Windows 8 Flack

[JefferyD90]

This is clearly (as you have said) a transitional stage. People know how to use Windows 7 because it worked like Vista, Which worked like XP, etc. This is a change, and people will get used to it. In 10 years we'll be saying the same thing about the new setup. People know how to use it because they're used to it 

Exactly, I said this earlier.  Windows hasnt changed since 1994 when Windows 95 came out.  And honestly that style of OS needs to go away.  It is holding us back in what we are able to do.  The only bad part about Windows 8 is it should have been done sooner.

[JefferyD90]

I bought a Macbook a few weeks ago thinking I could learn both OSes and stay up to date on both trends. I found myself using Windows 8 99.9% of the time because it just seemed to be more smooth then Mountain Lion. Here are a few points I can say on the topic of Windows 8.

 

First thing is the UI, I think Microsoft went backwards in their design but I think it may be because they are pushing the Modern UI. Things are just more square and less rounded like Windows and Vista used to be. I personally like the design more but as a "tablet OS" they could have made the desktop a little bit easier to use (in tablet mode) I use Windows 8 in desktop mode for the most part so I may not be qualified to state my opinion as much. Besides that, the UI does feel snappier when browsing large folders with lots of files or folders with heavy Media in them. so I am not complaining at all.

 

Second thing is the hybrid startup. This feature is really amazing. The amount of work it takes to make an OS compatible with potentially hundred of thousands of hardware configurations makes this feature really stand out. I can tell they did a lot of work to make this feature seamless while working with older apps. I guess it's really called a hybrid hibernation since it only keeps OS services and drivers saved but re runs all user profile services + apps. I love this feature, TLDR lol

 

Third thing is the driver support. This isn't backed by any hard facts but I feels drivers are written for Windows 8 feel more stable, even after Windows 7. Drivers that do not work for my odd devices such as TV tuners or CD/DVD Duplicators just work whereas in Windows 7, they are extremely flaky. 

 

I use Windows 8 on all my laptops to my desktop replacement laptop (W110ER) to a Little netbook with 1.5GB of ram. They all work perfectly and I would recommend it. There is nothing wrong with Windows 7 but Windows 8 does feel like an upgrade...

Well, the great thing is Windows 8 is built on Vista and Windows 7's basic kernal and such.  So everything that worked in them, is going to work in Windows 8 pretty easily that is where you are seeing a lot of the driver greatness coming from.

 

Also, as far as the hybrid startup and such, these are great features like you said, takes TONS of man hours to figure out and I agree kudos.

[JefferyD90]

I have never used it win 8 with a touchscreen. I got start is back and  I don't care that its windows 8. I think microsoft could have not wasted all of those resources trying to develop all the touch features.

 

I have seen the average user use win 8 however. They were jumping back and forth from the desktop to metro. It literally looked like an awful experience and very cumbersome.

But the question is WHY?!?!  Give us one reason other than "I just dont like it".

[JefferyD90]

I dont want people getting off topic anymore.  I really need you guys to tell me WHAT makes Windows 8 inferior to Windows of the past.  GIVE SPECIFIC EXAMPLES!

 

If you dont likes something that is fine and dandy, but PLEASE base your oppinion on some facts!

 

Also, I am getting a feeling that a lot of people are posting based on using a artificial start menu or something of that nature.  Im looking for ways that Microsoft can CHANGE Windows 8 to make it better for everyone!

[icebalm]

Also this needs to be backed up with something other than your personal ideas.  This is to be informative and NOT just another rant.

 

Now onto the topic at hand.  This is brought up by a simple question, why are so many people opposed to Windows 8?  It performs much better, offers a higher level of security, supports newer hardware, and has more integration with other software (like email, social messaging, SkyDrive, and so on) and many other great features.  The whole Operating System is stable, very few bugs to work through, and really is everything Windows 7 couldn't hope to be.  Everyday task are, literally, twice as fast to do simply because the number of steps required to do said task is cut in half.  Not to include the extra capabilities, like one touch sharing and simplified device management.

I really like how you state that this thread is to be informative and "backed up with something other than your personal ideas" and you go on to state, without evidence of any kind, a whole bunch of bunk.

Alright, can you first back up that Win8 performs better than Win7 as all the evidence seems to show that they're pretty much the same as evidenced here: http://usabilitygeek.com/windows-8-vs-windows-7-speed-and-performance-testing/

Security out of the box on Win8 is better because it comes with MS Security Essentials, however Win7 can use the same software as a free download.

Win8 supports newer hardware than Win7? Can you show me a piece of hardware that requires only Windows 8?

Software integration is very debatable. By definition installing software is integrating it with your system.

 

So now onto my main issue here, I honestly believe it’s simply because it’s a change (if it’s for the good or not) and people don’t want to change.

 

So here is the challenge, and were your responses come into play.  What EXACTLY is the problem with Windows 8?  Let’s address the obvious first, the start screen/menu.

This is precisely it. It is a change. However not just a small, incremental UI change. It is a large, sweeping, radically different change that *requires* user retraining.

Ever since Windows 95 (You know, 1995, 18 YEARS AGO?) Microsoft has been pushing the desktop metaphor with the start button element. It is ingrained in every Windows user. If you want to open an application, go to the control panel, or even shut down your computer, you first must click Start. For people who just need to use the computer to get things done, who don't care about the ins and outs, this is how they have worked for nearly two decades. Not only that, it's actually intuitive, at least back when it still said "Start" on it. If you sat someone down at a computer who never used Windows, they would instinctively click the Start button, and there they would find all their stuff. Even with just being the Windows logo, it's there on the screen, people will eventually find it and click on it.

Then suddenly, it's gone.

Replaced by what? Replaced by a fisher-price looking mosaic of tiles, some which seem to just be showing information, some which are application launchers, and not *all* of your applications are actually here either, for that you have to right click a blank spot and click "All Apps" in the bottom right? What's intuitive about that? What happens when a user does eventually launch an application? It loads in the desktop, with no visual cues on how to get back to the start screen, or launch anything else. There is nothing intuitive about this and actually requires training a user in how to use the UI, which is just poor design.

But never mind that, Windows 8 is just fine, right Jeffery?

 

I am going to use 2 examples of launching programs that Windows 8 is better at doing.  If I wanted to launch Microsoft Word, with Windows 8 I click once it flips to desktop mode seamlessly and I’m working.  Windows 7 I will have to click 1 time to open the start menu and at best click 1 more time (if I have it pinned to my start menu) then it opens.  If I didn’t do that step then I would have to click 2 more times (once for all programs and another time for the Microsoft Office folder).

How often are you going to be at the Start screen already when you want to launch an application? Precisely once per boot. All other times you're going to be somewhere else, usually in another app. So, instead of trying to make Win8 look better, lets compare apples to apples huh? Start the process from the desktop.

Windows 7: Click Start -> Click App Icon

Windows 8: Move mouse to lower left corner of screen -> Wait for Start to pop up -> Click Start -> Click App Icon

Even Microsoft realizes now how ridiculous the Windows 8 model is and is putting a Start button back in to 8.1.

 

Another point people seem to not be in tune with is the charm menus.  This is because of 2 reasons I feel, one is people aren’t use to the mouse gestures and two people don’t understand them.  The charms are EXTREAMLY useful.  The search feature is SUPER powerful.  You type what you want to search, then click the application you want to search into.  For example if I want to check my latest Amazon order, I type "Amazon" and then click on "Mail" and I will see all my emails that are in relation to Amazon, intelligently sorted from newest to oldest.  Something that Windows 7 search cannot do at all might I add.  And if I don’t see it, I can just click on “Internet Explorer” and poof I get a web search for Amazon to see why I don’t have my email.  Windows 7 would require switching between several apps to get this done, with the search feature being in different locations, and usually using different options, to get the job done.  So the Search Charm is so much more unified in Windows 8 that it simplifies things.

Yes, the Charms. The magical menu that only pops up when you have your mouse in a right hand corner. So if the "search charm" is so unified, why did Microsoft have to put it there at all? The search feature can be accessed by going to the start screen and just typing. Why have a superfluous "charm"?

I also like the way you explain how you're switching between multiple apps (by clicking on mail, then on IE) yet derride Windows 7 by saying to do the same thing you'd have to switch between apps. Ugh.

And yes, if you use all the built in default stuff that comes with Windows 8, it's going to work well together, but here's an experiment! What if you don't use Windows Mail for your email? Then how would you use Windows search to search your email?

 

The Devices charm allows you to do TONS of great things, like print or send the audio or video source to a specific device, without having to go through (once again) different submenus.  You just go to your charms click on devices and your printer is there, your stereo is there, your TV and second screen options are there.

Odd, all I get is "Nothing can be sent from the desktop", I'm sure it's nice and easy and intuitive though by the way you beam about it, probably just needs more user retraining.

 

And for all of you advanced people, the settings option is there to change EVERYTHING, and once again, always in the same place and in the same way.  So finding the options menu for Internet Explorer is no different than that of the Pictures App, or the Mail App, or Netflix App…  I think you get where I am going.  Thus MAKING IT EASIER, and in the long term (as soon as developers get off their lazy asses) more powerful than ever before, because it will have more direct access to hardware and settings inside Windows.

Hrmm, that's odd, I open Internet Explorer and go to the settings charm and I don't see any internet explorer settings, nor when I do it for firefox, or chrome, or LibreOffice, or VMware vSphere Client, or Cisco AnyConnect, or Outlook, or Steam, or... anything really. What the hell are you talking about? Oh, you mean it only works for "Apps". Well, how quaint. That sure is intuitive and so much easier, especially when you were talking about Internet Explorer, the browser MS has such a hard on for they had to include three versions of it in their OS!

 

A bunch of crap about gestures.

Again, the thing about gestures is they require unnecessary user retraining. If you have an installed userbase who has been doing a task the same way for two decades you don't just go and break their workflow just for the hell of it. There has to be some compelling user value-add or else you're going to piss off a bunch of people. Gestures aren't intuitive where buttons are, gestures require passive wait times before an active click can be made where buttons don't, and gestures can more easily be triggered accidentally. Where's the user value-add?

 

First about 60% of the people that use Windows 7, DID NOT use the pinning feature.  So they never, not once, pinned a program to their start menu.  Second of the remaining 40% they realized the average number of pinned programs is 7, with a quick list of 10.  That is 17 programs in your start menu.  I have tested this, and on a 1920x1080 screen, that takes up all but about 2 inches of the screen (top to bottom).  If you start to display submenus you QUICKLY take up over half your screen real estate with your Start Menu.  Well, part of the whole screen being a Start Screen in Windows 8, is simply because the Windows 7 Start Menu (when used to its fullest) took up half the screen anyways!  So it is only logical for them to do a FULL Start Screen.

Microsoft impliments drastic UI changes based on a minority of their userbase and wonders why people are bitching at them? Really?

 

Random crap about Apps and searching.

 

So why did an entirely new Apps platform have to be built just to get search right? Why couldn't Microsoft just add these features into the already existing Windows API like Apple did with spotlight 8(!) years ago? The separation between "Apps" and applications just confuses users and is completely unnecessary.

 

In summary, I am TRULY under the impression that people don’t like Windows 8 because it is a change not because it is a worse OS.

 

You are half right, people don't like Windows 8 because it is a change, and the changes make it a worse OS.

[ThreePinkApples]

Alright, can you first back up that Win8 performs better than Win7 as all the evidence seems to show that they're pretty much the same as evidenced here: http://usabilitygeek.com/windows-8-vs-windows-7-speed-and-performance-testing/

 

That.... that is just some horrible HORRIBLE made graphs, so cheating.

 

For WIndows 8

 

I have tried it/used it since the Developer Preview, never had any problems with it (that wasn't fixed in RTM)

For me the Start Menu is easier to use, it boots faster and works just as fast as Windows 7 overall. 

Though after a while I had one problem come up, the background on the start screen, so anoying that it couldn't be the same as on Desktop

Well, 8.1 fixed that : >

 

I am a kind of guy that love change just too have something new, so it was kind of obvious that I would love Windows 8, and in the months leading up to it I was getting quite tired of the Windows 7 look

 

 

 

And to you who pointed out that there was a instruction video (thingy) in Windows 8, well, you are right, but seriously, it sucked.

They made little effort in making that little thing, and it is just lazy of them to not have anything better. In Windows 8.1 they have fixed this, it is actually really good in 8.1, both those little instructions in the beggining pointing out and explaining the corners and the "Help & Tips" app. 

(Yes using 8.1 RTM on my laptop, doesn't game on it so I see no problem in using it already)

[JefferyD90]

I really like how you state that this thread is to be informative and "backed up with something other than your personal ideas" and you go on to state, without evidence of any kind, a whole bunch of bunk.

Alright, can you first back up that Win8 performs better than Win7 as all the evidence seems to show that they're pretty much the same as evidenced here: http://usabilitygeek.com/windows-8-vs-windows-7-speed-and-performance-testing/

Security out of the box on Win8 is better because it comes with MS Security Essentials, however Win7 can use the same software as a free download.

Win8 supports newer hardware than Win7? Can you show me a piece of hardware that requires only Windows 8?

Software integration is very debatable. By definition installing software is integrating it with your system.

 

This is precisely it. It is a change. However not just a small, incremental UI change. It is a large, sweeping, radically different change that *requires* user retraining.

Ever since Windows 95 (You know, 1995, 18 YEARS AGO?) Microsoft has been pushing the desktop metaphor with the start button element. It is ingrained in every Windows user. If you want to open an application, go to the control panel, or even shut down your computer, you first must click Start. For people who just need to use the computer to get things done, who don't care about the ins and outs, this is how they have worked for nearly two decades. Not only that, it's actually intuitive, at least back when it still said "Start" on it. If you sat someone down at a computer who never used Windows, they would instinctively click the Start button, and there they would find all their stuff. Even with just being the Windows logo, it's there on the screen, people will eventually find it and click on it.

Then suddenly, it's gone.

Replaced by what? Replaced by a fisher-price looking mosaic of tiles, some which seem to just be showing information, some which are application launchers, and not *all* of your applications are actually here either, for that you have to right click a blank spot and click "All Apps" in the bottom right? What's intuitive about that? What happens when a user does eventually launch an application? It loads in the desktop, with no visual cues on how to get back to the start screen, or launch anything else. There is nothing intuitive about this and actually requires training a user in how to use the UI, which is just poor design.

But never mind that, Windows 8 is just fine, right Jeffery?

 

How often are you going to be at the Start screen already when you want to launch an application? Precisely once per boot. All other times you're going to be somewhere else, usually in another app. So, instead of trying to make Win8 look better, lets compare apples to apples huh? Start the process from the desktop.

Windows 7: Click Start -> Click App Icon

Windows 8: Move mouse to lower left corner of screen -> Wait for Start to pop up -> Click Start -> Click App Icon

Even Microsoft realizes now how ridiculous the Windows 8 model is and is putting a Start button back in to 8.1.

 

Yes, the Charms. The magical menu that only pops up when you have your mouse in a right hand corner. So if the "search charm" is so unified, why did Microsoft have to put it there at all? The search feature can be accessed by going to the start screen and just typing. Why have a superfluous "charm"?

I also like the way you explain how you're switching between multiple apps (by clicking on mail, then on IE) yet derride Windows 7 by saying to do the same thing you'd have to switch between apps. Ugh.

And yes, if you use all the built in default stuff that comes with Windows 8, it's going to work well together, but here's an experiment! What if you don't use Windows Mail for your email? Then how would you use Windows search to search your email?

 

Odd, all I get is "Nothing can be sent from the desktop", I'm sure it's nice and easy and intuitive though by the way you beam about it, probably just needs more user retraining.

 

Hrmm, that's odd, I open Internet Explorer and go to the settings charm and I don't see any internet explorer settings, nor when I do it for firefox, or chrome, or LibreOffice, or VMware vSphere Client, or Cisco AnyConnect, or Outlook, or Steam, or... anything really. What the hell are you talking about? Oh, you mean it only works for "Apps". Well, how quaint. That sure is intuitive and so much easier, especially when you were talking about Internet Explorer, the browser MS has such a hard on for they had to include three versions of it in their OS!

 

Again, the thing about gestures is they require unnecessary user retraining. If you have an installed userbase who has been doing a task the same way for two decades you don't just go and break their workflow just for the hell of it. There has to be some compelling user value-add or else you're going to piss off a bunch of people. Gestures aren't intuitive where buttons are, gestures require passive wait times before an active click can be made where buttons don't, and gestures can more easily be triggered accidentally. Where's the user value-add?

 

Microsoft impliments drastic UI changes based on a minority of their userbase and wonders why people are bitching at them? Really?

 

 

So why did an entirely new Apps platform have to be built just to get search right? Why couldn't Microsoft just add these features into the already existing Windows API like Apple did with spotlight 8(!) years ago? The separation between "Apps" and applications just confuses users and is completely unnecessary.

 

 

You are half right, people don't like Windows 8 because it is a change, and the changes make it a worse OS.

You do notice that every single points of yours are wrong

 

First off, integration is simply that, INTEGRATED.  Once you have to make a change to the OS (installing a new program/editing registery/anything at all) you change what it is.  It is no longer integrated it is added onto.

 

And as far as security goes, how many people downloaded MSE?  According to MS User stats approxiamtly 8% of the userbase did, but about 20% went unprotected all together.  Because of integration, using Windows Defender (not the same as MSE btw go read the notes on it) from the start, it ensures a higher level of protection.  Also this is one of the first OS's to require everything from top to bottom to be digitally signed.  Not to include a better browser integrated, a much improved smart screen filter, amongst other things.

 

What-ta know Windows 8 only device: http://www.dell.com/us/p/XPS-10-tablet/pd?oc=fncwe02dh&model_id=XPS-10-tablet

 

Now, lets talk about the start button again.  Please dont get the start button confused with the start menu.  You said they are bringing the start menu back, no no no no...  They are bringing the start BUTTON back.  No menu, just a button (personally a waste of about 1000 pixels on my screen but whatever).  But even so they arnt even bringing the button back, because in Windows 8.0 if you will just hover your mouse in the bottom left hand corner, where the start button has been located for 18 years like you said, POOF it appears out of thin air!  It just looks different, it even says start on it!  Second thing I would like to add to this part of your comment #1 how many people have never used a comptuer before, that are going to start using it?  #2 pretty much EVERYONE agrees that it is easier for a first timer to use Windows 8 than other OS's.  Even so I will give you a point there, but GIVE EXAMPLES!!!   What makes it harder for a first timer?  Because I cant think of a single reason why.  If you want to get in the internet there is tile stairing at you right in the face that says internet explorer, want to listen to music there is a tile that says specifically music on it.  It only would be clear cut to click or tap on them.  But If you can give me a specific REASON that a first timer might have a harder time, Ill give you a point there.

 

Another quick point, if you are spending all your time on the desktop, once again, you are using Windows 8 as it is NOT meant to be used.  DO NOT USE WINDOWS 8 AS A GLORIFIED VERSION OF WINDOWS 7, you will be dissappointed because it IS NOT Windows 7.

 

As far as the search charm goes, if you use a different email client, then how is it any different at all than Windows 7 is?  It is not, it just takes 1 less click to launch the program to begin with.  Also, apps are the future.  Those old programs that you use, will be replaced by apps.  It may not be on Windows, but it will be replaced by apps.  So get use to it.  If your favorite developer isnt writing apps, please write to them about it.  The sooner the better.

 

As far as using the device charm on your desktop, once again, if the program hasnt been made to use the charms, it wont.  Windows 8 is only as strong as its weakest link, and that is the developers.

 

And this next point is the same as the last one.  If the program doesnt make use of the charms, then Im sorry it just doesnt.  Dont blame Microsoft for making the feature available and people not using it.  And as far as the programs that you have always had, you use them like you always have.  Chrome web browser, guess what its the same!  LibreOffice, its the same!!!  Steam, to my knowledge, is the same!!!!!!  Why would you expect those programs to change any at all?

 

Gestures, are litterally ALLL around us.  And I got some news for you, if you think Windows 8 is useless because of gestures, your going to hate the O-Rift, your going to hate virtual pannels, your going to HATE IT when a holodeck is built...  Gestures ARE the future, its happening in phones, its been happening in desktops as well.  Go back and read, I know of 2-3 people that have posted already something to the effect that the lack of a start button doesnt bother them because they have a natural habbit of going into that bottom left corner, THAT IS A GESTURE!!!  You had that same gesture in all of Windows before.  I do feel a tad bit for those who did put the task bar on the sides or tops of their monitors tho.  Its not about just for the fun of it, its about advancing technology.  Windows 8 is traning you for everything, from Xbox One and all of its gestures and commands, to the next version of Windows, to Microsofts next weariable technology (which has not been announced but you would be a FOOL to think they havent already started working on it), and we know that AMD is working on a holodeck within the next 20 years, and who do you think they are going to turn to first for help?  Its not Apple, I can assure you that much.  Most of the gestures flack is pure garbage of people A) not understanding what options are there (this has been discussed because yea they are hidden on the sides) and B) most people not knowing how powerful they actually are.

 

A minority of their user base?  I think you need to re-read that quote you posted me on, I said ~60% of Windows 7 users didnt use pinning, and of the remaing 40% that did use it they had too many programs and just made the Start Menu a cluster ****.  So over half didnt use the start menu anyways, and the ones that did over used it...  Yea you totally didnt read over that...

 

Well, its because Apps and Programs are two different thigns.  You can make a program to run under its own environment (ie video games do this all the time to help acomidate for system resiources or changing button functions on your mouse and so on and so forth) but APPS have to live under a certain set of rules outlined by the OS.  For example, look at Android OS, if you click the Home button, IT ALWAYS NO MATTER WHAT takes you back to the home page.  Have you ever been running a game in Windows and hit the Windows button, and it not take you back to the desktop?  It happens all the time, try GTA IV, or maybe World of Warcraft.  This is a small example of how programs are different than apps.

 

Any point you have made is a invalid point mostly based on your uneducated ignorance.  Please go watch a Build Confrence or something and learn a little bit, THEN come back to us when you have some knowledge.

 

But I did like the effort you put into this post!  If only you would put it into learning then the world would be a better place.

[JefferyD90]

That.... that is just some horrible HORRIBLE made graphs, so cheating.

 

For WIndows 8

 

I have tried it/used it since the Developer Preview, never had any problems with it (that wasn't fixed in RTM)

For me the Start Menu is easier to use, it boots faster and works just as fast as Windows 7 overall. 

Though after a while I had one problem come up, the background on the start screen, so anoying that it couldn't be the same as on Desktop

Well, 8.1 fixed that : >

 

I am a kind of guy that love change just too have something new, so it was kind of obvious that I would love Windows 8, and in the months leading up to it I was getting quite tired of the Windows 7 look

 

 

 

And to you who pointed out that there was a instruction video (thingy) in Windows 8, well, you are right, but seriously, it sucked.

They made little effort in making that little thing, and it is just lazy of them to not have anything better. In Windows 8.1 they have fixed this, it is actually really good in 8.1, both those little instructions in the beggining pointing out and explaining the corners and the "Help & Tips" app. 

(Yes using 8.1 RTM on my laptop, doesn't game on it so I see no problem in using it already)

I can agree with the instructional video and I have spent the past few hours thinking about this.

 

I think the only way it could have been better is if there was a APP that did all of this: http://windows.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/how-to

 

The video tutorial took about 50 seconds to do.  The average attention span of a 30 year old is about 1 minute.  So when someone sits down to their PC and wants to log on for the first time they have about 1 minute before they get frustrated.  Now usually when its the first time they take into account 15 minutes or something for setting it up (typing your name in and such) so you have actually 16 minutes.  But you cant really take 16 minutes because it does take about 15 to set it up.

 

So could Microsoft made a additional 15 minute video, or interactive tutorial (even if we all know it is in the best intrest of everyone), and people not been livid about it?  How many of us would have thrown our monitors across the room because we couldnt close it?

 

If Microsoft would have made a "Getting Started" app, (like in windows xp when it had that god awful baloon that asked you if you needed help) it could sit there until you clicked on it.  And it lead you through linking your Microsoft account, downloading apps, using charms, and all these other things.  Then the final step can be uninstalling the "Getting Started" app so it doesnt clutter up your Start Screen more than it has to.

 

Let me know what you think about that idea?  Would something like that go a long way in helping people adjust?  Or is this something that only time can help?

[Lyons]

blah blah blah I'm speaking nonsense everyone look at me try to justify an inferior operating system

 

Oh wow, good try, but no. Every single point you made is wrong and biased. Why do you not understand that because this is the first generation of a new style there is a learning curve involved? Say the change was in the opposite direction, if we went from modern UI -> Aero, EVERYONE would be complaining because it's a change. The fact that you're so upset about the change is pretty amusing, that was a good read 

[MiracleMan]

I tried for months, but I cannot deal with the Modern UI, at least not without a touchscreen. 

With Windows 7, i have everything i need in the bottom left corner of my desktop, but in Win8, the functions&programms are spread out over the complete desktop. 

 

It may be nice for touchscreen users, but with mouse and keyboard it just seems awkward for me, because it is so much slower. 

Other than that i have no problem with Win8, but Modern UI made me downgrade to Win7 agian

 

And yeah, i know, it is new, you have to learn it, but i really tried for serveral months (used it for 4 or 5 months), but i still can't reach the work speed and work flow i have with Windows7, i am not even close. 

 

If you could just deactivate Modern UI i would be perfectly fine with Windows 8 and would probably even prefer it to Windows7, it has its benefits, but for now, its not worth for me to upgrade agian

 

//Edit: 
Note: I did NOT try Windows 8.1 just yet

[Lyons]

I tried for months, but I cannot deal with the Modern UI, at least not without a touchscreen. 

With Windows 7, i have everything i need in the bottom left corner of my desktop, but in Win8, the functions&programms are spread out over the complete desktop. 

 

It may be nice for touchscreen users, but with mouse and keyboard it just seems awkward for me, because it is so much slower. 

Other than that i have no problem with Win8, but Modern UI made me downgrade to Win7 agian

 

And yeah, i know, it is new, you have to learn it, but i really tried for serveral months (used it for 4 or 5 months), but i still can't reach the work speed and work flow i have with Windows7, i am not even close. 

 

If you could just deactivate Modern UI i would be perfectly fine with Windows 8 and would probably even prefer it to Windows7, it has its benefits, but for now, its not worth for me to upgrade agian

 

You went 'months' without finding out about a start menu replacement? You get all of the benefits of Win8 with a start menu style of your choice...

[MiracleMan]

I had installed a start menu but it didn't work properly. Like, the search fuction was kinda buggy, so it still couldn't reaplace Modern UI completely. 

And i have only a couple of icons in my task bar and the rest i start with the search function, so it is really important for me

[icebalm]

Wow, just... wow.  I had low expectations from this thread but you guys really batted this one out of the park.
 

That.... that is just some horrible HORRIBLE made graphs, so cheating.

 

aerandir92, how about showing some evidence instead of just declaring something wrong because of the production value of the data's presentation?

 

 

But I did like the effort you put into this post!  If only you would put it into learning then the world would be a better place.

JefferyD90, I am convinced you are either a troll, or someone who is very young and has almost no experience in the IT field. Either way, I will not waste my time further.

 

 

Oh wow, good try, but no. Every single point you made is wrong and biased. Why do you not understand that because this is the first generation of a new style there is a learning curve involved? Say the change was in the opposite direction, if we went from modern UI -> Aero, EVERYONE would be complaining because it's a change. The fact that you're so upset about the change is pretty amusing, that was a good read

 

Lyons, how about some evidence that my points are invalid? I would especially love to see you argue that Win8 performs better than Win7.

 

Why do I not understand? I do understand. This isn't my first kick at the can kids, I grew up on a Commodore VIC-20. I survived GEOS. I ran Deskview in DR-DOS. I supported Windows 3.11. I still remember how to rebuild the desktop in MacOS 7. I transfered OS/2 Warp, all 30 floppies of it, over 14.4k modem. I had a beta copy of Windows 95. You want to talk learning curves? Lets do it.

 

I, unlike the rest of you, see how needless the changes in Windows 8 are. Where everyone else is trying to make it *easier* for the user to understand and use a computer, Microsoft makes change for change's sake and makes it harder. How do I know this? I work as field computer technician. Part of my job is to setup new computers for companies who buy them. OVERWHELMINGLY every company wants Windows 7. I have had precisely ONE customer request Windows 8, and within one week of deployment, requested that we replace the OS on their newly purchased computers to Windows 7 because the users were having too many production affecting issues with it, at great cost I must also add.

 

And you know where the money is? It's in business. So you guys with your anecdotal "hurr durr it was easy for me to figure out" doesn't make a lick of difference. It's easy for me to figure out too, that doesn't make it good. If it's not intuitive for the vast majority, and I'm talking upper 80th percentile here, to figure out, then it's poor design. The fact that Microsoft had to make a little animation on how to use the new UI proves it.

 

I know the issues with Windows 8, I have heard the users bitch about them. The fact of the matter is the OS is made for tablets, and not desktops. Microsoft is trying to shoehorn it into a market segment it doesn't belong,

 

Now unless I start hearing intelligent discussion coming from your keyboards, this is the last I'm posting about this. Have a great life.

[GoodBytes]

Windows 8 performs better than Windows 7 VISUALLY Noticeable.

As benchmark showed, newer the hardware the less visible it is. For me, my 5 year old laptop (Core 2 Duo, Quadro NVS 160M 256MB), got a nice 10-15fps average on the game that it can play increase over Windows 7, and it didn't play games of late at 500fps either.. more like 20-30fps, so that 10-15fps is a big improvement. My desktop, GTX 260, also say a performance increase in games, from 5-15fps depending on the game. You don't need proof when it's right in your face.

[rashdanml]

I know the issues with Windows 8, I have heard the users bitch about them. The fact of the matter is the OS is made for tablets, and not desktops. Microsoft is trying to shoehorn it into a market segment it doesn't belong,

I've lost track of how many times I've said this, although "it doesn't belong" isn't the right wording for it. Windows 8 is ahead of schedule - touchscreen monitors aren't cheap and readily available to the average consumer; besides, it'll be awkward to use a touchscreen monitor sitting 2-3 ft away from it. The alternative is to use a tablet input device or even a trackball.

 

Metro UI debuted on phones and tablets for a reason. It works extremely well on it. Ultrabook convertibles with touchscreens is the only other place it belongs so far.

[Lyons]

Wow, just... wow.  I had low expectations from this thread but you guys really batted this one out of the park.

 

 

aerandir92, how about showing some evidence instead of just declaring something wrong because of the production value of the data's presentation?

 

JefferyD90, I am convinced you are either a troll, or someone who is very young and has almost no experience in the IT field. Either way, I will not waste my time further.

 

 

Lyons, how about some evidence that my points are invalid? I would especially love to see you argue that Win8 performs better than Win7.

 

Why do I not understand? I do understand. This isn't my first kick at the can kids, I grew up on a Commodore VIC-20. I survived GEOS. I ran Deskview in DR-DOS. I supported Windows 3.11. I still remember how to rebuild the desktop in MacOS 7. I transfered OS/2 Warp, all 30 floppies of it, over 14.4k modem. I had a beta copy of Windows 95. You want to talk learning curves? Lets do it.

 

I, unlike the rest of you, see how needless the changes in Windows 8 are. Where everyone else is trying to make it *easier* for the user to understand and use a computer, Microsoft makes change for change's sake and makes it harder. How do I know this? I work as field computer technician. Part of my job is to setup new computers for companies who buy them. OVERWHELMINGLY every company wants Windows 7. I have had precisely ONE customer request Windows 8, and within one week of deployment, requested that we replace the OS on their newly purchased computers to Windows 7 because the users were having too many production affecting issues with it, at great cost I must also add.

 

And you know where the money is? It's in business. So you guys with your anecdotal "hurr durr it was easy for me to figure out" doesn't make a lick of difference. It's easy for me to figure out too, that doesn't make it good. If it's not intuitive for the vast majority, and I'm talking upper 80th percentile here, to figure out, then it's poor design. The fact that Microsoft had to make a little animation on how to use the new UI proves it.

 

I know the issues with Windows 8, I have heard the users bitch about them. The fact of the matter is the OS is made for tablets, and not desktops. Microsoft is trying to shoehorn it into a market segment it doesn't belong,

 

Now unless I start hearing intelligent discussion coming from your keyboards, this is the last I'm posting about this. Have a great life.

 

You are visibly upset. I don't care how old you are or who you know. I like Windows 8, and what you said PROVES that the only reason people dislike it is because of change. It's not worse, it is better, but it is also different. It's pretty sad that people like you can't embrace change and advancement, it slows innovation. Until more people are more technologically literate, I dunno what to do. Don't like it, don't use it, your loss 

[Patramix]

well i just wasted what feels like hours reading this entire thread.

 

the only facts i could find on this thread where mostly personal opinions and preferences... 

 

why do people hate windows 8, preference, why do you hate the beetle (car)? its preference. why do you hate chocolate(some people do), preference...

 

personally i USE windows 8, do i use the metro(modern) UI? no, why? its a preference thing, i hate it.

 

i like windows 8, once i modded it to look and feel like 7, but why you ask? because am an old bitter veteran of the windows platform... 

 

at its core(non UI elements) windows 8 is a wonderful OS, a litely upgraded windows 7 basically, with a few more features and options. ive been using it for 6-8 months after like most people hating it without even giving it a try. 

 

so i installed it, gave it a try, but being a power user, i hated the modern UI, so i proceeded to modding it, adding a few little programs that transformed window 8 to being almost perfect. gave it a windows 7 start menu with button. skipped the modern ui and tadda wonderful. Its perfectly stable, just like 7, works the same, as a bunch of features that 7 doesn't have witch seam stupid but are nice, like pausing file transfers, multi-monitor background support to name a few. 

 

now all that said, would i use a default windows 8, hell no, never, a modded 8, hell yeah, its a bit lighter then 7, boots up a bit faster, runs just a smooth, just as stable, and i end up using less 3rd party software then i do on 7 believe it or not. i actually use 2 3rd party software less on 8 then 7. as for compatibility issues, expect for some old xp programs that barely work on 7 anyways i've had no issues, all my games work fine(only had 2 or 3 that required a patch or easy fix), hardware is perfect(even my age old sound blaster platinum) works nicely. 

 

so not to smash on people fingers but, all this thread is, are personal opinions and preferences because those are the real reason to hate windows 8. 

 

just my 1 cent opinion of an old bitter vet

[Lamb]

I can not, under and circumstance agree with using a 3rd party start menu.  Just switch to Windows 7 if you are doing that.  (its a total pet peve of mine, thousands of people spent countless hours coming up with Windows 8 and no telling how many were directly involved with the Start Screen and I just find it a HUGE slap in the face with some donkey ba**s to completly ignore their hard work even if you dont like it.)

 

If there is something that I don't like about my computer (Metro UI) and I have the option to change that to something that I like by downloading a program, I will do that. It changes something that I don't like to make it work better for me. I'm not going to use an older operating system that has a start menu when I can have the benefits of Windows 8 and get a start menu just by downloading 1 program.

[CWP]

You are visibly upset. I don't care how old you are or who you know. I like Windows 8, and what you said PROVES that the only reason people dislike it is because of change. It's not worse, it is better, but it is also different. It's pretty sad that people like you can't embrace change and advancement, it slows innovation. Until more people are more technologically literate, I dunno what to do. Don't like it, don't use it, your loss 

 

icebalm brings up a very good point. Yes, it is because people are resistive to change. However, there are more and more people who are forced to use a computer (be it retrieving emails, or reading stock levels in the inventory), whether they are technologically literate or not. For example, at my workplace, the tech literacy ranges from "Can you please put the Google icon on my desktop so that I can go to Google? I don't know how to go there, and I don't want to learn your way!" to "OK, I will be the guinea pig and install IE10, even if the manufacture's website says they do not support it." To the people in the first group, the computer is a tool that helps them do their job, not hinder them. They just want the computer to adapt to suit them, and not the other way around.

 

Because of these people who are tech illiterate, the IT support group has to hand-hold all these people through transitions. The more things change, the more training is required. More training means more time spent on that. More time spent means less time for productivity. Less productivity means less money for the CEO. At the end of the day, it's all about money in CEO's pockets. We have all seen this happen with Windows XP. Nobody is willing to change because it is such a mature product. It just works.

 

That dual Start Menu option that Windows XP and Vista have is transition done right. Yes, I understand the issue of supporting two different styles; I have done it myself for my friends and family over the phone too. However, in a company setting, it allows me to choose which one to use for the entire company, and switch to the other one for the users who are known to have more trouble with it. In Windows 8, there is no Start Menu option. No transition period. Just Metro. There is not even a GPO to turn it back on. That won't help us help you (Microsoft) get the world to adopt Windows 8.

 

Personally, I have only tried the preview version of Windows 8 in a VM. I would not say I hate it, but I would also not just welcome it with open arms yet. I just have not spent enough time with it to be comfortable running it as my primary OS. However, as an IT manager for the company, I would have to say "over my dead body" if you were to ask me to change. The cost of replacing everybody's OS, the amount of hand-holding during the significant learning curve, the loss in productivity, it all stacks up against what little, if any, gain to install Windows 8.

[GoodBytes]

icebalm brings up a very good point. Yes, it is because people are resistive to change. However, there are more and more people who are forced to use a computer (be it retrieving emails, or reading stock levels in the inventory), whether they are technologically literate or not. For example, at my workplace, the tech literacy ranges from "Can you please put the Google icon on my desktop so that I can go to Google? I don't know how to go there, and I don't want to learn your way!" to "OK, I will be the guinea pig and install IE10, even if the manufacture's website says they do not support it." To the people in the first group, the computer is a tool that helps them do their job, not hinder them. They just want the computer to adapt to suit them, and not the other way around.

The Start Screen does that. You can pin web site to it via IE (or any web browser that will come for it, and support hat feature). Firefox is coming along with theirs.

 

Because of these people who are tech illiterate, the IT support group has to hand-hold all these people through transitions. The more things change, the more training is required. More training means more time spent on that. More time spent means less time for productivity.

No. It's because IT thinks that it's user are incompetent. and thinks they need to train everyone in the company. While in reality, many will figure it out, and you just have a small percentage of users to train. Also the transition can be done in groups. Where it can be done, let's say, per department at moments where it's not their rush period and super busy. IT managers should interact with department leaders, and set up a program with them.

For example, let's say, for HR department, December is a period where people work load is low, and there is no critical thing to do or due any time soon. IT managers can see with the head of HR a plan, to upgrade their systems. So Let's say they use XP now, and you want to go Windows 8.1 (worst case scenario). And assume also that the computers will be changed to fit Windows 8.1 requirements and that's part of the budget. Ok so, here is something that can be set

-> Inform all employees that in December Windows 8.1 will be installed. Provide benefits of switching to Windows 8.1, such as security, support for modern technologies and new features (Vista + Win7 + Win8) that will benefit their productivity. Explain the possible challenges, such as a learning curve to learn these new features, but in the long run will benefit them. And explain that a program will be in place to help them transition

-> Mid November, do a meeting, showing an overview of the OS. Explain that the Start Screen is just a Start Menu made bigger, explain that the layout of the Start Screen will be adjusted for them to their needs, and that they can customize it as they like. The goal of this meeting with the staff is not to teach, but rather have them see how it is, get an idea what they'll have, build up hype which will raise motivation for them to learn. Provide a documentation tour of the OS, mentioning once again the advantage of the new Windows.

-> End November or first day of December, morning, before going to their office, do a training session, pushing at first what was mentioned last time, in the case some people forgot. Then start the the actual training session, where they interact with the systems they'll have. Have a trained employee of their staff demo how to use the system, and how they can quickly access their program, web sites, search, etc. this will help them connect, and see reason to learn because they want to be as fast as the person done the demo, and see that all this applies to them. Kinda like a personalize setup.

-> Then when they go back to their office, Windows 8 is there, and so is few IT staff reserved for 2-3 hours (or the day), going around helping who ever need help. And voila.

Transition was a success. Phone calls for support will drastically reduce, and within a 1-2 week time, they'll be adapted.

This is just a simple example on a possible way in training employees.

 

Less productivity means less money for the CEO. At the end of the day, it's all about money in CEO's pockets. We have all seen this happen with Windows XP. Nobody is willing to change because it is such a mature product. It just works.

Changing burned lights, cleaning the building(s), general maintenance of the company building(s), and so on, cost money. But why do they do it? The same for computers. Companies have chosen to get computers as it boost productivity, but that's the cost of having them. The problem is that CEOs and managers don't understand this... they see it as desk, or a chair, where maintenance is minimal, while the reality is quiet expensive. IBM faced with a similar problems, where the current CEO was pitching money, to maximize profits. Burned lights, where not changed. Building was cleaned once a month or so. Systems were age old or half broken. Productivity was super low. Why? Because employees moral were all time low, and where not interested in working. They were reading their news paper, be distracted by other things, as it took forever to do anything with their systems, the lights weren't fixed, and left left out. IBM started to hire a huge amount of people to get productivity going as competition is hurting them, but while it provided a nice spike in productivity, it remained low. IBM started to care about it's employees and infrastructure, as a desperate experiment: new equipment was put on everyone desk, lights were fixed, building super clean, employees activities paid by the company, training was put in place for the new systems, and so on, and productivity went up to the roof, employee moral was increased.

I went to the bank recently. Their system is running XP. The system was so slow, as they entered my account number, she was answering stuff on their phones, when my profile was loaded, they didn't pay attention, and continue to check their phones. Then 2-3 min later, she noticed and click on something, it didn't work, and start trouble shooting (restart the computer - took forever), and every time there was a wait period, she was on her phone. And I noticed the others did the same, or talked to each other, then when it worked and did my stuff, and rinse and repeat for other clients. What a waste of time! If the bank updated their network infrastructure, computers, new OS, my service time would be significantly less. Let alone, not have to open 10 programs, where each of them did something different, all made by different companies, where (I was told) run under a custom DOS emulator. Unify things, do things right!

I worked at retail, and I had the same experience. The computer was on admin account under XP pre-SP1 (SP2 was long time out), and using DOSBox to run the cash register software, and oh god the computer was slllloooowww, and processing bills took forever. Heck even the credit card machine was on a 56K modem, it did all the dial sound at every card swipe, and constumers were pissed by the slowness.

Waste of money and time! Upgrade!

 

That dual Start Menu option that Windows XP and Vista have is transition done right.

Vista didn't have the old Start menu. It was removed, and people complained, while IT, while hating the OS, was happy with the decision, so it makes support MUCH easier. It was an XP mistake.

 

Personally, I have only tried the preview version of Windows 8 in a VM. I would not say I hate it, but I would also not just welcome it with open arms yet. I just have not spent enough time with it to be comfortable running it as my primary OS. However, as an IT manager for the company, I would have to say "over my dead body" if you were to ask me to change. The cost of replacing everybody's OS, the amount of hand-holding during the significant learning curve, the loss in productivity, it all stacks up against what little, if any, gain to install Windows 8.

100% that used Windows 7 as a VM hated it, at least on forums I participated in.

The only way to learn and adapt is to use it as a main OS. I bet you, you still have Windows 8 default tile layout.

Where I work, the IT manager and IT employees, love Windows 8. But we didnt' switch because:

- People still getting used to Win7, as we recently switch the entire place to Win7 (1 year ago, every computer ran on Win7, but we started 2 years ago). We need to wait and cause too much switching around as it may be chaotic, naturally. The transition was smooth, and we received a total of 5 calls for help with Win7. Pretty good!

- We prefer to wait for Windows 8 to be more mainstream, and more known to people, before transition. We usually follow a 6 year OS upgrade. But we are trying to shrink it. If Windows 8 picks up (mayeb 8.1, 8.2, 8.5... whenever that occurs) we will switch to it.

Those are the reasons, not because the Start Screen (which was planed to setup a default layout where we would pin Document, Computer ("This PC" in Windows 8.1), Profile, Firefox, IE, all in one group, and another group with Office, and another group with the department specific programs. Either way they are in separate profiles in our side, so it's no issue to make a new default account. All of our software was checked and confirmed to work proper under Win8.

All of our computers are running Win8 already.

We are a team that loves technology, love new things, and aren't afraid of changes. Many computers in where I work runs on SSDs as well the users are super happy/amazed with the speed of the computer when we did the switch.

Now we are transitioning to 1080p IPS panel (Dell U2312HM), which seemed to get everyone really exited.

I like to consider that our IT department has a very good relationship with other departments.

[JefferyD90]

If there is something that I don't like about my computer (Metro UI) and I have the option to change that to something that I like by downloading a program, I will do that. It changes something that I don't like to make it work better for me. I'm not going to use an older operating system that has a start menu when I can have the benefits of Windows 8 and get a start menu just by downloading 1 program.

But that is what this whole thread is about.  Why do people not like Windows 8?  Im looking for answers.  And installing a third party program to change things isnt what Im looking for.  I want to know what is wrong with Windows 8 and what can be done to improve it so that way no third party programs need to be used?

[JefferyD90]

The Start Screen does that. You can pin web site to it via IE (or any web browser that will come for it, and support hat feature). Firefox is coming along with theirs.

 

No. It's because IT thinks that it's user are incompetent. and thinks they need to train everyone in the company. While in reality, many will figure it out, and you just have a small percentage of users to train. Also the transition can be done in groups. Where it can be done, let's say, per department at moments where it's not their rush period and super busy. IT managers should interact with department leaders, and set up a program with them.

For example, let's say, for HR department, December is a period where people work load is low, and there is no critical thing to do or due any time soon. IT managers can see with the head of HR a plan, to upgrade their systems. So Let's say they use XP now, and you want to go Windows 8.1 (worst case scenario). And assume also that the computers will be changed to fit Windows 8.1 requirements and that's part of the budget. Ok so, here is something that can be set

-> Inform all employees that in December Windows 8.1 will be installed. Provide benefits of switching to Windows 8.1, such as security, support for modern technologies and new features (Vista + Win7 + Win8) that will benefit their productivity. Explain the possible challenges, such as a learning curve to learn these new features, but in the long run will benefit them. And explain that a program will be in place to help them transition

-> Mid November, do a meeting, showing an overview of the OS. Explain that the Start Screen is just a Start Menu made bigger, explain that the layout of the Start Screen will be adjusted for them to their needs, and that they can customize it as they like. The goal of this meeting with the staff is not to teach, but rather have them see how it is, get an idea what they'll have, build up hype which will raise motivation for them to learn. Provide a documentation tour of the OS, mentioning once again the advantage of the new Windows.

-> End November or first day of December, morning, before going to their office, do a training session, pushing at first what was mentioned last time, in the case some people forgot. Then start the the actual training session, where they interact with the systems they'll have. Have a trained employee of their staff demo how to use the system, and how they can quickly access their program, web sites, search, etc. this will help them connect, and see reason to learn because they want to be as fast as the person done the demo, and see that all this applies to them. Kinda like a personalize setup.

-> Then when they go back to their office, Windows 8 is there, and so is few IT staff reserved for 2-3 hours (or the day), going around helping who ever need help. And voila.

Transition was a success. Phone calls for support will drastically reduce, and within a 1-2 week time, they'll be adapted.

This is just a simple example on a possible way in training employees.

 

Changing burned lights, cleaning the building(s), general maintenance of the company building(s), and so on, cost money. But why do they do it? The same for computers. Companies have chosen to get computers as it boost productivity, but that's the cost of having them. The problem is that CEOs and managers don't understand this... they see it as desk, or a chair, where maintenance is minimal, while the reality is quiet expensive. IBM faced with a similar problems, where the current CEO was pitching money, to maximize profits. Burned lights, where not changed. Building was cleaned once a month or so. Systems were age old or half broken. Productivity was super low. Why? Because employees moral were all time low, and where not interested in working. They were reading their news paper, be distracted by other things, as it took forever to do anything with their systems, the lights weren't fixed, and left left out. IBM started to hire a huge amount of people to get productivity going as competition is hurting them, but while it provided a nice spike in productivity, it remained low. IBM started to care about it's employees and infrastructure, as a desperate experiment: new equipment was put on everyone desk, lights were fixed, building super clean, employees activities paid by the company, training was put in place for the new systems, and so on, and productivity went up to the roof, employee moral was increased.

I went to the bank recently. Their system is running XP. The system was so slow, as they entered my account number, she was answering stuff on their phones, when my profile was loaded, they didn't pay attention, and continue to check their phones. Then 2-3 min later, she noticed and click on something, it didn't work, and start trouble shooting (restart the computer - took forever), and every time there was a wait period, she was on her phone. And I noticed the others did the same, or talked to each other, then when it worked and did my stuff, and rinse and repeat for other clients. What a waste of time! If the bank updated their network infrastructure, computers, new OS, my service time would be significantly less. Let alone, not have to open 10 programs, where each of them did something different, all made by different companies, where (I was told) run under a custom DOS emulator. Unify things, do things right!

I worked at retail, and I had the same experience. The computer was on admin account under XP pre-SP1 (SP2 was long time out), and using DOSBox to run the cash register software, and oh god the computer was slllloooowww, and processing bills took forever. Heck even the credit card machine was on a 56K modem, it did all the dial sound at every card swipe, and constumers were pissed by the slowness.

Waste of money and time! Upgrade!

 

Vista didn't have the old Start menu. It was removed, and people complained, while IT, while hating the OS, was happy with the decision, so it makes support MUCH easier. It was an XP mistake.

 

100% that used Windows 7 as a VM hated it, at least on forums I participated in.

The only way to learn and adapt is to use it as a main OS. I bet you, you still have Windows 8 default tile layout.

Where I work, the IT manager and IT employees, love Windows 8. But we didnt' switch because:

- People still getting used to Win7, as we recently switch the entire place to Win7 (1 year ago, every computer ran on Win7, but we started 2 years ago). We need to wait and cause too much switching around as it may be chaotic, naturally. The transition was smooth, and we received a total of 5 calls for help with Win7. Pretty good!

- We prefer to wait for Windows 8 to be more mainstream, and more known to people, before transition. We usually follow a 6 year OS upgrade. But we are trying to shrink it. If Windows 8 picks up (mayeb 8.1, 8.2, 8.5... whenever that occurs) we will switch to it.

Those are the reasons, not because the Start Screen (which was planed to setup a default layout where we would pin Document, Computer ("This PC" in Windows 8.1), Profile, Firefox, IE, all in one group, and another group with Office, and another group with the department specific programs. Either way they are in separate profiles in our side, so it's no issue to make a new default account. All of our software was checked and confirmed to work proper under Win8.

All of our computers are running Win8 already.

We are a team that loves technology, love new things, and aren't afraid of changes. Many computers in where I work runs on SSDs as well the users are super happy/amazed with the speed of the computer when we did the switch.

Now we are transitioning to 1080p IPS panel (Dell U2312HM), which seemed to get everyone really exited.

I like to consider that our IT department has a very good relationship with other departments.

This guy gets it!

[JefferyD90]

well i just wasted what feels like hours reading this entire thread.

 

the only facts i could find on this thread where mostly personal opinions and preferences... 

 

why do people hate windows 8, preference, why do you hate the beetle (car)? its preference. why do you hate chocolate(some people do), preference...

 

personally i USE windows 8, do i use the metro(modern) UI? no, why? its a preference thing, i hate it.

 

i like windows 8, once i modded it to look and feel like 7, but why you ask? because am an old bitter veteran of the windows platform... 

 

at its core(non UI elements) windows 8 is a wonderful OS, a litely upgraded windows 7 basically, with a few more features and options. ive been using it for 6-8 months after like most people hating it without even giving it a try. 

 

so i installed it, gave it a try, but being a power user, i hated the modern UI, so i proceeded to modding it, adding a few little programs that transformed window 8 to being almost perfect. gave it a windows 7 start menu with button. skipped the modern ui and tadda wonderful. Its perfectly stable, just like 7, works the same, as a bunch of features that 7 doesn't have witch seam stupid but are nice, like pausing file transfers, multi-monitor background support to name a few. 

 

now all that said, would i use a default windows 8, hell no, never, a modded 8, hell yeah, its a bit lighter then 7, boots up a bit faster, runs just a smooth, just as stable, and i end up using less 3rd party software then i do on 7 believe it or not. i actually use 2 3rd party software less on 8 then 7. as for compatibility issues, expect for some old xp programs that barely work on 7 anyways i've had no issues, all my games work fine(only had 2 or 3 that required a patch or easy fix), hardware is perfect(even my age old sound blaster platinum) works nicely. 

 

so not to smash on people fingers but, all this thread is, are personal opinions and preferences because those are the real reason to hate windows 8. 

 

just my 1 cent opinion of an old bitter vet

A lot of people have been giving legitimate answers.  "I dont like Windows 8 because when I go to do xxxx I have to do it like this" is a legitimate answer.  Everything you do has a process, and what I am looking for is WHAT process do you not like?  What about Windwos 8 do you not like?  And I dont accept modded versions of Windows 8 as a solution because they are modded and not how it was intended.  Go back and read a few!

[JefferyD90]

I think the start menu isn't big enough to fit all the programs I frequently use and when I do use the start menu in 7, I am not looking at anything else other than the start menu, so the rest of my screen real estate is just gone to waste. With 8.1 and the smaller tiles I think it's a lot easier to open programs more quickly rather scrolling up and down a menu.

I have totally looked over this one at first.  Thank you for your feedback.  Is there anything you think that can make it better tho?

[Mauri]

I think this whole "windows 8 sucks" thing can be compared to to the whole "CS:GO" sucks debate as well. We're too used to the old ways that people don't really open their eyes to see how good the next big thing is.

 

If CS:GO didn't have the "counter strike" name to it (or the maps that would signify that it's a re-make of the previous ones), would you really think it's a bad game? Same can be said with windows 8