Just how many people hate Windows 8?

[+Frank B. Subscriber²]

Desktops are indeed a dying breed in the consumer market. Go to any given electronics store around here and you'll see the focus being on laptops and tablets; desktop PCs are more often than not relegated to a corner and don't get a whole lot of attention.

It's different in the corporate market of course - desktops will make up for a sizable part of new PC purchases there for years to come.

[PGHammer]

Out of curiosity, what Modern UI applications have you found that compete with and beat Win32 counterparts?

I've stated two of them - MetroIRC and MetroTwit (replacing mIRC and HootSuite, respectively) in several different threads.

I'm not so hung up on touch support that an application having (or not having) it is an issue, for the quite simple reason that my hardware doesn't support it - I am, after all, running Windows 8 on a desktop. ModernUI, and the applications thereof, therefore must support mice for me to be able to use them at all. The reality that ModernUI applications DO support mice means that the touch support (on hardware that doesn't support touch) is basically a non-issue, at least to me. How many folks use applications that support hardware that they don't have? If an application (any application - be it ModernUI or Win32) merits my adding a hardware feature that I am currently lacking, I CAN add it - I built my current desktop, and I'm certainly physically capable of installing new features by adding, or upgrading, the hardware - therefore I refuse to moan and groan over an application supporting a feature my hardware currently lacks as long as I can still use the application. If your hardware doesn't support touch, than why the heck should the touch-capable features of ModernUI, or any other OS, even have any relevancy at all? What matters is whether you can use the UI or the applications on the hardware you have now, or can upgrade to, if needful. (An example of a useful feature that has driven my upgrade plans is Hyper-V - to support Hyper-V in Windows 8, I need Extended Processor Tables support at the CPU level - which my Q6600 - in fact, all LGA775 CPUs - utterly lacks. Fortunately, my planned CPU upgrade - the i5-3570K - explicitly supports this feature, as do every single one of its socketmates.)

Therefore, touch support in ModernUI, or even Windows 8 as a whole, matters not at all to me due to lack of hardware support. It didn't matter in the case of Windows 7, either - and why would it?

[Jim K Global Moderator]

The Start menu is NOT part of the desktop - it never has been. Besides, desktop applications don't even care about it. Users care - however, applications (even desktop applications) could care less.

All the Start menu is, and has ever been, is an application launcher. Period. Not a thing more OR less. Why else are Start8, ClassicShell, etc., so blasted simple?

You know that yourself - and so does everyone else.

I didn't call the clinging to that metric "don't want to move" for nothing - I saw that same sort of thing when Windows 95 launched.

As obvious as the excision of the Start menu is, losing it can be dealt with - unless you see it as something traditional (which is all the stranger considering the tradition of alternate application launchers in Windows - including from, of all people, Stardock).

(Yes - I saw all those references to the Start menu whenever I install desktop applications - I still see them today, in fact. If desktop applications truly cared that the Start menu existed, they would raise a stink or throw up error flags - however, that isn't happening - I have not given up on desktop applications just because I don't have a Start menu any more. I still use them, and still install them. It's a molehill - not even a regulation hill, let alone a mountain.)

You may say that the Start Menu isn't part of the desktop but most users would disagree. Start Menu (as you mentioned) launched programs onto the desktop...their eyes never having to leave the desktop (if that makes sense?) This familiarity has been ongoing for almost 20 years. With the release of Windows 8...Microsoft decided to strip away this "program launcher" forcing basic users to be greeted with practically two interfaces. The MUI and the desktop. Unfamiliarity with MUI and the drastic change between it and the desktop ... plus the in your face of all those tiles and frustrating hidden options has proven disastrous for Microsoft.

Growled, you know perfectly WELL why - it was either change OR watch the tablets eat their lunch.

Even so...there is absolutely no reason Microsoft couldn't have left in the legacy code for the start menu and an option to boot to the desktop. They could have done this easily while still working on the apparently unfinished/unpolished MUI and MUI applications.

[BajiRav]

I still recall people making concepts of start menu with widgets during Longhorn beta days and everyone was head over heals on how cool it would be. Just a thought. :p

Out of curiosity, what Modern UI applications have you found that compete with and beat Win32 counterparts?

For my own use?

- Official twitter app

- OneNote : it may not be as full featured(not sure) but I am not a heavy note taker, it is good to just type something and let it pause till the next time I need it.

[MorganX]

Desktops are indeed a dying breed in the consumer market. Go to any given electronics store around here and you'll see the focus being on laptops and tablets; desktop PCs are more often than not relegated to a corner and don't get a whole lot of attention.

Maybe in Europe. The sales "growth" is with mobile devices, but not because of the death of the desktop. Because just about every US household has one or more PCs or laptops. They don't need to purchase a new one. That does not shrink the base or the market.

2010 US: More than 80% of US households have some type of PC, and almost half have more than one. About 77% of Gen X has a desktop PC at home, and 61%, a laptop. Age 18-34, 90%,

The software era has begun, only no one is providing meaningful applications. Not enough software engineers, math and science require too much effort. So everyone goes for a marketing degree and produce music video Surface ads of people wearing lots of makeup, spinning Surfaces and dancing on their heads but doing absolutely nothing with them.

[PGHammer]

Maybe in Europe. The sales "growth" is with mobile devices, but not because of the death of the desktop. Because just about every US household has one or more PCs or laptops. They don't need to purchase a new one. That does not shrink the base or the market.

2010 US: More than 80% of US households have some type of PC, and almost half have more than one. About 77% of Gen X has a desktop PC at home, and 61%, a laptop. Age 18-34, 90%,

The software era has begun, only no one is providing meaningful applications. Not enough software engineers, math and science require too much effort. So everyone goes for a marketing degree and produce music video Surface ads of people wearing lots of makeup, spinning Surfaces and dancing on their heads but doing absolutely nothing with them.

MorganX, that is why I dared ask the question that nobody - least of all the analysts - has dared, especially since the decline in DESKTOP sales began before the Developer Preview of Windows 8 hit the Internet, and has affected Apple's Mac line - could the failure in uptake of all non-tablet/slate (basically any hardware that lacks touch support) be due to lack of touch support? Other than OS X, touch support is nearly ubiquitous.

[PGHammer]

You may say that the Start Menu isn't part of the desktop but most users would disagree. Start Menu (as you mentioned) launched programs onto the desktop...their eyes never having to leave the desktop (if that makes sense?) This familiarity has been ongoing for almost 20 years. With the release of Windows 8...Microsoft decided to strip away this "program launcher" forcing basic users to be greeted with practically two interfaces. The MUI and the desktop. Unfamiliarity with MUI and the drastic change between it and the desktop ... plus the in your face of all those tiles and frustrating hidden options has proven disastrous for Microsoft.

Even so...there is absolutely no reason Microsoft couldn't have left in the legacy code for the start menu and an option to boot to the desktop. They could have done this easily while still working on the apparently unfinished/unpolished MUI and MUI applications.

The answer to THAT question (users see the Start menu as part of the desktop) I'll leave to the late Abraham Lincoln - calling a tail a leg doesn't make it one.

User perception and reality are diametrically at odds - and nowhere is it more true with exactly how desktop applications actually act in Windows 8; they act no different than they do in Windows 7, in terms of either installation OR use.

The MUI being different is indeed true - however, adjusting to a different MUI is something we as users (even Windows users) have been more than capable of dealing with - exactly how much can the MUI, even in Windows 7 and earlier, can differ simply by re-skinning the desktop using something such as WindowBlinds? That's been true over all of WindowsBlinds' existence - why would Microsoft making the change, rather than a third party, make any difference?

There's far less to the difference as far as desktop applications than is being made - pretty much the desktop applications (or even the desktop itself) could care less that the Start menu is gone. If anything, this change, as massive as it seems affects desktop applications far less than re-skinning the desktop (again, using something such as WindowBlinds) does. I'm not picking on Stardock, or even WindowBlinds - I was, in fact, a registered user of ObjectDesktop in the XP era. However, some skins changed the MUI to the point where I could not adjust at all. Note that I didn't have the problem with every skin, or even most of them - however, there are some skins that DID change the MUI so radically that I was left completely at sea - which, rather amusingly, is NOT the case with ModernUI's addition and the Start menu's excision.

[Tal Greywolf]

A few personal observations here: First off, I'm not a tablet user. I do have a small Android tablet that sits under a pile of books, unopened mail, and who knows what else, collecting dust. I don't use it for a variety of reasons, namely that there is nothing that I do that requires a touch screen. The same is true for my cellular device, I do not have a touchscreen-enabled cellphone, I have a very old-fashioned *phone* which is the only thing it is used for. If I need to web surf or answer email, I wait until I can get home and turn on the computer.

So for me, tablets and touchscreen-enabled devices are not anything I'd like to own. I find them often to be frustrating, I can't type on them for the most part, and there's no real applications that run on a tablet that demands that I have one.

Now, as for Windows 8, I have it on my computer. There are a lot of things I like about it, the stability, USB 3.0 support is much better, and it's a very good OS... up until we come to the Start Screen and the Metro UI. There, it becomes to me an unusable mess to deal with, which is why ClassicShell was installed. I prefer being productive, and since most all of my productivity is in the desktop, I prefer not to be constantly flipping back and forth between two unrelated interfaces just to access a program or install a driver. ClassicShell (and the other options) provide a level of stability and functionality that is missing right now with the default Windows 8 OS, something that Microsoft completely whiffed.

I also keep Windows 7 on a second drive, and have Windows 7 on my non-touchscreen notebook. Again, it's the question of functionality and productivity... constantly having to switch between interfaces is not productive. (It's also why Windows 8 will not be rolled out in the company I work for. They've evaluated it for desktops, and decided the problems and hassles that come with two interfaces keeps it from being worth adopting. They will use it for limited tablet devices, but with the understanding that there are going to be things you won't be able to do on a tablet that you still will require a desktop system for.)

[MorganX]

MorganX, that is why I dared ask the question that nobody - least of all the analysts - has dared, especially since the decline in DESKTOP sales began before the Developer Preview of Windows 8 hit the Internet, and has affected Apple's Mac line - could the failure in uptake of all non-tablet/slate (basically any hardware that lacks touch support) be due to lack of touch support? Other than OS X, touch support is nearly ubiquitous.

It's a fair question, but I think it's not really about touch. If touch works fine. I have no problem with it, or without it. Modern UI works fine with a mouse and scroll wheel.

I still say it's about the apps in general. I buy whatever runs the apps I need. With the tablet/phone crowd it's more and more lifestyle stuff. iPhone dominates peripherals, fitness and health stuff on the phones and tablets. Android is a distant second and Windows phone is non-existent. I don't know if it's easier to develop for the Apple port than USB or what.

There's a reason facebook and Twitter are the number one and two uses of smartphones and tablets, that's all consumers need to do outside of basic email, texting, and web browsing. Software and hardware devs need to give them a reason to use the devices for more.

[PGHammer]

It's a fair question, but I think it's not really about touch. If touch works fine. I have no problem with it, or without it. Modern UI works fine with a mouse and scroll wheel.

I still say it's about the apps in general. I buy whatever runs the apps I need. With the tablet/phone crowd it's more and more lifestyle stuff. iPhone dominates peripherals, fitness and health stuff on the phones and tablets. Android is a distant second and Windows phone is non-existent. I don't know if it's easier to develop for the Apple port than USB or what.

There's a reason facebook and Twitter are the number one and two uses of smartphones and tablets, that's all consumers need to do outside of basic email, texting, and web browsing. Software and hardware devs need to give them a reason to use the devices for more.

That's not exactly news to me, MorganX - however, neither ModernUI, or even Windows in general, are to blame there.

Developers are getting less and less likely to stretch the capabilities of individual applications, let alone take advantage of new features in an operating system. Pretty much the only developers that don't have such reticence are niche developers.

Part of it is, as much as I despise the idea, us as users. We tend to reward a developer that writes a simple (if not downright dull) application - basically the one-trick-pony school of applications. Tablets and smartphones are like the early days of computing - they run only small simple applications due to lack of capabilities *hardware wise* - not necessarily due to OS limitations. Android freed from the current hardware shackles could be a threat to Windows 8 itself - not merely WindowsRT - spending time with the AndroVM tells me that much; for that reason, Android on Bay Trail is worrying. However, small, simple applications on mobile platforms can pay off rather quickly due to the large number of such devices - look at the number of just iOS devices in the EU, or North America, or Asia. Do the same numbers for Android. In most cases - due to price differences alone - that number far outstrips the number of Windows PCs. No developer with a clue will ignore market numbers that large. Writing an iOS or Android app - even if your application is a niche app - can pay off far sooner than a desktop application - even one just as simple - could. One-trick-pony in mobile sells due to sheer numbers.

The issue in terms of DESKTOP-OS application development is, if anything, worse than ever - if a developer tries to push past the simple, the user base for that application, game, etc. will push back. The whole hooraw over ModernUI is, unfortunately, part of it. The critics of ModernUI either haven't noticed that it is usable without touch - or they just plain don't care. (Given how long it has been since the Developer Preview of Windows 8, I am thinking that the latter is most likely.) It's not what they are used to; therefore, they will do anything they can to destroy it. (The dispute in terms of Linux desktop environments with GNOME 3 started that way - therefore, it's not unique to Windows; however, given the size of the marketshare of Windows, and especially on desktops, the hooraw is naturally larger.) More and more, what users accept are only evolutionary improvements at most; if anything, the larger the user base, the smaller the improvements they will accept. If it sounds like "sheeple syndrome", you're right - and that is exactly what I think it is. Quite frankly, seeing it in IT makes me nearly physically ill.

Android and iOS have been out there longer (by far) than Windows Phone 8, which is different enough from Windows Phone 7.x that you have to rewrite WP 7.x apps to take advantage of WP8 features; if you also want in to the 8/RT space, you have even more work to do. Then there is the issue that Android apps are, in fact, easier to write than apps for Windows Phone, let alone 8/RT. Also, the number of devices IS a factor, like it or not. Android and iOS have the device numbers - Windows Phone 8 does not, and naturally Windows 8/RT have more than WP8, but nowhere near as many as iOS or Android. While one of the things that gets dragged in to the whole debate is that the Google Play store has lots of apps, app quality, even on the Google Play Store - the *official* gateway to all those Android devices, is as hit-or-miss as ever; there are still a lot of apps that are device-specific, even on Google Play. That isn't the case with Windows Phone 8, let alone Windows 8/RT, and their respective Stores - if an app is device-specific, it won't be accepted in the Windows Phone//8/RT app stores. Therefore, if anything, Microsoft has it all over Google in terms of QA/QC for apps. I can't recommend an Android app that won't run on an Android VM, due to lack of experience WITH that app. What draws developers (and likely users) is the large number of users iOS and Android already have - most users get the buzz (and the itch) likely by word-of-mouth. Also, the devices are cheaper than PCs - even netbooks or notebooks. However, the app problem bothers me with Android, and a keyboard would be a must-have in any case (regardless of what OS any tablet, slate, or convertible I were to buy would have). Android and iOS devices are actually LESS likely to include a keyboard (iPads, in fact, don't include one) than a WindowsRT device. Also, because I'd be using it most often with said keyboard, touch is even less of an issue. For me, due to lack of a learning curve, Windows 8 and RT win.

However, Windows 8 has an alternative platform that WindowsRT does not - older notebooks and laptops (preferably x64). As long as that notebook or laptop meets Windows 7's HARDWARE requirements, and the hardware was not deprecated, I can replace (not upgrade) the OS (8 replacing 7), for basically the same cost as an RT-based tablet, if not less (about the cost of an Android tablet).

[Jolo]

What was the correct path for Microsoft (too late now):

Microsoft PC Operating System

It's historically called Windows, and will be called Windows

- Windows

- Windows Server

* It has a normal UI, like before

- You have Start Button, and a 'Metro-influenced' Start Menu (a little-like Metro UI for opening desktop normal programs), only visual influenced, JUST LIKE OFFICE 2013 for example)

Microsoft Mobile Operating System for Phones and Tablets (ARM OS)

Will be called Metro OS (or another 'Cool' name)

* Contains the Metro UI exclusive interface for touchscreens

* But, is also integrated as part of normal Windows, for use with desktops and convertible Laptops with touchscreens, but you can OPTIONALLY use on a normal PC, so you can run dedicated Apps on it

* You can trigger it with an exclusive button, bigger, on the down-right side of the screen. You can also trigger in the Start Menu itself, or disable both options for anyone who doesn't want it

Two separates operating systems, one even included into another (Metro OS into Windows). You can promote it like that, to use in compatible devices.

So:

- You leave alone Pros and any other person that's like and want to use Start classic menu, but with a cool metro-influenced little UI, classic shorcuts and options, even for shut down or restart a computer (most people in the world even want these two options, Vista demostrated that in the past putting Suspend over Shut Down, nobody likes it)

- You can had an entire touchscreen ecosystem into Windows, but separated

- You, as Microsoft, can promote their new OS and interface, so developers can develop Apps for that, using normal Windows

- You, as a customer, can have best of both worlds on your PC if you want to use it Modern OS

And, on the Hardware side:

- You call the Surface RT with a non-confusing name. Microsoft Surface with Modern OS (cheaper, VERY cheap)

* You delete desktop on this, is pointless. Only Modern UI.

- You call the Surface Pro as now, but, Surface Pro with Windows (and, because Modern OS is integrated, both on it, like any other convertible laptop)

- Unified UI STYLE for Windows, Modern OS, Xbox, Skype and... It's just the Metro Style! Not functional, STYLE.

Hardware partners can do the same.

Sumary:

- Modern OS

- With Modern UI, only for ARM tablets and Phones

- Windows for PCs (Desktop and Laptops)

* Modern OS integrated for Touchscreen Desktop and Laptops/Convertibles or anyone who wants to use it

* You still include Start Button and Start Screen, classic desktop primary UI

It's a little bit confusing. Sorry. Just ideas.

But, it's too late anyway.

Sorry my english.

Jolo.

[MorganX]

Two separates operating systems, one even included into another (Metro OS into Windows). You can promote it like that, to use in compatible devices.

There's a simpler option. Go back to the future, Windows & Windows Workstation (i.e. Enterprise Edition).

Enterprise supports GPO settings to turn off all of the Metro and basically simulate a Start Page-free Desktop Environment, that still won't bring back the Start Menu.

Now having said that, after using Windows 8 for 6 months, that's not actually necessary. The changes being made in Blue are a step in the right direction. The Start Button is great even if it just goes to the Start Page.

Now one glaring omission no one mentions is Microsoft forgot to allow configuration of "All Users" Start Page :/ Would be nice to be able to configure this from GPO as well. More tile/icon customization is also needed.

Not that much is needed, it just appears not much thought was given to how to make the Modern UI most useable in the current enterprise environment. This can be fixed in 8.1 and 8.2. Having good Modern Applications is a whole other issue. But as MS fixes the US in Blue and future releases, it will seem less foreign on the desktop.

[PGHammer]

There's a simpler option. Go back to the future, Windows & Windows Workstation (i.e. Enterprise Edition).

Enterprise supports GPO settings to turn off all of the Metro and basically simulate a Start Page-free Desktop Environment, that still won't bring back the Start Menu.

Now having said that, after using Windows 8 for 6 months, that's not actually necessary. The changes being made in Blue are a step in the right direction. The Start Button is great even if it just goes to the Start Page.

Now one glaring omission no one mentions is Microsoft forgot to allow configuration of "All Users" Start Page :/ Would be nice to be able to configure this from GPO as well. More tile/icon customization is also needed.

Not that much is needed, it just appears not much thought was given to how to make the Modern UI most useable in the current enterprise environment. This can be fixed in 8.1 and 8.2. Having good Modern Applications is a whole other issue. But as MS fixes the US in Blue and future releases, it will seem less foreign on the desktop.

MorganX, if System Center 2012 is deployed in an enterprise, it can make exactly those changes, as it supports Windows 8 Enterprise already. ModernUI is usable in any environment - including enterprises; it's that danged "sheeple effect" - what the core of IT wishes to destroy, they must first impugn and belittle. (The core system administrators in any enterprise - especially the large ones - are also the most conservative. They by and large have the same thinking as the College of Cardinals of the Roman Catholic Church; a core duty of the College, other than electing the next pope, is they act as the guardians of Church policy and doctrine. The core system administrators all too often feel they have a similar policy - to protect IT by imposition of an overly restrictive structure - why else is BYOD meeting strong resistance in large enterprises? The core system administrators seek to protect IT from any invaders or invasion, especially from within - if they could, they would have prevented any OS since XP from taking root inside, and in some cases, they have, in fact, done just that.) Via System Center 2012, ModernUI can be locked down, and the Windows 8 Store can be locked out - meanwhile WSUS, not Windows Update, could STILL be used to deliver updates within an enterprise. This is doable today.

However, that requires spending money - not exactly justifiable, in a "spend less" environment, especially in terms of enterprise IT. However, folks have to get past the fear of learning a new UI/UX first.

Do you know why MetroIRC and MetroTwit actually work, while few other ModernUI apps made it through my gauntlet? Because their developers remembered that touch is anything BUT pervasive - if your app doesn't support keyboard and/or mouse users (especially keyboard users) it will feel like a lick-and-promise app, and that is something that anyone behind a keyboard despises. (While in some cases it may well be warranted, who likes being treated like a child?) Worse, most ModernUI developers started off as mobile app developers - not Win32 developers. (The developers of MetroIRC and MetroTwit started as Win32 developers - not mobile developers. I'm beginning to think that the develop of the ModernUI version of the Kindle reader came from the Android side of Amazon - not from the developer of the Win32 version of Kindle reader software.)

[MorganX]

MorganX, if System Center 2012 is deployed in an enterprise, it can make exactly those changes, as it supports Windows 8 Enterprise already. ModernUI is usable in any environment

Not sure where you're going with all the Modern UI usability, administrator resistance stuff. IT Standardization has a major impact on TCO and business productivity.

But with regards to SCCM, are you telling me SCCM can configure custom Start Page for "All Users" and Customize Start Page Tiles/Icons, boot to desktop, et. al.? I'm not talking about locking down the store, or preventing changes to the Start Page, I'm talking about configuring the Start Page for All Users. A given set of tiles and groups for the Start Page. Just like All users Start Menu and Desktop icons can be configured?

[PGHammer]

Not sure where you're going with all the Modern UI usability, administrator resistance stuff. IT Standardization has a major impact on TCO and business productivity.

But with regards to SCCM, are you telling me SCCM can configure custom Start Page for "All Users" and Customize Start Page Tiles/Icons, boot to desktop, et. al.? I'm not talking about locking down the store, or preventing changes to the Start Page, I'm talking about configuring the Start Page for All Users. A given set of tiles and groups for the Start Page. Just like All users Start Menu and Desktop icons can be configured?

Are you using Group Policies? If so, yes. (Take a look at the MSDN Virtual Labs on SCCM 2012 - I'm having to because I can't deploy it in my own test lab due to my hard drive being too small; deployment of Windows 8 Enterprise is one of the MVA exercises.)

One issue that I get with enterprises (and large ones) is standardization - managing multiple user groups is hard enough; throw in different operating systems within each group, each with their own idiosyncracies, can have admins reaching for the Rolaids. If that (and the cost thereof) is an issue, say so - I get that much. I pointed out exactly that issue during the Consumer Preview period - why have the critics apparently assumed I had forgotten bringing it up? If costs are an issue, I get it - I can't hate an enterprise for not wanting to incur unbudgeted expenses. Just don't try and blow smoke up my posterior.

[BajiRav]

But with regards to SCCM, are you telling me SCCM can configure custom Start Page for "All Users" and Customize Start Page Tiles/Icons, boot to desktop, et. al.? I'm not talking about locking down the store, or preventing changes to the Start Page, I'm talking about configuring the Start Page for All Users. A given set of tiles and groups for the Start Page. Just like All users Start Menu and Desktop icons can be configured?

Yes (except b2d). My own Windows 8 workstation came with a customized start screen. It was a image deployed by System Center (not sure which version).

[Dashel]

For my own use?

- Official twitter app

- OneNote : it may not be as full featured(not sure) but I am not a heavy note taker, it is good to just type something and let it pause till the next time I need it.

I think that question is kinda loaded, but does underscore the idea\bias that 'features' will always be the trade-off for more simple/mobile systems.

I would say there are several kinds of websites, plus any of the 'quick' news readers, that can be better than viewing via the browser (Tom's, News, Travel, ESPN, etc); Of course if I'm researching something it will be in the full browser on my desktop where the need for extra features becomes important.

[MorganX]

Are you using Group Policies? If so, yes. (Take a look at the MSDN Virtual Labs on SCCM 2012 - I'm having to because I can't deploy it in my own test lab due to my hard drive being too small; deployment of Windows 8 Enterprise is one of the MVA exercises.)

Not that interested in the SCCM image/profile thing, this is going to happen once when imaging anyway, but it is great to see that Start Menu registry preferences update the Start Page. I'm keeping our guys focused on completing Windows 7 deployment, but most likely, we'll move forward with Blue sooner rather than later. No chance on the current RTM.

I'm not sure if Boot to Desktop is something we should even bother with. Might as well bite the bullet if you deploy. The Start Button will be good though.

[xWhiplash]

Maybe in Europe. The sales "growth" is with mobile devices, but not because of the death of the desktop. Because just about every US household has one or more PCs or laptops. They don't need to purchase a new one. That does not shrink the base or the market.

2010 US: More than 80% of US households have some type of PC, and almost half have more than one. About 77% of Gen X has a desktop PC at home, and 61%, a laptop. Age 18-34, 90%,

The software era has begun, only no one is providing meaningful applications. Not enough software engineers, math and science require too much effort. So everyone goes for a marketing degree and produce music video Surface ads of people wearing lots of makeup, spinning Surfaces and dancing on their heads but doing absolutely nothing with them.

Agreed. Why do people think general user Joe Somebody needs to upgrade their computer every year? I know people who are still happy with a Core 2 Duo or even a Pentium 4!

I fail to see how it can ever be possible for desktops to die out.

[+Warwagon MVC]

You know what would make me laugh. If they don't give the people who hate that the start button is back a way to remove it.

[Active.]

You know what would make me laugh. If they don't give the people who hate that the start button is back a way to disable it.

Would be funny. What would actually be easiest though is to just make it into a regular application shortcut that you can freely choose to put on the task bar or not.

[PGHammer]

Agreed. Why do people think general user Joe Somebody needs to upgrade their computer every year? I know people who are still happy with a Core 2 Duo or even a Pentium 4!

I fail to see how it can ever be possible for desktops to die out.

Don't tell me - tell that to all the critics of Windows 8. I have been saying *from the beginning* that the Windows 8 hardware requirements are identical to those of 7. Nothing greater is required - period. Hyper-V is not a standard feature of Windows 8, but an option - however, any Intel CPU in a socket newer than LGA775 supports it. (LGA1366/1156/1155/2011 - from i7 down to CeleronG. As VT-x became nearly ubiquitous in LGA775, both VT-x and EPT support *are* ubiquitous in all non-Atom x86 CPUs from Intel since LGA775.) And given that the economy is still bad, and unemployment is still an issue, there are more OS-only upgraders with 8 than there were with 7, which itself saw quite a number of OS-only upgraders.

[Dashel]

Except the onboard GPU limitations are more of a roadblock for most PG.

[PGHammer]

Except the onboard GPU limitations are more of a roadblock for most PG.

That would make sense for users of portables - however, it doesn't apply to desktops if you have PCI slots. (Yes - I specifically said PCI, not PCI Express.)

There are DX11 GPUs (from both AMD and nVidia) that fit quite comfortably into PCI slots. (AMD's HD5450 in particular has been making a living in this area, as it's a GPU that was primarily designed for portable use - in desktop trim, it requires neither extra power or anything more than passive cooling. I have a PCI Express version, however, the same card is quite plentiful in PCI. It's far from expensive, either.)

[Dashel]

I don't disagree, but anything without an AGP or PCI-E slot wouldn't work anyway. The cost isn't justified for older desktops nor is an option for the many, many more laptops with **** onboard Intel GPUs that transitioned 'off' of Desktop PCs.