News Windows 8 launch date confirmed as 26th October

I don't think you understand Microsoft's business strategy. It's long-term vision is to have their OS everywhere: at work, at home, in your home, on mobile devices, in your car. The main problem has been how to make a brand-recognisable GUI that is familiar to use in each of these environments, which can vary widely in terms of screen size, input devices and processing power.

Microsoft has always tried to cram the desktop GUI into smaller devices and finally realised that it was woefully unsuitable for that. Now it is trying from the other end: start with Metro on small mobile devices, and scale it up to larger, more powerful devices by judiciously adding features without losing the essential user experience. Windows 8 is a bit of a hybrid, and has a few clunky features as a result. But it is a bit like turning an oil tanker. The next version will be much more integrated, and as even small mobile devices become more powerful, a little eye-candy will sneak back into the minimalist design. But Metro tiles are going to be awesome. You haven't seen a fraction of the possibilities yet.

 

Has anybody quantified the improvement in gaming performance? Guessing it's not going to be stellar and spending the price of the OS on a better GPU upgrade when the time comes will likely cover it. I'll be staying with 7; zero interest in Metro and 7 suits me fine.

 

I'm not entirely sure you can call the MS approach to things strategy, the enormous size of the company means there is rarely a cohesive plan, Plays for Sure being an excellent example.

Yes they've always pushed the windows look and feel, and failed, but this has always (traditionally) been about making sure people continue to use windows at work and continue to use there productivity software.

They may now be looking toward Apple and seeing how well the ecosystem approach has worked for them but MS has also looked at Google in the past and seen how well search has worked. But just this week we've found that strategy hasn't really made them any money either.

They might be pushing growth in other sectors but MS bread and butter is the office and its office suite and if you think this forum is conservative you want to hear the complaints this week when we finally upgraded to office 2010.

 

I cannot agree more with Nexxo.
Beside, even if you hate it, it won't change in Windows 9, nor 10. Get used to it. I sure did, and with a proper layout, and color I find it practical. Not to mention the huge list of features.
My laptop now, only has 1 OS, and it's Windows 8. Use my laptop everyday, including work. (soft development).

Some sites did, and they presented increase performance in games. But we have to wait and see for official, full for all GPU's, Windows 8 drivers, with a build of Windows 8 that doesn't have anymore debug stuff, and last build, to really know for sure, and how much.

 

Amidst all the negativity, it's perhaps worth remembering that a full-fat OS like this is a supreme achievement. Tens of thousands of people collaborated over millions of hours to create this.

W8 and Metro will be successful. The Metro UI is an exciting development that really challenges the popular belief that Apple appliances 'just work' - my parents get lost on their iMacs but I really can't see them struggling with Metro once they've learnt it.

I got a Lumia 800 when they came out because, as a mobile UI, Metro is streets ahead of Android and iOS (albeit less flexible than Android). Desktop Metro will be an improvement on this, Microsoft have a lot riding on it and they've learnt from their past mistakes.

Either way, W7 licenses will be available for years, so let's not be too upset.

 

Microsoft has traditionally taken a blunderbus approach, with a scattering of strategies trying to corner all markets at once. Its huge size allowed it to do that and absorb the penalties for getting it wrong without a sweat (even now). It does not help, of course, that their hardware partners are a scattered and diverse bunch either, who constantly change their mind/strategy.

However there are definite signs that this is changing, in the light of the shining example provided by Apple: one boss, one vision, one hardware manufacturer. Lo: Microsoft suddenly produces its own hardware (Surface) to promote Windows 8: one OS (kernel)/GUI for all platforms. Lo: Google produces its own hardware (Nexus) to promote its one Android OS for all platforms. The times, they are a-changin'.

Microsoft is waking up to the idea that the business sector is not the biggest market. Home consumers are. Apple proved that. Google and Microsoft are now changing tack to the same prevailing winds.

 

You've got a point, I think it's largely down to the fact that as geeks we have some misguided belief that because we generally know more about tech than the general user we should have sole dominion over the tech sphere -- tech is for everyone.

Personally I've happily admitted in the past I'm a luddite when it comes to change in the tech world. I'm trying to break these habits (I've forced the default 7 shell on myself instead of reaching for the nearest shell replacement app) but it's still difficult.

I try and maintain an open mind, however Metro still doesn't make sense to me on the desktop. I'll need to actually try it out to know for sure though, so admit I could be completely wrong.

 

While the home market might be larger for Apple, MS is playing for a small chunk of it (the desktop) there hope may be to use metro to sell tablets but that sector of the market is pretty well sewn up by Apple. Google has demonstrated this by launching a near loss leader to try and grab some market share.

In the play to move into the larger home market there is a risk it loses share in the business market which may have slow growth but its constant, and more importantly consistent cash flow has allowed to fail in so many other markets.

 

I've decided; I'm going to get Windows 8, use one of the many, many handy tools out there to strip out Metro,(Or at least disable it), and enjoy the smaller running footprint and slight performance boost to my PC as a result.

Metro can go burn in hell for all I care, Microsoft were a bit thick to include it within windows 8 as a forced function, but the rest of the OS is sound from what I've seen of it. Despite crashing the release candidate in my VM because I taxed it too much.

 

Is this a sales pitch..?

 

About 90% of home computers are Windows PC's; hardly a 'small chunk' of the home market. Where Apple has dominion is in tablets and smartphones, which are increasingly the go-to devices for ordinary users wanting to use specific web, media and social network applications. That is where Microsoft perceives the next big money to be. It tries to pitch its sales around convergence: "We can give you all the fun of Apple, and all the productivity associated with Windows (Office). We can be the best of all worlds".

Microsoft is big enough to be able to focus a branch on its productivity cash cows, while focusing another branch on domination of all OS ecosystems, which has always been its ultimate goal. To expect Microsoft and Google to give up because "Apple has it all sown up" is naive --it's like expecting Apple to give up in the 90's because Microsoft was the dominant OS. But Apple is showing signs of complacency and stagnation in innovation while Microsoft and Google are busily reinventing themselves in the face of fierce competition (as indeed Apple did, back in the 90's). The saga continues.

 

Yes but they already own that market, they're not competing with any one in the desktop market they don't have to, others have tried to compete with MS in desktops and failed. Apple have moved the goal posts and convinced people they don't need a bulky desktop. Google, meanwhile is pretty platform agnostic, it may make money from Android but it also makes, likely, more from Windows desktops and a fair chunk (i would guess) from Apple users. MS are looking for growth in the home market and they can not get that from the desktop, the 10% non MS users are non MS users for their own reasons and they'll never switch.

The small chunk they're trying to get hold off is the tablet/smartphone users who don't want to be tied to Apple/Google. This part of the market will never be as big as the corporate market, not for MS, they're too far behind to make any real market share. I don't expect them to just give up, I do expect them to stop trying to chase Apple or Google and realise their strengths are else where.

Intersting aside MS normal approach of embrace, extend and extinguish has singularly failed them of late.

 

I love the look of the Metro UI and the implementation is cool - most-used stuff being immediately accessible. I wish it was more usable, given the input devices (mouse and keyboard). A touch-screen monitor or even a kinect-alike device imho are daft for a desktop PC. I can see it working perfectly on a tablet through touch, or as a gesture-happy PC through the living room TV. It's a bone of contention until they perfect a way of getting around it flawlessly on a desktop because atm it's largely hit and miss and not very intuitive. It needs to have commonality.

I assume MS have plenty of carrots for app developers? This is what pushed Apple devices into home users hands. MS are incomparison, rather bereft of apps.

 

Actually, Microsoft is fighting to keep it's 90%. What I mean is that now tablet and mobile phones are being an extension of desktop and laptop computer, and are starting to replacement them. That's the future. A single device that is a smartphone on the go, and becomes a computer when connected to a screen with keyboard. Desktop and laptop market as we know it, will be greatly reduce. Already, they are many people with smartphone who barely uses their computer anymore. They use one for work, and just for smartphone maintenance. As they do all they need (e-mail, web surf, IM, etc..) on their phone directly. If they could work on their phone and no longer need to be attached to a desktop or laptop computer for maintenance (upload new music/video, manage phone, update, etc.), they would.

 

Unless we have computer monitors like this:
http://www.wacom.com/en/Products/Cintiq/Cintiq24touch.aspx
Used with a keyboard.

 

Although a lot of the early reviews were overwhelmingly negative, I have to say that the more I read about Windows 8 the more likely I am to finally upgrade. Yes, Windows XP has worked well for me these many years, but it's now holding me back from upgrading. I am an incremental upgrader - i.e., I rarely upgrade an entire computer at once. Instead, I tend to buy new parts when old ones either fail outright or can no longer operate efficiently.

I feel like my experience is somewhere in between geek and muggle. I've tried Ubuntu, I assemble my own systems, but in the end I just want something that works. I don't want to fuss about with too many configuration settings. I want to turn on my computer, easily access programs, and just generally be able to use the darn thing. With that in mind, and considering a motherboard/CPU/RAM upgrade in the near future, I think I'm finally at a point where I want to upgrade.

When I say "Windows XP just works," what I mean to say is that up to now my personal experience has not warranted the need to upgrade. It is not meant as a slight toward Win7 or Win8. To be honest, I think Windows 7 is a great OS, and if I had the need for better hardware than a 32-bit version of Win XP could support, I would have upgraded sooner. Have I spent money on a new video card? Yes, but only because my old one stopped working; it was not to get a marginal frame rate increase.

Now that I'm at a point at which video and graphics output is asking for more power, I'm ready for some new core hardware; therefore I'm ready to upgrade. Considering Microsoft's low-cost upgrade offer, and given the more recent reviews, I think I'll be happy with Windows 8.

 

Rant in the wrong place, ignore me...

 

Always do.



(j/k )

 

After doing a little more research, specifically on how multi-monitor setups work in Win8, I think I'll be picking it up. It's $40, might help in games, and you've still got a desktop.

Having a game playing on one monitor, a desktop display on the second, and the Metro home screen on a third seems like it could be pretty nifty with a bit of tinkering.

 

Looking back on it, it reads a bit like an intern's first draft for one! I just get a little tired of backwards-looking hypocrites who will, in the long run, appreciate the changes. UIs will not be tied to physical interaction, either through keyboard and mouse or touch, forever. This is a step forward, and we should at the very least be curious about it - it is pretty original.