Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 21st Jan 2014 00:15 UTC
Windows

HP really wants people to buy a Windows 7 PC instead of a Windows 8 machine. The PC maker has been emailing customers over the weekend noting that "Windows 7 is back." A new promotion, designed to entice people to select Windows 7 over Windows 8 with $150 of "savings," has launched on HP's website with a "back by popular demand" slogan. The move is clearly designed to position Windows 7 over Microsoft's touch-centric Windows 8 operating system.

Windows 8.x is just fine. Nothing's wrong with it. It's all the users' fault. Windows 8.x is just fine. Nothing's wrong with it. It's all the users' fault. Windows 8.x is just fine. Nothing's wrong with it. It's all the users' fault. Windows 8.x is just fine. Nothing's wrong with it. It's all the users' fault.

Thread beginning with comment 581157
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[5]: Except...
by antonone on Tue 21st Jan 2014 08:26 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Except..."
antonone
Member since:
2006-02-03

Well, should you be allowed to order Windows without explorer.exe? Or without Internet Exploder? Or maybe without Windows Update installed in, because you just don't like the way it works?

You can't order a TV without that horrible stand, or irritating blue stand-by light, because a TV is a whole atomic product. You MAY be able to choose another model without those disadvantages, but it's an entirely different model.

MS is selling an atomic product as well. Windows 8 is a product with Metro. You can't just cherry-pick features you like, because that's not what they're selling. If you don't like it, then stay with Windows 7.

I can't believe why on earth people think MS is bringing enlightenment and progress to the masses, all in good faith. Bringing improvements is their method of defeating their competitors so you can give them money, and nothing more. They're money-making company, since day 1. Can anyone blame them for this? I think not.

Why you're so against Metro? Because it hurts your current sense of aesthetics? But your current image of a perfect UI was crafted by the very same company years ago. So how to justify your acceptance of their past influence on your image of a good interface, compared to your rejection on them trying to alter this image by using today's Metro?

(sorry for bad english)

Edited 2014-01-21 08:36 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[6]: Except...
by Vanders on Tue 21st Jan 2014 09:31 in reply to "RE[5]: Except..."
Vanders Member since:
2005-07-06

Well, should you be allowed to order Windows without explorer.exe? Or without Internet Exploder? Or maybe without Windows Update installed in, because you just don't like the way it works?

If a large enough percentage of customers asked for that, then yes, Microsoft would be fools not to offer it to them and take their money.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[6]: Except...
by Thom_Holwerda on Tue 21st Jan 2014 10:37 in reply to "RE[5]: Except..."
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

Why you're so against Metro? Because it hurts your current sense of aesthetics? But your current image of a perfect UI was crafted by the very same company years ago. So how to justify your acceptance of their past influence on your image of a good interface, compared to your rejection on them trying to alter this image by using today's Metro?


I gave Metro enough of a chance. While I can see it somewhat work on tablets (not my Surface RT though, which is a piece of shit), it's hell on a 24" desktop monitor that just gets in the way.

Worse yet, though, there are no good Metro applications. This, to me, indicates that developers, too, really dislike Metro and are apparently unable to craft good applications with it. Even Microsoft's own are terrible!

So, my Windows 8 PC has been purged from all that crap. I've used Metro since the very first test release, and I gave it its fair shake. Sadly, it's just really, really bad software.

Reply Parent Score: 6

RE[7]: Except...
by MOS6510 on Tue 21st Jan 2014 17:47 in reply to "RE[6]: Except..."
MOS6510 Member since:
2011-05-12

I should be getting a Windows 8 laptop, with touchscreen, and a Windows 8 tablet.

When we meet after that I will have an opinion too.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[6]: Except...
by The1stImmortal on Tue 21st Jan 2014 12:43 in reply to "RE[5]: Except..."
The1stImmortal Member since:
2005-10-20

Well, should you be allowed to order Windows without explorer.exe? Or without Internet Exploder? Or maybe without Windows Update installed in, because you just don't like the way it works?

Server Core is an available option, from Microsoft, if you feel like shelling out for the server edition. So yes you are able to order/install Windows without it. Windows Update has supported, easily visible options to disable it entirely.

You can't order a TV without that horrible stand, or irritating blue stand-by light, because a TV is a whole atomic product. You MAY be able to choose another model without those disadvantages, but it's an entirely different model.

Many/most models have removable stands (for wall mounting) as a supported user customization.

MS is selling an atomic product as well. Windows 8 is a product with Metro. You can't just cherry-pick features you like, because that's not what they're selling. If you don't like it, then stay with Windows 7.

Um. Actually they're selling a product in various SKUs with varying feature sets (which are enabled/disabled by license key rather than by missing binaries). They're selling a product that's inherently configurable. And they have gone out of their way to push certain choices on users that should be customizable.

I can't believe why on earth people think MS is bringing enlightenment and progress to the masses, all in good faith. Bringing improvements is their method of defeating their competitors so you can give them money, and nothing more. They're money-making company, since day 1. Can anyone blame them for this? I think not.

You know, I've always actually believed that if companies don't serve some purpose in existence beyond pure profit, they shouldn't be granted legal personhood and limited liability in the first place.
That aside, many consider some of the choices made by MS in Win8 to not actually be improvements, and not made in order to simply compete, but in order to mistreat customers - which is rarely considered good form, even if legal.

Why you're so against Metro? Because it hurts your current sense of aesthetics? But your current image of a perfect UI was crafted by the very same company years ago. So how to justify your acceptance of their past influence on your image of a good interface, compared to your rejection on them trying to alter this image by using today's Metro?

Can't speak for others. Personally I believe
- Metro is another "fad" choice for Microsoft, that will not have longevity and therefore is a waste of time to learn/suffer through. (Someone within MS will in a version or two decide it's dated and replace it with something ENTIRELY different and incompatible again, wasting users time and money)
- The Metro/desktop incongruity breaks workflow and therefore costs time and money
- Aesthetics yes - its simply a poor interface with poor discoverability and poor clarity when interacting on a classic desktop computer. It also deals poorly with having hundreds of installed programs.
- More, but it's twenty to midnight and I'm running out of steam ;)



(sorry for bad english)

All good. Made sense to me ;)

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[7]: Except...
by zima on Sat 25th Jan 2014 01:07 in reply to "RE[6]: Except..."
zima Member since:
2005-07-06

- Aesthetics yes - its simply a poor interface with poor discoverability and poor clarity when interacting on a classic desktop computer. It also deals poorly with having hundreds of installed programs.

You have hundreds of installed programs?

Reply Parent Score: 2