Column: Stop the Windows 8 Hate

213

Comments

+ Add a Comment
avatar

big_montana

You are incorrect there, as that was ONE, ONE developer, not MS that had a Win 7 box, as most were Win 8. Sorry people but I had to feed the troll.

avatar

Eagle70ss

Nope, there were cabinets full of those Win 7 boxes...err dev kits...Nearly all the games ran on Win 7 boxes brah. They just told you that and you believed it. There were reports from people everywhere at E3 that the Xbox they were playing crashed to windows 7. Is it Microsoft's product or the developers? Way to damage control Micro and blame developers.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-hands-on-with-xbox-one

https://twitter.com/JazRignall/statuses/344967744808185857

I'm absolutely correct...you're just gullible.

avatar

riopato

The final product of Xbox one is in fact windows 8

avatar

PCWolf

I tried Windows 8, I know how to use Windows 8, & Windows 8 offers me nothing I need. Gordon Mah Ung needs to stop smoking those California Herbs. Windows 8 is Crap & the World had spoken. Gordon Mah Ung, stop trying to push Windows 8. You are sounding more & more like you are on the Payroll of the folks at Redmond. If you enjoy Windows 8, then good for you! But stop trying to convince the rest of us that this Turd OS is a bouquet of roses. If it was, We would have embraced it.

avatar

riopato

Gordon will do just fine using windows 8 without the need to convince anyone where the direction of PC goes. If users don't want to learn the new interface, nothing is preventing users to stay in the dark ages using the mess known as the desktop UI. Most users that are open to the tile interface can enjoy what windows 8 and future iterations of windows will provide.
I will have to ask for now on, Apple users don't have a problem with it why can't windows user do the same?

avatar

PCWolf

I tried windows 95. It was better than Windows 3.0. I tried Windows 98. was better than 95. Tried Windows ME. ME sucked balls!! Tried Windows XP. Was impressed! Then I tried Vista... OMG WTF IS THIS??? Then I tried Windows 7... Nice!!! Then I tried 8... Don't need a OS with a Tacky looking Touch UI in my face all the time. If I didn't like change, I would still be using 3.0, or 98. Retarded Windows 8 users like you who claim the reason we hate Windows 8 because we hate change, are as dumb as Mac users who think Apple invented everything & that Macs still don't get viruses. Power PC users don't follow the crowd just because the crowd thinks it's better. That type of mentality is for iSheep. & you my friend, sound like a iSheep. If Someone likes Windows 8, then that's great, let them enjoy what works for them. But when people like you say that I hate Windows 8 because I fear change, then that's when people like you will hear my mouth.

If you want, bring you car over so I can remove the steering wheel, remove your dash MPH & Gas gauges & replace them with a touch screen driving system & slide bar that requires you to steer by sliding a button left & right while tapping on a GO button to accelerate, and a Stop button to Brake. Then I'll hide your MPH & Gas indicators under that, and then tell you how MODERN it is and that it's the future of Driving! And that it's great and you should embrace it! & when you don't and complain about how stupid Touch Screen Driving is, I will just say you hate change & that your living in the dark ages of driving. But knowing you, you might actually like it....

avatar

Sovereign

Oh look, the usual bullcrap of "You just aren't learning/you refuse to adapt because I think this change is good so you're wrong."

Nice try.

avatar

TheFirstRuleAbo...

Just like we embraced Windows 95 when it launched. Or lots of people have embraced Priuses and CFLs. When the change is good, it will be loved. When the change is bad and shoved down our throats - it won't.

Don't need to be a rocket scientist to figure that one out.

avatar

riopato

Windows 95 had the same criticisms when it first came out the same way windows 8 is now. Back then no one ever used a device called a mouse and to need a single use device to in order to interface with the operating system would be the down fall of the company. Long live OS2warp!

avatar

TheFirstRuleAbo...

riopato, are you a member of the Great Lakes Wadeladacaca tribe? No one before Windows 95 used a mouse? What were they using for Macs and Win 3.x, pray tell? I remember some complaints, but mostly I remember PC sales taking off, people like me who'd sworn never to own a computer suddenly buying one and bootleg copies of Win95 being sold on Moscow street corners for $25 before it was officially released. PC ownership skyrocketed after the release of Windows 95; yes, the plummeting of computer prices had a lot to do with that, but that really started three years later with the Asian economic meltdown. My first PC had a 1.6 GB drive and cost $3000 bucks - and Windows 95.

OTOH, we now see Windows 8 being blamed by PC manufacturers for slow sales. Not because users read bad hater propaganda on the internet, but because they try it out in preview or in the stores and say, WTF?? Because people like me who've been happy on the Redmond plantation and even forgiven Windows ME are saying the same thing.

Look, if you like it, that's great. Just don't treat the rest of us like we have some mental disease. It's just insecure and petty.

avatar

PCWolf

Agreed

avatar

Carlidan

I don't see anything that suggest W8 users being rude. It seems W8 are rude. Yes, we know you hate it. And..... We heard the same reasons, so why you keep posting the same thing? Have you read the comments? Most of w8 haters started the "flame wars".

avatar

PCLinuxguy

"if you like it, that's great. Just don't treat the rest of us like we have some mental disease. It's just insecure and petty." To be fair that is how haters treat those that actually like windows 8. so really it's coming from both sides of the fence and I agree it is pretty petty. Hence why I find the arguing that's been going on since it's release to be stupid.
Even moreso because the dislike is based on just one thing: the start screen. I could see it if there wasn't a desktop to fall back to for people to be upset, but the desktop isn't going away and ti's easy as heck to bypass the start screen. Heck that's what I do.

avatar

PCLinuxguy

Exactly! I had to deal with alot of the windows 95 hate when we switched over from MS-DOS systems to Windows 95 systems. Lots of complaints until people were shown how to use it and then it did well.

avatar

brannank

Gordon, my friend...I just have to tell you, you have Stockholm syndrome-lets get you some help buddy.

avatar

AFDozerman

I guess I should start copyrighting my jokes...

avatar

riopato

-100

avatar

PCWolf

+100 Internets

avatar

Ghost XFX

Acceptance of W8??? Gordon? You been smoking a lot of purple stuff and rubbing Cheetos all over your body, haven't you!? I'll never ever accept an OS that thinks I should like it, even though it's built for a touch screen portable device. Sure, it's faster, but so is Rosie O'Donnell on roller blades with chocolate cake being used as bait.

This is where MS fails the hardest, they think they know you better
than you do! With any OS, you have got to think about the Power Users. Sure, PCs aren't being bought up in droves like they used to, but that's only because the majority of power users would rather build their rigs, than be cheated by some half-cocked OEM supplier.

That negligence on their behalf has many power users pretty damn pissed off at being excluded when MS created this OS. For a laptop or smart phone, it makes sense. For a Power User with a 24in.+ screen in front of them, who thought this would be such a wonderful thing? It's a swing and a miss for me. I been through their ME fiasco and currently using Vista64 with W7 sitting near by. W8 will never be in my future.

avatar

LesserAnimal

Did you honestly use the windows 7 start bar? like really think about it. You probably only used the search bar right? well. do the same with metro. problem solved. Metro user interface like the windows start bar is a navigation plane with two routes. A search bar and a bunch of buttons for the inept. if you arent the inept then don't use it.

avatar

TheFirstRuleAbo...

Always used the Start bar myself. One click on a pinned icon vs. typing in a search? Even without the occasional, rushed misspellings for me it wasn't even a contest. If the search bar works for you, great, but tell me, did the Start bar interfere even once with your ability to use it? You and I both got what we wanted out of Windows 7, that's why we both used it. Now only you get what you want out of Windows 8, that's why you use it and I don't. Our journeys now go in different directions; best of luck to both of us in them.

avatar

riopato

I generally skipped windows 7 all together and was stuck with Vista. I'm now using windows 8 and I don't miss the start bar at all. Hitting the windows key was always faster to access the start bar instead of using the mouse and start menu so doing the same on windows 8 is no different infact, being familiar to using a mac, windows 8 search reminds me of mac's spotlight. Fast and categorized which the start menu never could do properly.
I do like the fact I can "dock" apps to the taskbar but never have to drill down folders ever again is the best thing that I like best about windows 8.

avatar

PCWolf

I could have not said it better myself.

avatar

LesserAnimal

Windows 8 needed a solid polish but it wasn't really any worse than the pos that windows 7 is. Reports led me to believe 8.1 wasn't going to be the polish it needed but hands on experience is telling me that it actually was.

Lets get really real MaxPc Readers. If you're the power user you think you are than admit the only worthwhile part of the windows 7 start menu was the search bar. If you were clicking your way around that turd you should hang your head in shame. Just as you should if your doing so in windows 8.

The only part that should concern the computer savvy as far as start menu changes are concerned is the effectiveness of the search bar and what it takes to get there . This is where the only real gripe comes in. The transition from desktop to metro was a jarring experience until they let metro share the desktop background. I totally dismissed the change as a superficial bandaid until i experienced it and noticed .....I was no longer pausing like I was lost every time i hit the windows button. in fact i'm in and out of metro so fast now I hardly even realize its there. i can usually bust out Windows key + search query + enter and be staring at the program i want before I ever realize I even left the desktop..

The new menu for the windows button in 8.1 is better than 7. Its small enough to eyeball through and its all business. It may be the one case mousing around may be faster. Even given that I don't do it. Its still faster for me to not take my hands of the keybaord and watch metro blink on and off my screen.

Secondly windows itself is far more responsive now. I don't think i've seen any real performance gain in applications but windows 7 feels more and more sluggish everytime I have to use it compared to 8.

7 was the polish vista needed to get a passing grade.
8.1 is effectively the same. Doesn't make it great but its on par with 7 now and anyone denying is just frustrated by change in general. A word to those people. Were heading towards a post windows world and you won't be able to complain about how unfamiliar things are. Get comfortable using different UI(endles linux variations, osx, android, etc) after doing so you learn to just roll with the changes and shrug them off as long as a terminal (cmd prompt) and a search bar are available you will feel right at home.

avatar

PatchRowcester

Here is why I cannot take your post seriously.

Far too many assumptions, and use of the flawed logic - "It works for me, so you must be dumb for not liking it."

I am typing this on my Windows 8.1 preview machine. I like it, its really fast, but I miss the native start menu. Or let me put it this way, a launcher that is native to windows which is not full screen, doesn't take the keyboard to bring up a program "easily", and one that doesn't use horizontal scroll.

I use the start menu in Windows 7 to pin some of the applications I use most frequently, but I do not wish to pin them to the task bar or place a shortcut on the desktop. I don't like using desktop shortcuts (personal preference). Now, given that I cannot drag specific icons across the All Apps screen, every time I want to launch MS Excel, I have to scroll to where its located (horizontally, I might add), and click on it. Which is really annoying if you want to launch multiple instances quickly.

Now, why do I refuse to the windows key? I have nothing against it. I remote into my laptop through team viewer. When I hit the windows key, its brings up the menu on the host machine instead. So you see, it gets really annoying. The full screen launcher adds no value. I am glad it exists for people who like it, but for those that don't, they have to resort to 3rd party applications. Not a big deal. But the idea that MS were willing to piss off existing users just to push an agenda is what irritates me.

To think all of this nonsense could have been avoided if they let us have an easy to access launcher - not necessarily a start menu, but a launcher that I could at least pin programs to. Well whatever...I am really starting to not care about this "issue". I'll just move on.

I just don't like it when folks like you just talk like you got everything figured out for everyone.

avatar

riopato

This is exactly how I feel about windows 8. Everything about it just feels faster, smoother and accessible. Never having to drill down menus, folders and ironically windows makes me like this OS even more each time I use it.
Every time I use the desktop side of windows 8 oddly makes me feel I'm using something antiquated if it wasn't for the fact that windows in general is fast, fast, fast.

avatar

TheFirstRuleAbo...

You just have to decide that there are better options and pursue them. It is interesting that you make an implicit comparison between Windows 8 and death. If that's what I passed through after years of life on planet Microsoft, then right now I'm in the heaven known as Linux. There's enough similarity between distros to make it easy to switch if the one you're using gets a bit frisky and adopts MS's take it or leave it attitude. That means you're always going to have choice and an experience that includes most, if not all, of what you want.

I am done with hating Windows 8, not because it doesn't deserve it, but because hate's a waste of life. I'd rather spend it loving the fact that I do everything I used to do in Windows and don't need it or any programs written for it (although I still use one or two minor ones in Wine for convenience, though there are perfectly good alternatives - habit, I guess) and that I long ago stopped thinking of it as my Linux box and now it's just my computer - period. I love the choices, stability and freedom to have my computer look the way I want and do the things I want.

So I utterly reject your false choice of hating Windows 8 or accepting it, just as I reject the OS itself.

avatar

riopato

This editorial was meant for windows users, not UNIX users.

avatar

TheFirstRuleAbo...

I was a Windows user. I switched to Linux because of Windows 8.

avatar

legionera

and why you had to switch to Linux and not stayed with W7?

avatar

PCLinuxguy

best. discussion. ever. /serious

avatar

igoka

Sound like you are in depression right now . What happened you didn't get your latte today ?

avatar

FLGibsonJr

"Denial. Confusion. Anger. Depression. Acceptance."

That sounds exactly like the stages a person goes through when diagnosed with a deadly disease. Now if you are comparing Windows 8 with a deadly disease I agree.

I wouldn't waste my time with Windows 8, it won't be around for long.

Regards,

avatar

PCWolf

The cure for the Windows 8 Disease is Windows 7.

avatar

riopato

Yes, I've heard that many hospitals still uses leeches to cure certain diseases but I would prefer a more modern alternative.

avatar

Bullwinkle J Moose

Well, as far as Spyware Platforms go....

The best bang for the buck and most fun to actually use is probably the Nexus 7 2013 model

A year from now, we might be streaming high end games directly to just such a device from our Steam Boxes or Windows machines that we never actually use except to turn it on

ALL the newer platforms are designed to provide very limited value without an NSA connec.... er, I mean Internet connection anyway

Imagine the fun that the NSA will have with our built in cameras when we make those awesome game faces playing a session of "Crisis on the Can"

High end video compression and streaming should help battery life as well

Except for a few games, Windows is completely dead to me at this point anyway

Get with the program

"MINIMUM PC" is the future

avatar

Carlidan

"ALL the newer platforms are designed to provide very limited value without an NSA connec.... er, I mean Internet connection anyway"

So why are you on the interent. I guess you do want NSA to probe you, and I don't mean just your computer.

avatar

Bullwinkle J Moose

There is no getting around it now, so let's make the best of it

Right Gordon?

Or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Probes
(heh heh)

avatar

legionera

If you don't like it, just don't visit the website.

avatar

Bullwinkle J Moose

I see a future were you can stream windows and ios apps and desktop to a $200 android device

What do you see?

besides $800 Microsoft tablets that nobody wants

An O.S. that nobody wants either?

What's your big vision?

Please share it with us

I don't hate Windows 8

If I could stream the power of an 8 core Intel CPU and state of the art graphics card to a $200 mobile device over wi-fi OR across the globe through the Internet, I would be fine with Windows 8 sitting on a box that I never have to look at

A touch tablet can act as a remote control for a desktop computer and since windows would not actually be running on the tablet, a second license would not be needed for such a device

Controlling several computers with different Operating Systems in real time from a remote tablet is the Holy Grail of computing

Your entire corporate office, anywhere you want it!

It's not just for games after all

Think of running several computers in several different locations around the globe with several different operating systems from a cheap tablet device or even turn remote computers on & off with tablet controlled smart switches

I think there will be much more interest from other players in the next few years besides Steam, Linux and NVidia in breaking Microsoft's stranglehold on the Computer Industry

One method would be to send an HDMI + sound output to an outboard "STREAMBox" (Not a SteamBox)
The Box would compress the video stream just enough to prevent dropouts or glitches across the Internet but still look great on a Tablet.
It could allow control of the PC from the tablet with ethernet input from a router and output to PC

Or the Box could be completely USB 3.1 powered sending video to the compression box and Internet traffic on the same cable (Ethernet from router to StreamBox and USB to computer)

The tablet itself could connect to any wi-fi setup anywhere in the world or you could have a private wi-fi connection directly with a single computer

A Streambox on each machine locally would allow private or public control of multiple computers

avatar

legionera

If you think that it is so easy and cheap, why don't you start working on it?

avatar

Bullwinkle J Moose

I've been working on it for a few years now and if you read my old posts, you will see that I was on it before Steam, Linux or NVidia were

I'm not here to build the hardware, I'm here to get others with hardware and software experience interested in the idea

So far, so good!

avatar

legionera

You are yet to figure out how to fix the problem with the spotty cell phone signals in the town (and its lack of it outside the town), the lack of a public wifi connection and the lack of a wide enough broadband.

avatar

Thresher

How I feel about it is largely irrelevant to what is going to happen in the future with Windows.

What matters is the IT organizations of the large companies that buy the largest number of PCs. These organizations are perfectly happy with Windows 7 and see no reason to switch. Windows 7 is the Windows XP of this generation. It is stable, training costs are nil since everyone knows how it works, and there is no pressure to upgrade since it will be supported for years to come. Vista was skipped for the same reasons, with the additional fact that the release version was awful.

Windows 8 is by no means awful, but it does come with additional training costs because the interface is unfamiliar. Metro is just a layer that adds complexity and there is zero reason for internal developers to create apps for it.

I suspect that Metro (ModernUI) will become a failed effort, at least on desktops and laptops.

avatar

legionera

but... you don't even have to use Metro... just change the Open With option to a desktop program and you are set. What kind of a computer specialist are you not to consider such a basic step?

avatar

LCCgreg

As noted in a number of comments, Windows 8 is a superb operating system. It is fast and reliable and is the best version yet.
But Microsoft stuffed up the introduction of the "modern UI" completely, especially when used on a regular PC or laptop where legacy (read most) software still needs desktop mode to run.
We use Windows 8 in our business and we sell PCs with Windows 8 to our customers with the Start8 menu from Stardock and a shortcut to the modern UI on the desktop.
Our logic is that they can use the computer in "normal" Windows mode or they can jump into the modern UI and make up their own minds.
So when the modern UI is finally complete (8.2 or later) they can switch as it suits them.
But crikey, Windows 8 on virtually any modern processor with plenty of RAM and a fast solid state drive is just brilliant
Such a shame Microsoft has let the interface negativity bubble away from day one, it has damaged the enthusiasm people normally have for buying a new computer, but we battle on!

avatar

Neufeldt2002

I'm old enough to have used several interfaces before MS came out with Windows, and I have been fine with most of them, but I cannot ignore the fact that I cannot accept Win 8 with that horrid start screen. Couple that with the fact that advertising API is built into "Metro" (a la dashboard from Xbox) I will not use Win 8 no matter what. I am voting with my wallet. Yes I could use the various programmes that fix Win 8 but why should I? That would mean that I approve the direction MS is going with giving up privacy to be always connected to social media, possible ads on my desktop, and a FUGLY start screen. No Thanks.

avatar

riopato

Adapt or die old fart. Touch interface is the future before the UI converts into a 3d gesture based UI.

avatar

Baer

I am OK with Win 8. I like the speed and it is fine to use for me as I just ignore the Start screen. I use it ion my Ultrabook and a Tablet but my powerful desktop rig is staying with WIn 7 for now. I find that touch is fine for a phone but I tend to only use it for scrolling. I really do not like the start screen as I use multi monitors and I want to have a number of windows open at the same time. When I finish my new rig (DIY) I will probably put WIn 8 on it but just keep ignoring the start screen and stay with the desktop.
I think with me it is basically acceptance but I certainly do not love it and I did Win 7.
MS has to learn to listen.

avatar

steven4570

I gladly accept Windows 8...provided that "start is back" is installed. On a non touchscreen computer, it makes ZERO sense. As long as i can install start is back, I'll run Windows 8 all day long, because the under the hood benefits and improved task manger are well worth it.