Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 14th May 2012 22:49 UTC
Windows For weeks - if not months - I've been trying to come up with a way to succinctly and accurately explain why, exactly, Windows 8 rubs me the wrong way, usability-wise. I think I finally got it.
Permalink for comment 518361
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[6]: um
by freeweaver on Wed 16th May 2012 12:17 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: um"
freeweaver
Member since:
2012-05-16

Why? Is there some reason why you can't use Windows 7? Is the release of Windows 8 somehow forcing you to move to a new OS from your old one?

I personally will just continue using my Windows 7 as I have done until now and wait for 3rd parties to solve the issues I have with Windows 8.



As you've suggested elsewhere, Metro is a future path for microsoft. They won't just dump the paradigm after pushing it so forcefully on people, else they'd be a bit silly.

So when people say that they may as well move to Linux, or, Lignux as i'd like to call it, they are saying that they do not want to use the metro interface for the foreseeable future of desktop computing, which is going to be around far longer then just Windows 8.


Oh, I wish that was true. But well, just recently I upgraded the Ubuntu-installation I had running to the newest release. It started out fine, but then the installation seemed to stall. I waited for a while, then clicked on the small arrow that brings up the terminal-window and guess what? There it was, waiting for me to input stuff. Later on when the installation finished Ubuntu needed a restart, but not surprisingly things went wrong again: the system refused to boot, it would only hang there with unmountable root filesystem. Turns out there was a bunch of modules and other packages missing.

And this was all on a very standard Ubuntu installation, I hadn't even so much as installed any custom themes on it. The only things I had installed were compilers and their relevant dev libraries. No new kernels, no binary-only drivers, no nothing like that.

My point is that I *still* often have to resort to command-line to fix stuff that gets broken for no good reason.



I don't understand your point here? You are suggesting that the command line is still needed right? but then you go on to give an example where the broblem was a geeky one - upgrading the OS. As a geek myself, I have NEVER come across any "normal" users that upgrade their OSs, have you? Usually they just ask someone like you or me to do it, right? So I fail to see where your example has merit. Perhaps you could give another...



That would be true in a parallel dimension, possibly, but in this dimension there is nothing stopping Joe Blow from just sticking with Windows 7. And when he buys a new PC he will just learn to use Windows 8, complain about it for a while, and then do nothing about it in the end.

And why not just learn a different OS? after all, we can see from the unprecedented growth of all things free and open source, that Microsoft is struggling to keep the "competition at bay.

I, as a geek have converted many, many computers over to Linux. The "normal" users computers I converted have become second nature to them, just like you say will happen for windows 8 converts.

So considering all this, why would you not suggest its a good idea to switch OSs? because its nothing to do with "ease of use".

Edited 2012-05-16 12:23 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3