Win 8 has a start menu, contrary to common belief

Discussion in 'Off Topic Area' started by Mitlov, Apr 26, 2013.

  1. Giovanni

    Giovanni Well-Known Member Supporter

    lol. if you're not using the command-line, you're losers! hallowed towers, indeed. first, you need the unix beard.
     
  2. aikiwolfie

    aikiwolfie ... Supporter

    Partly. But for a lot of people it's about their work flow. Windows 8 just doesn't fit how they work. All the Linux desktops hit the same wall when they made big changes. The majority hates the changes because they messed with their work flow.

    From Microsoft's side, they want the same familiar GUI on all devices. They've some how managed to convince themselves we can't move between devices if they have different GUI's.
     
  3. Giovanni

    Giovanni Well-Known Member Supporter

    it's interesting though. all of my ubuntu friends hated when the new dock showed up. but oddly, they're all comfortable with it now. yes, i agree with you, we all hate change. but it seems windows is more stuck than mac or linux users. to me that is, as someone that works at a company where the guys that don't use macs use linux desktops. and it's a lot of things with microsoft. if you tell excel users that hey, open office does it all just as well, they'll refuse to use it still. i use open office exclusively and it's a great (and free) product, but i can't get my wife to drop word or excel.

    just interesting observation from someone that got out of the windows paradigm some time ago.
     
  4. Moosey

    Moosey invariably, a moose Supporter

    And more to the point, they've assumed that they need a consistent UI and that it had to be a tablet/phone UI generalised to a laptop/desktop, whereas I would expect that the majority of their users (especially in work environments) need an interface that is mouse and keyboard friendly.
     
  5. axelb

    axelb Master of Office Chair Fu

    I adapt to OS change fairly quickly, but I have to say win8 has been made far too touch screen bias.
    It's unfortunate as there are many non touch screen workstations out there.

    Server 2012 has brought some big changes encouraging use of Powershell, but I have to say the 2012 changes have been received a lot better then the Win 8 changes.

    Thanks for the 3rd party apps, they will come in use.
     
  6. aikiwolfie

    aikiwolfie ... Supporter

    Well in the case of Mac users. Their GUI has changed radically since OS X appeared. Before then it still looked like the Mac Classic with a bit of colour. So I can appreciate why they might embrace change.

    Linux users tend to tinker. We have had multiple desktop environments to choose from for quite a while now. Now to mention multiple distributions. DE and distribution hopping are common place. What people didn't like about the likes of Unity and Gnome Shell was the obfuscation of the internal workings and the totalitarian top down condescending approach the developers took. That really amplified any issues people had with those new environments.

    I currently use Unity and I am "comfortable" with it now. But it's not what I want to be using. It's too limited in customisation options. Which leaves me to choose from environments that take more effort to customise to my liking than it's worth for me right now. So I'm kind stuck for the time being. Neither Unity nor Gnome Shell are by any stretch of the imagination, efficient desktop working environments.

    Windows users are used to the monoculture. It's all they know. Most of these people have no desire to understand how their computer works. They just want it to work no questions asked. Which is fine.

    Similarly they've had MS Office for so long now. The idea of switching is like asking them to cut off an arm. I couldn't get my mum to go anywhere near Ubuntu until her laptop was killed by Nvidia's substandard graphics chip. I couldn't afford to get her a new laptop and neither could she. So she got stuck with one of my little Zotac backup machines. Which I had Ubuntu on.

    Basically it took a situation where she had no choice but to use something else to get her to realise Ubuntu and LibreOffice would do all the desktop stuff she needed and Firefox would let her play on-line Bingo just as well as IE.

    Getting my dad to switch was a lot easier. He can't even turn the microwave on. When his PC was constantly being crippled by malware I just wiped it clean and gave him Ubuntu. Told him Firefox was his internet betting and Spotify was his music. He was happy as a pig rolling in mud.

    People who've taken a lot of time to build up skills and figure out a way of working really don't like that being messed with. They don't want to figure out a new way of working or relearn everything they've learnt over the last 30 years.

    Ironically Windows 8 is closer to Windows 3.1 than Windows 9x, XP, Vista or 7 in terms of the start screen layout. If Microsoft made Windows 3.1 today. It would look like Windows 8. Windows 3.1 had no start button. Application were grouped together and laid out in a grid.

    My mum started using Windows with Windows 3.1 just like I did. I wonder what she'll think of 8.
     
  7. aikiwolfie

    aikiwolfie ... Supporter

    To be fair, Microsoft have always insisted on a consistent GUI across platforms. Which is why Windows Mobile and CE looked like Windows 95/NT. Some Microsoft engineers developed a concept for a dual display tablet which actually looked like it was worth having.

    The idea was you'd use it like an actual notepad. Write with a stylus as you'd write with a pen and it would organise everything in journal format instead of the folders/directories, desktop concept. But Microsoft ditched it because it was too different from their other products even though people who had see it "leaked" on-line were raving about it.

    The closest thing it today is the Samsung Galaxy Note tablet. The powers that be in Microsoft didn't know a good thing when they had it. Now they have single digit market share for phones and tablets.
     
  8. aikiwolfie

    aikiwolfie ... Supporter

    No employer will be buying any employee a touch screen unless they really need it. Windows 8 is virtually pointless in a corporate desktop environment. Which is why 7 is the OS of choice for this refresh cycle.
     
  9. Giovanni

    Giovanni Well-Known Member Supporter

    yes, wolfie agree quite a bit. like you said, linux users tend to be "power" users and maybe even <like> to tinker a bit. maybe mac captures that type of user a bit more? don't know, just guessing. the big problem that i have with windows is that it's not really easy to tinker the way i'm used to. other systems make tinkering much easier, i think. just my opinion.

    you're right, windows users are just very monolithic.

    interestingly, for me, i have a couple linux servers at home to hold my personal repos (don't need anymore because of github) and some web servers, but anyway, i set the runlevel to no gui anyway, i'm just really comfortable with the command line. i keep vacillating especially now that it seems like my iphone may finally be on the fritz....do i go android for mobile and ubuntu for laptop? or stay in the apple sphere?
     
  10. aikiwolfie

    aikiwolfie ... Supporter

    It really depends on what you're looking for from your devices. Everything has it's quirks, bugs and problems.
     
  11. Count Duckula

    Count Duckula Valued Member

    I do understand how my computer works, well enough. I have been a software developer / system engineer for 15 years now, and I've created pretty much every type of software on many types of platform.

    The main reason I like Windows for personal use is that it has gotten very stable, is supported by most manufacturers, and just works. That, and all apps and components tend to work in a similar fashion. And you are right. I want it to just work, no questions asked :) It's not that I can't use debuggers or manually integrate things. I just have no interest in doing so unless I get paid or unless it is interesting enough.

    I have programmed for most flavors of Windows, linux, BSD, embedded linux and real time linux, fpga, and once some ancient form of unix. all systems have their crufty corners. Just saying that using windows is 'not good' is silly, and similar to saying 'TKD is not good'.
     
    Last edited: Jun 26, 2013
  12. Giovanni

    Giovanni Well-Known Member Supporter

    ok, so here's my question: does windows really 'just work' or does it fail in ways you already expect so it doesn't seem as bad, because it always fails in the way you expect? the immediate thing that comes to mind is viruses and the need for virus scanning/protection. this is a HUGE problem (and just one of many), yet no windows user explicitly mentions it when i ask the question "why windows?" and they say it "works".

    admittedly, i was being a little silly before when i said the 'not good' comment. and i straightened it out with mitlov over pm (me apologizing). again, my intention is not to troll anyone's windows os. i'm really just curious why in 2013 people continue to use the product when there are at least 2 very good other options for most users.

    maybe this is a parable for martial arts too? who knows....
     
  13. LilBunnyRabbit

    LilBunnyRabbit Old One

    Virus scanners are needed on any OS if you're careless, not just Windows. Anyone who tells you that Linux doesn't need a virus scanner hasn't been paying attention the last few years (of course if you want to be safe from viruses you could always go for OS/2).

    And yes, from the point of view of a developer/admin Windows does 'just work'. Certainly compared to the other options. For personal use it makes no odds, but in terms of dealing with a larger infrastructure Windows does just make it easier. Particularly with some of the new toys being rolled in these days.

    Well let's see, I use environments appropriate for what I'm doing. The majority of the time on my home computer I'm gaming (where Windows still has an undeniable advantage), or prodding at pet projects - and I still favour Visual Studio for development.

    Also there's Powershell :love:.

    I do occasionally hear this, and would be interested to see the stats that the view comes from. Of course if we're going on anecdotal data then the mac users I know are certainly not power users, and only a couple of people I know run Linux machines by choice (both of them, interestingly, .NET developers and keen Windows users - you know, the ones you say aren't power users).

    Which when you're running 2000 client machines on an enterprise network is a very good thing.

    To be honest I've had no problems at all with Windows 8, either on a touchscreen or not. Generally though on a desktop machine I'm doing most interaction (including launching applications) via keyboard rather than mouse, so it makes very little difference to me.
     
  14. Giovanni

    Giovanni Well-Known Member Supporter

    this warmed my heart!

    and damnit....i forgot about gaming! you're right, undeniable advantage there.
     
  15. aikiwolfie

    aikiwolfie ... Supporter

    And yet Microsoft have had enough complaints to warrant a U-turn on the start menu.

    Personally I think the real issue is tech companies are selling their ideas on how we should be using technology rather than responding to demand.
     
  16. Giovanni

    Giovanni Well-Known Member Supporter

    just to go back to this...

    i know people that deal with huge infrastructure that's all linux and developers that do ruby/java/c++/c on linux. i'm pretty sure that they would tell you it's no question what's better. because the tools are all already there, and any new tools that are needed are mostly open-source. we've used open-source libraries in our development, and we've even fixed libraries when needed (something you cannot do with windows or proprietary software).

    my only point is maybe it's what your most comfortable with. which is fine too. i doubt you'll hear a c++ or .net developer tell you that vs stinks. it doesn't. they all love it.

    great discussion guys! thanks! it's a complex issue, but a fun one!!!
     
    Last edited: Jun 26, 2013
  17. LilBunnyRabbit

    LilBunnyRabbit Old One

    The infrastructure thing is because of a few specific tools. Active Directory and Group Policy are still, as far as I'm aware, pretty much unbeaten for ease of setup, configuration and use. They are also extremely robust, and more powerful than most people realise.

    Of course you can fix libraries on Windows - if you're using open-source ones. With the proprietary ones (i.e. the Microsoft .NET stuff as opposed to the 3rd party) you can always extend, or write your own assemblies to work with. Linux doesn't have a monopoly on open source. :)

    I should have clarified what I meant by infrastructure - I was referring specifically to the user ecosystem. In terms of back-end structure I'd opt for appropriate tools for the job. For virtualisation (for example) I've used RHEL, ESXi and Hyper-V. I don't have a favourite - they're suited for different domains. But for setting up a multi-user network I would always go with a good AD setup over any of the alternatives I've seen, particularly if I'm not going to be maintaining it myself.
     
  18. Count Duckula

    Count Duckula Valued Member

    Yes. Anyone claiming that there is an easy or stable alternative to Active Directory and group policy needs to lay away the crack pipe.


    There is simply no replacement for Visual Studio Integrated debugging is wonderful, and I have tried using debuggers on linux. Good luck debugging multithreaded applications with gdb. A couple years ago, that made the debugger crash hard every time, to the point where I had to fall back to sprinkling print statements in my code.
     
  19. Mitlov

    Mitlov Shiny

    But Windows 8.1 also includes a setting where you can set the start button (both the taskbar button and the physical key) to launch a customizable all-applications screen instead of the live tile interface. In addition, you can set the backdrop of this screen to be the desktop wallpaper instead of a Metro wallpaper. And you can set it to boot to desktop instead of booting to the live tile screen.

    So if you change those three settings in Windows 8.1, it's a very different user experience than Windows 8.0, and much more keyboard-and-mouse friendly.

    As for why Microsoft feels there needs to be a unified interface between KB&M and touch (someone raised that issue), it's because it thinks that tablet PCs/convertibles are its best bet at fighting back against the iPad, which has taken a huge bite out of PC sales. You can't have two separate OSes like iOS and OSX if you're hoping to sell convertible devices like the Vaio Duo series, the Lenovo Yoga series, etc. And trying to use a traditional KB&M interface with touch is a nightmare (see: Windows 7 tablet PCs). It's possible to design an interface to be friendly to both KB&M and touch. Win 8.0 was Microsoft's first attempt to do that, but dropped the ball on a lot of details on both the KB&M side and on the touch side. Windows 8.1 sticks with the same concept but refines the user experience for both KB&M use and for touch use.
     

Share This Page