Why do people hate Windows 8 ??

[JupiteL]

I've tried my friend's laptop for pretty long time, it's really different from win 7 and need some times to adapt. I don't know much about the performance.

[ThorBuildingLegos]

So... people have adamantly stated why they won't switch. Here's my take in a nifty top 3 list... because 3 is the magic number.

 

3rd: They removed feature X, dag nabbit!

It shouldn't be news to anyone that with each iteration of any operating system the developers will systematically add AND remove features. Some will be missed, others will be easily forgotten, some will be spat on as they fade away in to the distance, but people will find alternatives and replacements or eventually just move on. It's quite frankly not that big an issue, but it's enough to make some cry bloody murder...

 

2nd: It's messing up my/our workflow.

Boy oh BOY is this a big issue. We often forget that not everyone is completely proficient at understanding similarities between (G)UIs, the optimal ways of using computer input peripherals like keyboards, generally people who are not that proficient with computers. Some of us might take our understanding of how to interface with computers for granted. So with this in mind it doesn't make sense to change the workflow of the operating systems essential functions like start menu. A full screen menu is a big step forward for Windows 8, one which has been very successful for both OS X and Linux, but it can possibly cause confusion and may require a reintroduction to the use of the operating system, like paying for courses  or just enduring the productivity hit while it lasts. But that aside the "desktop mode" of Windows 8.1 looks fairly familiar and if the menus are setup properly (possibly using OblyTile on a test PC and distributing the profile files via active directory) then the experience can even be enhanced. But it does require some research and work to get this done and most people would rather just wait until some third party solution shows up and changes everything... like developers using tiles in the Windows menu as functions to a single app rather than icons for individually different apps and using live tiles for what they're worth. But this will only happen with time and some smart people coming together and filling that productivity gap...

The best example of how important it is to maintain a stable workflow is actually in the open source world. Debian for instance is distributed in several versions, one of them being LTS (or "Long Term Support"). Now what that entails is that the software and kernel are expected to behave in a predictable manner, which constitutes a state of stability. Unpredictable behavior can lead to instability and decrease productivity. The LTS release of Debian is actually more about how the software communicate with each other, how they perform, fail and with what frequency, but it should also be stated that this is very important for the interface as well. A graphical user interface must be recognizable and easy to use and by the baseline users, or else it might lead to companies constantly having to course people in how to use the new software. Therefor the baseline user is not just the lamen, but the almost inept, to ensure that loss in productivity is not caused by end-user confusion or ineptitude (which, you guys, is almost always).

So.. yeah, introducing a new "easy-to-use, big buttons, easy to read" GUI and expecting it to be adopted instantaneously because it looks so easy to use when it creates a rather large gap in between user experiences... is perhaps not such a good idea. Perhaps you should ease the public in to it.. and not forcefully cram them in the door. But it's still not the worst administrative cockup in their recent history, the biggest has to be that...

 

 

1st: It's expensive as ++++...!

OS X is now free with each Mac PC, notably because the OS is bundled along with the machines. But even before Apple decided to do this licenses for OS X cost about 20$ to 30$. LinuX is (mostly) free of charge with a vast array of free applications for private, professional or enterprise use, so it does not stand to reason that Microsoft STILL demands up to 100$ for the new iteration of their operating system. They could argue that they are putting more value in to their software and that its made to work will all sorts of PC hardware and not just a select few, but that point is void when you realize that you can pretty much get the same results on Windows, OS X and Linux with the same kind of performance, with increments of variation. Not only that but people have been building Hackintoshes for ages and now people are building Steam Machines. So Microsoft no longer the only one who provides the do-all operating system environment.

So lets focus on MIcrosofts fall from grace regarding Windows 8 as a general-use operating system: that they are overpricing their product and that Microsoft does not sell traditional non-metro apps through their "marketplace". In other words they missed golden opportunities to bring software developers in to their new ecosystem, not only by excluding non-Metro apps from the "marketplace", but by overpricing their OS at such a level that when the average end-user see the price-tag there's a fair chance that they will either use their old Windows 7 key or that they will pirate Windows 8 right off the bat. This is incredibly inconsiderate if you want people to adopt a completely new GUI. So in my opinion, from a somewhat limited business point of view, and from a end-user point of view, it seems like commercial suicide for Microsoft to overprice their OS in a world that's been comparing apples to oranges... especially since the world might start preferring apples real soon. I'll go frolic with the penguins when that time comes.

 

 

 

So there you have it. What I summarize to be the big issues that curtail the adoption of Windows 8.

 

(PS: Yes, there were changes to the kernel, and yes Windows 8 performs slightly better on some systems and much better on others)

[Markyod]

Because i shouldn't need to install 3rd party software to make the OS bearable, the UI is useless to me, I don't have a touchscreen. Id rather stick to windows 7 and have slightly less performance.

[ThorBuildingLegos]

Because i shouldn't need to install 3rd party software to make the OS bearable, the UI is useless to me, I don't have a touchscreen. Id rather stick to windows 7 and have slightly less performance.

 

3rd place: they removed/added X feature. Yes, you SHOULD need to install 3rd party applications. In fact there are certain countries here in Europe that prevent Microsoft from freely distributing Windows Media Player and Internet Explorer bundled with Windows. This is to prevent Windows from having monopolies on these very integral components or to not distribute certain video/audio codecs to regions that don't have a general license for the technology. This is why Microsoft was forced to make the browser choice app and why they sell Windows 8 N.

 

In short: an OS is an OS and software used in "userland" is NOT the OS, from a purely technical and political point of view. This ofc goes against the modern "device owners" point of view because they believe that the manufacturer is supposed to provide an entire ecosystem before the device is considered "productive", which is like begging for monopolies and these dang patent wars. So I completely disagree. We need to understand that making the choice means having the choice in the computer world. Neglecting it will only limit our ability to choose or the choices them selves.

[TheProfosist]

Ok I really do want to reply to many things in this thread but I have a feeling itll be a big waste of time as it will fall on deaf ears. If someone thinks differently please let me know.

[ThorBuildingLegos]

Ok I really do want to reply to many things in this thread but I have a feeling itll be a big waste of time as it will fall on deaf ears. If someone thinks differently please let me know.

 

Everybody might not agree with what you're saying, but it's not exactly falling on deaf ears. There are many reasons for and against Windows 8 and its up to each individual or organization to make that distinction for them selves, and there are many different reasons to switch or not switch. So, a big waste of time? Perhaps... the original post was a question posed to the general LTT community, you being a member of it, about why people hate Windows 8 so much, and in the end the answer is largely subjective but could help paint a better picture of why some people are displeased... so if anyone reads it... well, yes some might read it... by all probability at least one person has to read it... you make the decision.

[TheProfosist]

Everybody might not agree with what you're saying, but it's not exactly falling on deaf ears. There are many reasons for and against Windows 8 and its up to each individual or organization to make that distinction for them selves, and there are many different reasons to switch or not switch. So, a big waste of time? Perhaps... the original post was a question posed to the general LTT community, you being a member of it, about why people hate Windows 8 so much, and in the end the answer is largely subjective but could help paint a better picture of why some people are displeased... so if anyone reads it... well, yes some might read it... by all probability at least one person has to read it... you make the decision.

I know I wont convert the masses of haters but there are a good deal of misconceptions that proliferate this. the thing is that I and other have gone over them multiple of times in different threads on the forum and just as another thread like this pops up nothing has really changed.

[ZmanFTW]

Win8 was created with tablets & touchscreens in mind. Win7 was created for desktop PCs. Both Intel and MS are guilty of focusing their products on cell phones, tablets, and laptops. While I am sure that the numbers do not lie for them, desktop gaming PC users have been put on the back burner. Many console gamers are now looking to gaming PCs and the video game industry (including PC gaming) is bigger than ever and growing every year.

 

http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/09/04/why-pc-gaming-has-exploded

[Skanic]

Because its Windows h8te.

I have Windows h8te.1

[TheProfosist]

Win8 was created with tablets & touchscreens in mind. Win7 was created for desktop PCs. Both Intel and MS are guilty of focusing their products on cell phones, tablets, and laptops. While I am sure that the numbers do not lie for them, desktop gaming PC users have been put on the back burner. Many console gamers are now looking to gaming PCs and the video game industry (including PC gaming) is bigger than ever and growing every year.

 

http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/09/04/why-pc-gaming-has-exploded

^^^ This is one thing. Only the windows 8 start screen was or whats called the "modern" interface not the whole thing. the desktop will likely never die out for those people that actually need to do things with their computers. The thing is is that is NOT the majority of the market.

[Dragonzeanse]

^^^ This is one thing. Only the windows 8 start screen was or whats called the "modern" interface not the whole thing. the desktop will likely never die out for those people that actually need to do things with their computers. The thing is is that is NOT the majority of the market.

Could not agree more. I'd like to read your opinion on the situation. People aren't so predisposed to hating Windows 8 that they can't stop to read what you have to say, especially since the Windows h8red has died down a little.

[TeKNiQue]

Well, I don't like change. Sure, you could make Windows 8 even better than Windows 7 by implementing a start button, but no for me. I'm used to Windows 7, so I'll just stay there.

[ThorBuildingLegos]

Well, I don't like change. Sure, you could make Windows 8 even better than Windows 7 by implementing a start button, but no for me. I'm used to Windows 7, so I'll just stay there.

2nd: workflow. It can be excused by saying you want the predictability of Windows 7, which is fine and completely acceptable.

[ubuntusuperuser]

i didn't like windows 8, then i tried it on a non-touch screen laptop and  i hate it, tried it on a touch screen laptop and it is much better 

[ZmanFTW]

^^^ This is one thing. Only the windows 8 start screen was or whats called the "modern" interface not the whole thing. the desktop will likely never die out for those people that actually need to do things with their computers. The thing is is that is NOT the majority of the market.

 

It may not be the majority of the market but it is a growing market that should not be ignored. Trying to make the majority happy with a "one OS for all" or "one CPU type for all" approach may cut costs and increase profits but it just gets traditional desktop users uncomfortable and angry. It's not just the start button with MS, but the whole interface designed for touchscreens, privacy, system accessibility, customization, cost, etc. DirectX is a whole other topic that I don't even want to get started with because I will venture off of the OP. I love Intel chips, but I hate what die shrinks and iGPUs have done to overclocking.

 

BOTTOM LINE: If MS and Intel carry on with this tradition, other companies will recognize it as an ignored market and develop products that PC gamers and desktop users WILL be happy with. We are NOT going away!

[Kamina]

Because Microsoft forgot about Desktop users.

 

I use it with Start8 so I'm ok with it. Faster boot times and games will support it better. W8.3 might have the start menu back though.

[ZmanFTW]

http://www.dummies.com/how-to/content/privacy-concerns-and-windows-81.html

[Tam3n]

Mod few reqistery values, uncheck slow transition animations, and Windows 7 becomes as snappy as can be.

[mr moose]

It may not be the majority of the market but it is a growing market that should not be ignored. Trying to make the majority happy with a "one OS for all" or "one CPU type for all" approach may cut costs and increase profits but it just gets traditional desktop users uncomfortable and angry. It's not just the start button with MS, but the whole interface designed for touchscreens, privacy, system accessibility, customization, cost, etc. DirectX is a whole other topic that I don't even want to get started with because I will venture off of the OP. I love Intel chips, but I hate what die shrinks and iGPUs have done to overclocking.

 

BOTTOM LINE: If MS and Intel carry on with this tradition, other companies will recognize it as an ignored market and develop products that PC gamers and desktop users WILL be happy with. We are NOT going away!

 

you can't blame intel for making their processors faster and smaller,  even if they didn't go down the iGPU route OC'ing as we know it is still on borrowed time.

[Kooixh]

I have no problem with windows 8.I prefer 7 though because I don't find myself using the metro start menu often and I prefer to have the classic start.But this can easily fixed with software though,

[linusforsell]

Had my first interaction with Windows 8 (well, I guess it was 8.1) when building a computer for my sister this weekend. It was a bit weird at first, but 10-15 minutes in, some minor settings tweaks later and it felt all fine... Can't see why people would complain so much. The only thing I found really bad was when I tried to find and run my installed programs, it was really inefficient compared to Windows 7, but I'm sure that's due to the fact that I'm so used to Windows 7.

[xox]

my £20 activation of windows 8 ran out so now I really an't be arsed. Plus, I don't want to lose my office licence.

[ZmanFTW]

How do die shrinks help desktop PCs? It is because of the mobile computing market that die shrinks are happening. iGPU helps desktop PC users without a video card I guess. I have experimented with VirtuMVP but if I really want more GPU power I would buy a better video card or 2 for SLI.

 

Imagine an i7-4770K with no iGPU and the surface area of i7-2600K with lower power requirement than Sandy Bridge. All I am saying is that there should be more choices and options for desktop PC users. I personally will always prefer a CPU with NO iGPU, lower power/temps, better OC.

[fojacko]

Personally, i've had nothing but trouble with windows 8. Network drivers that crash every 10 minutes, random blue screens stating bad memory, even though i've upgraded my memory (3 times) and motherboard. I really, really want to upgrade to win8, but until i see actual proof of them things being fixed, I will just wait for windows 9 and then upgrade my network adapter and hope the motherboard & memory issues are non-existant.

[Frix]

Purely because its different and people don't like change. When Windows changes again people will be asking "I liked Windows 8 better"