pain others feel about the GUI. I have some annoyances, but not anything to convince me Windows is worth discarding at this moment. I cannot notice much changes aside from the Start Menu being replaced. I use programs, not the spend my time having a date with start menu(and even in 7, searching is faster than folder digging). And aside from early hiccups, it seems like I have heard no complaints from my totally technically-uninclined sister.

 

[Insert_Nickname]

XP always had security issues. Using IE exacerbated the problems. NOT FUN having a semi-ruined system thanks to evil random popup ad that you can't "escape" from.

Plenty of hardware issues too. Even though it strictly speaking wasn't Microsoft's fault, but again OEM drivers. MS did iron out the kinks with first SP1, then with SP2+ it was, and is, rock stable. Just as an example, did you ever try getting the early VIA 4-in-1 drivers to work properly...?

You wont hear me defending WinME though, that one was a complete and utter POS...

 

[Doomer]

The beauty of all this is that, by paying with their purse, the public will very effectively dictate the direction Microsoft is going with Windows.

And it gives me a warm fuzzy feeling inside to the see all the same people that defended ME, Vista and now Windows 8, getting disproven, ONCE AGAIN, by Microsoft, and exposed for the hypocritical holier-than-thou fanboys they are.

I am totally fine with Windows 7, just as I was totally fine with Windows XP. I don't need to upgrade to Windows 8, just as I didn't need to upgrade to Windows Vista. Because I don't want to, just as I didn't. But when I do need to upgrade, when I do feel the need, just as I felt with Windows XP, Microsoft will have a brand new OS for me, or they will lose me. But they will, so they won't.

Of course by that time all you blind idiots defending Windows 8 thinking the only thing "wrong" with it is how it's different, will be quiet and nobody will remember how you are now humiliating yourselves with strawman arguments like that.

In the meantime, we'll both keep using the OS we like, and Microsoft will keep slowly going down the drain.

Thank you sir.