backtop


Print 116 comment(s) - last by EricMartello.. on Feb 18 at 3:50 AM

Microsoft's current operating system trails well behind its predecessor in sales

Windows 8 was billed as a next generation operating system that would meld together the PC and tablet worlds. In the end, however, the operating system did more to infuriate users than to bolster the sales of new PCs and Windows-based tablets.
 
Things have gotten so bad that even long-time, diehard champions of the Windows platform like Paul Thurrott have turned on Windows 8 and Microsoft’s design direction with the operating system.


Windows 8.1
 
With that said, Microsoft is still optimistic with regards to sales of Windows 8, and released the following statement this week to ZDNet:
 
Windows 8 has surpassed 200 million licenses sold, and we continue to see momentum. This number includes Windows licenses that ship on a new tablet or PC, as well as upgrades to Windows 8. The figure does not include volume license sales to enterprise. Windows is a central part of life for more than 1.5 billion people around the world, and we are looking forward to the future.
 
200 million licenses sold is an incredible feat, but it puts Windows 8 well behind its predecessor, Windows 7. It has taken Windows 8 15 months to hit the 200 million licenses sold mark; Windows 7 hit the 240 million mark in just 12 months.
 
Many will point to the downward trend in PC sales as a reason for the drop in Windows 8 sales. Others will point to the fact that the meteoric rise in tablets sales is also affecting Windows 8 sales.


Microsoft Surface Pro 2
 
However, that second point just reinforces the fact that Microsoft’s efforts with tablets (be it tablets running Windows 8 or Windows RT) aren’t picking up the slack for the laggard PC market. While Apple and Google are seeing steady gains with tablets running iOS and Android respectively, Microsoft still hasn’t cracked the code on how to get consumers to embrace its Surface tablets (or even its partners’ Windows 8-based tablets).

Source: ZDNet



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

People who hate Windows 8 need to shut up already
By amanojaku on 2/14/14, Rating: 0
By Reclaimer77 on 2/14/2014 11:05:10 AM , Rating: 5
quote:
Instead of complaining on forums, complain to Microsoft:


We did, and Microsoft didn't listen.

By a huge majority, the early tester and release candidate feedback to Microsoft about Windows 8 was negative. Overwhelmingly. Nearly nobody thought Windows 8 was ready for the desktop as-is.

Microsoft ignored them and released a poor half-baked desktop OS that to this day isn't fixed. Fundamentally flawed for it's purpose.

And you few, you loudmouthed apologist minority, have been telling US to shut up. You've been so categorically and fundamentally wrong about Windows 8, that you should be disqualified from discussing computer software entirely! The sheer breadth of your stupidity and ignorance cannot be overstated.

Windows 8 has cost Microsoft their CEO, their market-share, their respect. It's damaged the ENTIRE PC industry. And you think people should shut up??

Go to hell.


By Reclaimer77 on 2/14/2014 11:21:26 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
I haven't seen the metro interface on this machine in ages.


So the primary feature of Windows 8, it's entire reason for being put on the market, you don't even use? You don't even WANT to use!

What a ringing endorsement! I can't imagine why the world isn't embracing Windows 8...


By inighthawki on 2/14/2014 11:37:12 AM , Rating: 4
It may be a primary feature, but it is not by any stretch of the imagination the only one. There are tons of backend improvements not available on Win7 that are in Win8.

Metro is only UI, and UI is customizable. Windows 8 may have tried to make a statement about it and failed, but there is so much more to the OS that you're not even seeing because you're not trying it.


By atechfan on 2/14/2014 12:12:45 PM , Rating: 2
It is still a desktop OS, and a good one. Of course, I use Stardock products to get it to look the way I like. MS should just buy Stardock. They are pretty good at designing UI tweaking shit.


By Reclaimer77 on 2/14/2014 12:33:52 PM , Rating: 2
Stardock is nice. I've actually been looking to give this one a try at some point:

http://retroui.com/

If Windows 8 was like this from the start, the transition would have been a lot smoother. Especially this,

"RetroUI now comes with RetroUI Enforce™ which allows you to run the Start screen and the Metro apps in a window on top of the classic desktop."


By atechfan on 2/14/2014 1:43:59 PM , Rating: 2
I hadn't heard of that one. It actually looks better as it replaces multiple Stardock products.


By Dorkyman on 2/14/2014 12:15:25 PM , Rating: 2
Okay, hypothetical question: Suppose the purchaser of new hardware had the option of choosing (a) W8.1 (b) W7 (c) Vista or (d) XPpro.

What would be the percentages?

Here's my take: (a) W8.1--20%, because it's new and zoomy, (b) W7--50%, because it's reliable and a known quantity, (c) Vista--5%, because some are more comfortable with it, and (d) XPpro--25%, because it's reliable, simple, universal, and many legacy apps are on it.

But then why isn't this the situation? ONLY BECAUSE MS WON'T ALLOW THE PURCHASE OF OLDER OPERATING SYSTEMS. That's the only reason. So they have dug themselves into an ever-deepening pit due to their own decisions.


By YearOfTheDingo on 2/14/2014 8:52:16 PM , Rating: 3
Will Windows 9 be better? I don't know what Microsoft can do to fix this? Thurrott hits it on the nail: Win8 is basically two different OSes glued unnaturally glued together. It's having the wife and the mistress under the same roof--it will never work, no matter how much you like each of them individually.


By Jeffk464 on 2/15/2014 6:37:47 PM , Rating: 2
yuppers


By atechfan on 2/14/2014 11:47:16 AM , Rating: 3
Metro was far from the only reason Windows 8 was put on the market. Metro was merely part of the whole. It was an attempt to unify the interface between devices. Ignore the interface for a moment, and you'll see the WinRT API set is a massive improvement over the ancient Win32 APIs. Their is nothing stopping MS from allowing classic desktop look and feel with WinRT (the API, not the OS) applications.


By heffeque on 2/14/2014 11:51:54 AM , Rating: 4
No, Windows 8 is not only Metro.
The computer they gave me at work had Windows 8 and... I'm glad it does because it's faster and more robust than Windows 7. But since I don't like Metro, I only use the Metro Start thing as a place to put the shortcuts to my most used apps, which is kind'a nice, but it has nothing to do with Metro itself (I'm using it as a Start menu instead of using Metro Apps). And... I'm quite happy with it!
Faster OS, more robust, uses less RAM, the task manager is far better, you can pause a copy-paste... and no need to use Metro Apps if you don't want to.
I'm obviously not going to pay to put Windows 8 in my personal computer, but if it's there... why not take advantage of it? Why complain about Metro if you don't even have to use it?

Just my 2 cents.


By Jeffk464 on 2/15/2014 6:41:18 PM , Rating: 2
yup, the start screen is much more betterest than the start menu. Its the only redeeming quality to the win8 UI for the desktop.


By inperfectdarkness on 2/17/2014 2:37:56 AM , Rating: 2
8.1 has grown on me. Still sucks that I don't have a start menu, but a folder with shortcuts down in that corner of my desktop seems to suffice for now.

What I can potentially see as being the biggest advantage for 8 in general, is the ability to flip between desktop and metro. If I were using a tablet without peripherals, metro is great. If i plug it BT keyboard/mouse, then it's nice having a desktop.

8 desktop still feels like it's not ready for primetime...but I'd still recommend it after the 8.1 updates and a few user tweaks.


By rsmech on 2/14/2014 2:34:07 PM , Rating: 3
Getting more than I wanted is a bad thing. Fuzzy logic on your part. If with windows 8 you can download apps to give you Windows 7 appearance and navigation as well as extra features you don't have to use it's a bad thing. If this is the case (I won't say it as slanderous as you would). You make no sense, the guy who talks about all the apps, customization's Android gives you. Please. Maybe Android is easier to use, you don't seem capable to apply the logic of customizing Windows 8.

Insult me and misdirect.


By TheEquatorialSky on 2/14/2014 11:34:04 AM , Rating: 1
It would've been nice if they included a start menu *and* the classic Windows 2000 theme.

Either give me choices or make life simpler. Windows 8 does neither and it's seriously driving me to consider Linux or a chromebook.


By inighthawki on 2/14/2014 11:40:18 AM , Rating: 2
Oh sure, there's tons of room for inbox improvement. Don't get me wrong I'm not saying they shouldn't try to fix the issues. I'm simply stating that it seems ignorant to disregard the entire OS and its new features because of UI, which is easily customizable because it's Windows.

Go download any of the free start menu alternatives (startisback, classicshell, etc) and there's almost certainly a classic Windows 2000 theme available by someone. If not then that sucks, but I think I've only ever seen one other person I know who preferred that theme.


By Reclaimer77 on 2/14/2014 11:35:30 AM , Rating: 1
Oh please, you knew you were posting flame bait. Nobody likes being told to shut up. Don't get your panties in a wad because you're getting what you wanted now.

quote:
PC sales aren't declining because of Windows 8.


Yeah lets pretend it's not a huge factor. Every analyst out there, people who do this for a living, is blaming Windows 8. But hey, I'll just take your word.


By atechfan on 2/14/2014 11:42:51 AM , Rating: 5
Nevermind that PC sales were already slowing down before Windows 8 was released, or that Mac sales are also down. Of course, those are Windows 8's fault too, right?

Smartphone sales are also down. HTC is struggling to survive. Motorola has been losing money for years. Even Samsung, the smartphone king, missed sales predictions. I guess that means people hate Android.


By inighthawki on 2/14/2014 11:50:03 AM , Rating: 3
Don't argue with Reclaimer77, he has his mind set on certain things and won't change it. There's no way to prove what is causing slows in sales on either side. It is an enormous market with thousands of factors ranging from the OS being unpopular, shifts to mobile, a lack of need to upgrade (hardware is keeping a better pace than it did 10 years ago), or simply people don't want to spend as much money on these kinds of devices anymore.


By amanojaku on 2/14/2014 11:53:58 AM , Rating: 5
You're new here, so I'll warn you that you can't reason with Reclaimer. He's not like Tony Swash or Argon18, who purposely troll. He truly believes what he says, no matter how wrong. For instance, a couple of years ago he said American slavery wasn't that bad, and that the Civil War wasn't about slavery. I had to show him a picture of someone's disfigured back from being whipped, and quotes from the Confederate Army declaring war against the north because Lincoln was elected. Lincoln, of course, vowed to abolish slavery.

Reclaimer truly believes Windows 8 is the death of the PC. Never mind the poor economy, improved reliability of modern electronics, increased multimedia and networking capabilities of mobile devices, and the fact that most people don't actually do work on a PC outside of the office. He doesn't troll, but he is... special.


By Reclaimer77 on 2/14/2014 11:59:45 AM , Rating: 2
I can't believe I just read that. Slavery wasn't "that bad"? I goddamn dare you to find me where I've ever stated, or even intimated, such a thing!!!! If you said that to my face, your teeth would be hitting the back of your throat.

You two are really pathetic telling him not to discuss things with me and spreading lies like this to defame my character. I'm sure he can make up his own mind and fight his own battles. What kind of men are you anyway? Boys from the looks of it.

quote:
Reclaimer truly believes Windows 8 is the death of the PC.


Well that's good to know. I wasn't aware I believed that, or even stated it, but thanks for telling me!

The PC isn't dying, and Microsoft isn't going anywhere. Windows 8 simply tried to take the PC in a direction the consumer didn't like, and they've rejected it clearly.


By amanojaku on 2/14/2014 1:11:48 PM , Rating: 2
I owe you an apology. I had to dig through several years' worth of posts before I found what I was looking for, and it turns out it was FITCamaro who said the South wasn't as brutal as history teaches. But, to be fair, the two of you tend to post similar comments. :)

http://www.dailytech.com/Article.aspx?newsid=19374...

Still, I was wrong to blame you for something someone else said.

That doesn't change the fact that you regularly attack people who don't believe what you do. I'm not the only one who's said this, which is why I gave atechfan a warning not to get his hopes up. He can do what he wants. And you've told posters not to bother reasoning with other posters, so don't act like I'm alone in this.


By Jeffk464 on 2/15/2014 6:35:46 PM , Rating: 2
Well slavery was cradle to crave. You were "taken" care of for your whole life. Industry wants to use you and dump you during your productive years, just saying.


By atechfan on 2/14/2014 12:05:09 PM , Rating: 2
Well, he is right about the Civil War then. Slavery sucked, no denying that, but that was just the way the North vilified the South. The war was really about State power vs. Federal power. Seeing the shape your country is in now, I find it hard to believe that you are better off for having the North win. Slavery would have ended in the South regardless who won the war, it just would have taken longer most likely.


By Reclaimer77 on 2/14/2014 12:18:16 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
The war was really about State power vs. Federal power. Seeing the shape your country is in now, I find it hard to believe that you are better off for having the North win.


I'm starting to see you have nothing in common with those two.

You have a pretty good head on your shoulders, and regardless of our views on Windows 8, I can say I respect you.


By amanojaku on 2/14/2014 1:37:50 PM , Rating: 3
Well, this is off topic. However, I did find this, which addresses the whole "it wasn't about slavery, it was about states' right" BS. I don't know why people keep insisting the Civil War was about states' rights. They have none, having ceded their rights in order to join the union. And the Confederate States hadn't talked about secession until Lincoln vowed to abolish slavery if he was elected. You may be correct in that slavery would have gone away had the Civil War not started (it was increasingly unpopular throughout the country prior to Lincoln's election), but no one really knows. After all, the South shot first, and then the war started. And the shape the US is in has nothing to do with who won or lost. Corruption exists on all sides, in all ideologies.

http://www.dailytech.com/Article.aspx?newsid=19374...

Since people like to quote the Constitution:
quote:
Supremacy Clause

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding.


By atechfan on 2/14/2014 7:15:05 PM , Rating: 1
Of course corruption exists. That is why de-centralization of power is such a great thing. The less power a corrupt leader has, the less damage he can do. Centralized government, by the very nature of being further removed from the issues, is always going to be inferior to locals having more power over themselves. Centralizing power only leads to people feeling disenfranchised in the end.

There is a saying, "There is no problem so large that the government can't come in and make worse." that applies whenever people expect government intervention to solve problems. It almost always makes things worse. Regulations rarely solve anything. Increasing individual rights and making sure that your rights stop the moment they infringe on others is the answer.

For example, the environment. In the US, you have the EPA. How effective are they, really? What does environmental legislation really do? When a company pollutes to save money, they just take the fines that will result as part of the expense, or they bribe someone. Just extend property rights. Someone has the absolute right to pollute his own land as much as he likes, but the moment that pollution crosses on to his neighbour's land, he has violated his neighbour's property right, and is responsible for reparation.

A paltry fine is not going to stop a company from dumping shit into a river if the money they save by doing so is more than the fines paid. but if said company had to pay for the damages to the 200,000 property owners whose lands also touch that river, they would find another way to deal with wastes. No government regulation agency needed. Just robust property rights and a fair court system.

I could go on all night about how the private sector and personal rights/responsibilities trumps government regulation almost every time, but I've already digressed far from the topic of this thread.


By Jeffk464 on 2/15/2014 6:52:49 PM , Rating: 2
To a certain extent the land belongs to everyone it was here before we were born and it will be here long after we are all dead, not to sound native american or anything.


By atechfan on 2/16/2014 8:00:25 AM , Rating: 2
So you have no objection when I decide to camp out in your back yard?


By Reclaimer77 on 2/14/2014 11:46:10 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
There's not a single way to prove either side of the argument.


Then there's nothing concrete proving me wrong, is there?

Glad we agree on something :)


By retrospooty on 2/14/2014 11:55:23 AM , Rating: 2
Come on... Can you do anything other than blindly defend MS?

Even MS has realized their huge blunder with this clusterf$%k horrible UI and has publicly stated they are bring the old start menu back in the next OS release.

SURELY if MS realizes and publicly admits it, then its fanboys can too. It's time to accept it now and move on.


By atechfan on 2/14/2014 12:09:18 PM , Rating: 2
The UI isn't that bad. MS screwed up by not including more choice in how the UI is presented, but Metro is pretty nice in the right context.


By inighthawki on 2/14/2014 12:20:18 PM , Rating: 2
On a tablet I agree, it's pretty nice. Move to a desktop with a 30" monitor and a mouse and keyboard and tell me that again ;)


By atechfan on 2/14/2014 12:25:22 PM , Rating: 2
I use the desktop almost exclusively on my Windows 8 desktop machine.


By inighthawki on 2/14/2014 12:19:24 PM , Rating: 2
Wow, have trouble reading? I took a completely neutral stance that it is impossible to prove either side of the argument. I didn't say anything about Windows 8 being popular or not. Why is it that so many people have trouble with logic on this site? Pointing out a lack of evidence is not synonymous with taking an opposing stance to the statement.


By Reclaimer77 on 2/14/2014 12:28:54 PM , Rating: 2
No offense, but it feels like you're being ANYTHING but "neutral" on this...


By retrospooty on 2/14/2014 12:35:30 PM , Rating: 1
Right... It must be my imagination that you are littering these comment sections defending MS as if you have a stake in the matter. I must be trippin'. /s

Like I said... Even MS has realized their huge blunder with this clusterf$%k horrible UI and has publicly stated they are bring the old start menu back in the next OS release. SURELY if MS realizes and publicly admits it, then its fanboys can too. It's time to accept it now and move on


By atechfan on 2/14/2014 12:48:50 PM , Rating: 2
I've got a bunch of MS shares. They have been paying nice dividends for a long time. So you could say I do have some stake in the argument.


By retrospooty on 2/14/2014 12:57:56 PM , Rating: 2
That was a response to inighthawki based on many many months of posts... You are new here, so I couldn't make that call on you. Anyhow, the thread guidelines stop reporting correctly after several levels of replies, so you cant tell who replied to who without hitting the "parent" button.


By atechfan on 2/14/2014 1:08:47 PM , Rating: 2
Well, just to let it be known, I am a pretty big MS fan. Been using their products for 3 decades, and have a sizable chunk of my investments with them. So take any pro-MS comments with that in mind.


By retrospooty on 2/14/2014 1:30:33 PM , Rating: 2
Me too. Have used and loved most of their products for 2 decades myself. I just don't agree with giving their recent bad moves a pass. Do that and they wont improve it.

The internet in general has been on fire since Win8's release with millions of users that absolutley hate the new UI (primarily kb/mouse users). Nothing new to report there, obviously KB/Mouse is entirely an entirely different interface than touchscreen, so they need different UI's... Thus the complaints. This is a good thing, as they seem to have changed their stance and will fix it for Win9. The system works, and I am really looking forward to Win9.


By inighthawki on 2/14/2014 1:03:55 PM , Rating: 2
Are you for real? When did I defend the UI in Windows 8? Did I not in this very article comment about how I have custom themes and a start menu replacement to remove the need to go to metro? What does metro or the UI even have to do with what I said?

You probably see it as defending because you're incapable of differentiating between logic and someone taking a stance other than your own. I will do the same for Apple, Google, etc, I just happen to like Microsoft products so naturally articles about Microsoft products attract me more than an article on say, Android KitKat. But nonetheless, let me rephrase my stance for you:

You have no quantifiable evidence that proves that the unpopularity of Windows 8 has anything to do with the decline in PC sales.

Does this mean I'm defending Microsoft for Windows 8? No. It is a failure in the eyes of the public. But you and reclaimer like to spout its unpopularity as *the* reason or declining sales. I'm simply stating that you cannot make that claim. It is not logically sound, and is conjecture. It is a single variable in a giant market which is impossible to isolate as *the* factor when there are so many possible reasons and combinations for the decline. You can take the word of all the top analysts but their word is no more proof than yours. It is guesswork and conjecture with no factual evidence.


By retrospooty on 2/14/2014 1:33:33 PM , Rating: 2
I have had enough of your rathole. You aren't sucking me into it today. You cant follow simple conversations, and always ALWAYS take things out of context (as you just did once again) and change the entire conversation to one that no-one else if having... I am just not biting today.


By rsmech on 2/14/2014 2:44:23 PM , Rating: 2
Relax, your not always right, doesn't make you wrong. It's an opinion.


By Jeffk464 on 2/15/2014 6:49:01 PM , Rating: 4
I think another reason desktop sales are declining is because people just don't need to upgrade as much as they used to. A 5 year old desktop still does pretty much everything people need to do.


By JDHammer on 2/14/2014 12:19:44 PM , Rating: 2
Sounds like someone Blastman and myself know....

/looks @ PGI >.>


By lol123 on 2/14/2014 4:46:08 PM , Rating: 2
I can barely express here how much I agree with you here. While it was fun to watch this train wreck for a while as it unfolded, the unbridled arrogance and gall of the Microsoft people - and the loud-mouthed outposts of Windows 8 fanboys/rambling apologists (paid off or not) - in still calling for being given the benefit of the doubt regarding a product that is fundamentally broken, hostile to its user base and which has damaged the entire computer industry, has at this point started to get extremely tiresome and it almost borders on the sickening in how disingenuous it is.

MSFT have to complete the job of hounding these people out of the company (once again the board and shareholders have had to clean up the mess that operative management has made) and hopefully it has actually started to dawn on the shills that clutter the message boards such as this one and the misguided limp-wristed hipsters that actually like Windows 8 that this product is as dead as ME/Vista and that no one is listening to their garbage blather anymore. When even someone like Paul Thurrott goes out and flat out calls Windows 8 a "disaster", one would think that they would realize that we've reached the end of the line here and that it's time to just drop it and look forward to Windows 9.


By Jeffk464 on 2/15/2014 6:32:02 PM , Rating: 3
Damn, I hate when I have to agree with reclaimer.


By EricMartello on 2/18/2014 3:50:12 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
By a huge majority, the early tester and release candidate feedback to Microsoft about Windows 8 was negative. Overwhelmingly. Nearly nobody thought Windows 8 was ready for the desktop as-is.


This is arguably the overwhelming reason that Windows 8 just isn't getting traction. It is an impediment to efficient desktop computing.

I give props to MS for trying something new, but force-feeding the metro UI is not the way to go about it. Let people decide where (if at all) they want to use the metro UI while making it an install option to boot to a Win-7 style desktop with start menu (not just a button).

I really want to switch to Win 8 because it is well-optimized under the hood. It is faster and more efficient than Win 7, and definitely as stable if not moreso.

Metro UI is pretty cool on a big screen, great on a touch screen but it just isn't cut out for desktop.

quote:
Windows 8 has cost Microsoft their CEO, their market-share, their respect. It's damaged the ENTIRE PC industry. And you think people should shut up??


I think there is a lot of unjustified hate flying around about Win 8. I mean you still got tools running Win XP thinking it's 'better than Win 7', they probably also avoid pentium CPUs because 'they heard the pentiums can't do math'.

There are legit gripes about Win 8's dictatorial approach toward forcing people into MS version of computing...but interface aside, Win 8 is not bad from a technical standpoint.


Microsoft's force feeding
By XingWheel on 2/14/14, Rating: 0
RE: Microsoft's force feeding
By amanojaku on 2/14/2014 10:57:37 AM , Rating: 5
quote:
I am so glad we have Android and iOS now.
You're comparing a desktop version of Windows to Android and iOS? If there's one thing that can be said about Windows 8, it's that it can run your old Win32 and Win64 applications. Android, iOS, and Windows RT can't do that.


RE: Microsoft's force feeding
By Reclaimer77 on 2/14/14, Rating: -1
RE: Microsoft's force feeding
By atechfan on 2/14/2014 11:37:32 AM , Rating: 5
Only in reclaimer77 la-la land is 1.7 million since release for Chromebooks "thriving". Back here on Earth, most people would call 200 million sales in less time "crushing".

Who needs Windows? People who have lots of Windows software that they don't want to replace with half-baked web-apps, for one.

Funny, Windows NT sucks because it doesn't have legacy Win32 support, but somehow Windows 8 sucks because no one needs Win32 support. You are delusional.


RE: Microsoft's force feeding
By Reclaimer77 on 2/14/14, Rating: 0
RE: Microsoft's force feeding
By atechfan on 2/14/2014 12:18:11 PM , Rating: 3
Sorry if I came across as too harsh. I just think the ChromeOs machines are useless, and most people defending them are knee-jerk MS haters. I keep seeing skewed figures posted to make it look like ChromeOS is taking the market by storm, when it clearly isn't.

I'm too lazy to go look, but I am sure you've stated that WINdows RT sucks because it doesn't run Win32 apps, and because it has a crappy app selection. I just find it ironic you'd defend ChromeOS since it suffers from both of those weaknesses too.


RE: Microsoft's force feeding
By Reclaimer77 on 2/14/2014 12:26:44 PM , Rating: 2
Well in the context that for decades now Windows has had 90%+ of the market, I can see how ChromeOS is exciting to some people and maybe they embellish it's success a bit, yes.

Also people love to cheer for the little guy, and why not? Microsoft has had a near monopoly for so long, it's kind of cool that Google is presenting, an albeit, small challenge.

quote:
but I am sure you've stated that WINdows RT sucks because it doesn't run Win32 apps


I feel pretty sure that I never made such a statement. Windows RT is fine. My only issue was putting a clearly mobile-optimized UI (Metro) on a desktop OS.


RE: Microsoft's force feeding
By atechfan on 2/14/2014 12:40:53 PM , Rating: 2
I see ChromeBooks as being like the EEEPC when it was launched. It sold like hotcakes, then people realised that Linux was not Windows and their old stuff didn't work. After that, Windows Netbooks dominated. I predict the same will happen again. People are buying into the hype, but when they find out how limited they are, most will either go back to Windows machines, or go with an iOS or Android tablet.

Android would have made a better OS for Google to attack the cheap notebook market with. Android sucked for the first few iterations because the Dalvik Java implementation was horribly slow, but newer Android releases seem to be doing more natively and less through Dalvik.


RE: Microsoft's force feeding
By Reclaimer77 on 2/14/2014 12:48:58 PM , Rating: 2
You know I've often wondered why Google doesn't merge ChromeOS a bit more with Android. Now that more touchscreen enable Chromebooks are hitting the market, maybe they will?

There's probably some really obvious reason that I'm not seeing through.

quote:
It sold like hotcakes, then people realised that Linux was not Windows and their old stuff didn't work.


I always assumed that was because Linux is, you know, kinda a pain in the ass lol. Say what you want about ChromeOS, but it's pretty freaking easy to use!

quote:
I predict the same will happen again.


It very well could. Chromebooks have more third party vendor support, but that could go away.


RE: Microsoft's force feeding
By atechfan on 2/14/2014 1:02:23 PM , Rating: 1
Samsung will probably stick with Chromebooks, as they seem to be the ones getting the lion's share of ChromeBook sales. HP dabbles all over the place, and rarely sticks with anything new. I wouldn't count on ChromeBooks lasting long at HP. Acer will make shitty ChromeBooks, just like they make shitty Windows laptops, then will blame Google when they don't sell.


RE: Microsoft's force feeding
By Jeffk464 on 2/15/2014 6:07:03 PM , Rating: 2
I think chrome OS was meant to be a more locked down OS than android. If you go android you open the system to a lot more vulnerabilities which is one of the major reasons not to run windows.


RE: Microsoft's force feeding
By Jeffk464 on 2/15/2014 6:03:45 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
most people defending them are knee-jerk MS haters


Wrongo bongo, I can't see me ever leaving windows on my desktop machine but I very well might get a chrome os laptop or possibly a chromebox for my TV. Chrome OS definitely has its place.


RE: Microsoft's force feeding
By rsmech on 2/15/2014 5:56:28 AM , Rating: 2
I agree there is a shift happening. Google has the pockets to make chrome 1 of the mainstream alternatives down the road. Some people can live without Windows, they can survive off chrome books, smartphones, or tablets. But if you need desktop productivity Windows has less competition. Competition is good.


RE: Microsoft's force feeding
By amanojaku on 2/14/2014 11:40:13 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
For millions of people, Android and iOS have been a solid computing alternative to Windows.
You know, your other reply to me pissed me off so bad I saw red. Then I read this and just couldn't stop laughing. Anyone who thinks the current versions of Android and iOS, and the devices they run on, are solid alternatives to any desktop OS is out of his or her mind. Android and iOS are for people who spend time on social networking sites, consume multimedia, and play games. That's a huge market, probably larger than traditional computing, but it's not real computing. Even Android and iOS users admit to using a notebook or desktop for real computing tasks, like the basic spreadsheet to complex 3D modeling. It's not just the availability of software, it's the form factor. You need a keyboard and mouse, and not the virtual kind or the one with chiclet-sized keys.


RE: Microsoft's force feeding
By Brandon Hill (blog) on 2/14/2014 11:58:33 AM , Rating: 2
You still didn't really address or shoot down his statement (which I do believe is correct). Many people can just get by with a tablet these days -- "real computing" has evolved over the years.

What do most normal folks do these days? As you said, they check email, they get on Facebook, play games, etc. Even devices like the iPad and Android tablets can handle basic Photo editing/retouching and video editing (iMovie on the iPad). And even if you need to do more intense Photo work, there's a full-blown Photoshop Touch app for iOS and Android.

I'm likely going to replace my mom's 6-year-old Dell desktop with a cheap tablet for Christmas this year. She doesn't need the desktop -- all she does is watch YouTube videos I send her, check her email (to look at pics I send of her grandson), and surf the web. That's it. She doesn't need a desktop for that; she doesn't even need a laptop for that.

All she needs is a tablet which she can easily carry around with her.


RE: Microsoft's force feeding
By amanojaku on 2/14/2014 12:34:42 PM , Rating: 3
The point of this article isn't to compare Windows 8 to Android or iOS, it is to compare Windows 8 adoption to previous versions of Windows on the desktop. The post I replied to compared desktop Windows to Android and iOS. A valid comparison would be Windows RT to Android and iOS, or Windows 8 to ChromeOS and OS X.

I pointed out the APIs, because one of the major reasons Windows RT sucks is lack of compatibility with previously released software (binary compatibility aside, you can't even port your code without a complete UI rewrite, among other things).

If Windows 8 was perfect, that wouldn't change the fact that mobile is what is cutting into desktop PC sales, and Windows RT will not gain adoption if developers have to rewrite everything they've done just because MS refuses to put the Win32 and Win64 APIs into RT. This is why I want RT to die, or at least have the Win32/64 APIs added. Developers shouldn't have to choose between coding for the desktop, coding for mobile, or maintaining code bases for both. They would refuse to code for either, as seen by the small number of apps in the Windows App store in comparison to Apple and Google's app stores.

Reclaimer's point was that no one needs Win32 or Win64 on mobile. That's nonsense. There are 30 years' worth of applications developed on Win32/64. MS wants developers to dump their accumulated knowledge and code for Windows Runtime. One thing programming languages and APIs are supposed to provide is backwards compatibility. You see this in C/C++, Java, etc... MS just threw everything out when Runtime was introduced.


RE: Microsoft's force feeding
By Reclaimer77 on 2/14/14, Rating: 0
RE: Microsoft's force feeding
By retrospooty on 2/14/2014 1:45:40 PM , Rating: 1
"Holy crap man, you didn't just move the goalposts, you've changed STADIUMS!!"

More specifically he changes the entire sport.


RE: Microsoft's force feeding
By amanojaku on 2/14/2014 1:54:16 PM , Rating: 2
This is what I mean by people being unreasonable:

XingWheel
I am so glad we have Android and iOS now.

amanojaku
You're comparing a desktop version of Windows to Android and iOS? If there's one thing that can be said about Windows 8, it's that it can run your old Win32 and Win64 applications. Android, iOS, and Windows RT can't do that.

Reclaimer77
And how many people actually need that?


RE: Microsoft's force feeding
By retrospooty on 2/14/2014 2:00:19 PM , Rating: 2
My bad, I was looking at the wrong thread, I though he replied to someone else with the stadium comment (inighthawki).


RE: Microsoft's force feeding
By w8gaming on 2/16/2014 12:22:57 AM , Rating: 2
Everyone would love to have Windows on mobile, if (1) Microsoft and Intel can magically resolve the heat+battery runtime+performance+weight issue. Who doesn't want a mobile device with i7 performance, 10+ hours battery, little heat and weight little? It is just that none can deliver such a gadget. (2) Microsoft can somehow come up with a touch based or pen based UI that can be naturally interact with the traditional desktop applications. The current iOS copycat approach does not work.


RE: Microsoft's force feeding
By Reclaimer77 on 2/14/2014 12:03:30 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Anyone who thinks the current versions of Android and iOS, and the devices they run on, are solid alternatives to any desktop OS is out of his or her mind.


You know what, I give up. You either refuse to stop "seeing red" when I post or take me out of context, whatever.

Brandon said it all, I have nothing to add.


RE: Microsoft's force feeding
By retrospooty on 2/14/2014 12:31:36 PM , Rating: 2
"You know what, I give up. You either refuse to stop "seeing red" when I post or take me out of context, whatever."

There seems to be alot of this here lately. I cant tell you how many stupid conversations I have seen/been in lately where at least one very vocal poster is having an entirely different argument than the poster he is replying to. WTF is going on lately?

I get the I think A and you think B, and we disagree, but stop harping on about Z.


RE: Microsoft's force feeding
By Reclaimer77 on 2/14/2014 1:00:09 PM , Rating: 2
lol I don't know. It's like some weird form of threadhijacking.


RE: Microsoft's force feeding
By inighthawki on 2/14/2014 1:12:58 PM , Rating: 2
You do realize that it's possible to comment on a post without making a direct response to the primary purpose of a comment, right? This isn't a forum with a thread on a specific subject. It is a hierarchical comments section on a news article that allows comments that can branch from indirect points of other comments.

Maybe that is the problem here. Do you realize that sometimes people make a comment that isn't necessarily strictly about A, and just pointing out Z instead? It's possible to have a side discussion...


RE: Microsoft's force feeding
By Reclaimer77 on 2/14/2014 1:30:52 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
You do realize that it's possible to comment on a post without making a direct response to the primary purpose of a comment, right?


Yes. However when you start beating people over the head over comments they didn't make, and points they weren't trying to make, problems occur.

And we can do without the condescending tone. We all see what you're trying to do here.


RE: Microsoft's force feeding
By retrospooty on 2/14/2014 1:39:00 PM , Rating: 1
"Yes. However when you start beating people over the head over comments they didn't make, and points they weren't trying to make, problems occur."

YES! bingo that is it right there... Thanks. I was having trouble finding the right words to describe inighty today, and you absolutely nailed it on the head. He totally runs off the rails over comments others didn't make, and points they weren't trying to make,


RE: Microsoft's force feeding
By inighthawki on 2/14/2014 2:04:16 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
He totally runs off the rails over comments others didn't make, and points they weren't trying to make,

I don't know, I think sometimes you guys just infer too much from my posts. Like maybe you guys tend to infer information from my posts because you think my comment is always in direct correlation with what you stated. This is not always the case and sometimes I'm just making an observation or trying to (and I guess failing miserably at appearing to) take a neutral stance on something. Reclaimer you should be able to relate, considering you've been accused numerous times of being an apologetic Android/Google fanboy defending their every move. It is clear that you like Google and their products. But sometimes you are also accused to the same simply when stating facts, so maybe you can see the situation I'm always put in by some people? I do like Microsoft and their products. I'm willing to admit their faults, but I also like to be rational about things at the same time. Sometimes that comes off as defensive but it's really me trying to be rational and look for factual information to back up a claim.

A prime example is back when Xbox One was announced and people complained about the ESRAM vs GDDR5 in the PS4. People claiming well before the release that PS4 is X% faster, but obviously this could not be known until release. I simply stated we should wait for release and see the real difference. And yes, that day has arrived and it is clear. We know have evidence that shows that the ESRAM in the XBO is significantly hindering to the performance. I'm not afraid to admit that, I won't defend MS for the decision (I think it was stupid), but during that time I was heavily accused to defending MS just because I wanted real numbers at the time.

But you know what, this is silly. Obviously I'm getting a little frustrated with you and Reclaimer this particular day. I will apologize for my behavior. Let's try to have a more civilized debate instead of arguing back and forth, as time after time it has proven to get none of us anywhere except upset with one another.

Have a nice day guys.


RE: Microsoft's force feeding
By retrospooty on 2/14/2014 3:45:09 PM , Rating: 2
It's all good man. http://imgur.com/6HkKJv1


RE: Microsoft's force feeding
By Reclaimer77 on 2/14/2014 3:59:09 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Reclaimer you should be able to relate, considering you've been accused numerous times of being an apologetic Android/Google fanboy defending their every move. It is clear that you like Google and their products. But sometimes you are also accused to the same simply when stating facts, so maybe you can see the situation I'm always put in by some people?


Yes I can certainly relate, you're right.

I don't think you're some MS "fanboi" though, if that helps.

quote:
But you know what, this is silly. Obviously I'm getting a little frustrated with you and Reclaimer this particular day. I will apologize for my behavior. Let's try to have a more civilized debate instead of arguing back and forth, as time after time it has proven to get none of us anywhere except upset with one another.


Agree.


RE: Microsoft's force feeding
By Jeffk464 on 2/15/2014 6:09:04 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
You need a keyboard and mouse, and not the virtual kind or the one with chiclet-sized keys.


agreed


RE: Microsoft's force feeding
By Reclaimer77 on 2/14/14, Rating: 0
RE: Microsoft's force feeding
By Jeffk464 on 2/15/2014 5:59:01 PM , Rating: 2
Oh common most people absolutely must run windows, its just a fact of life.


RE: Microsoft's force feeding
By Jeffk464 on 2/15/2014 5:57:40 PM , Rating: 2
Yeah, I have win8 on two computers and have to say I much prefer win7 for non touch devices. And for touch devices I prefer android.


RE: Microsoft's force feeding
By Jeffk464 on 2/15/2014 6:15:40 PM , Rating: 2
I do prefer the start screen to the start menu though, go ahead and flame me.


RE: Microsoft's force feeding
By Jeffk464 on 2/15/2014 6:16:37 PM , Rating: 2
In my opinion it is the only thing win 8 has going for it on a desktop.


RE: Microsoft's force feeding
By karlostomy on 2/16/2014 3:24:00 AM , Rating: 2
I have win7 on desktop and win8 on my touchscreen laptop.

After spending a number of years with Win7 and some time with win8, I am actually finding myself preferring the Win8 laptop.

I have to say I am glad i didn't let all the negative Win8 haters sway my decision.

I guess some people just don't like dealing with change.
Change is difficult and all the angry posters on the internet are testament to that.


yes, but
By GulWestfale on 2/14/2014 9:49:10 AM , Rating: 2
i hate win8 as much as the next guy, but right now i need a new potable machine to write on... and on my last trip to the local computer store i saw an asus transformer tablet with a keyboard dock for only 400 bucks. and that includes a full office license (which is $139 by itself).

so i'm thinking about buying that instead of getting a nearly useless chromebook or an android tablet with kingsoft office.

i really think MS sometimes does have great products, but their marketing sucks. if you have the dominant office suite that everyone needs/uses, why would you not make a bigger deal out of that fact? and that you can run said office suite on a win8 tablet?

it's really a missed marketing opportunity there, like "silver" duct tape. i mean, silence is "golden", but duct tape is SILVER?! helloooo?




RE: yes, but
By TheEquatorialSky on 2/14/2014 11:44:35 AM , Rating: 2
The problem is that people who only need "a new portable machine to write on" can use just about anything. Price and convenience rise in importance compared to flexibility.


RE: yes, but
By Jeffk464 on 2/15/2014 6:18:51 PM , Rating: 2
Personally I'm a gigantic fan of google's office suite.


RE: yes, but
By Jeffk464 on 2/15/2014 6:19:58 PM , Rating: 2
Before that I used open office, I'm just not going to pay for MS office for how much I use it.


RE: yes, but
By w8gaming on 2/16/2014 12:28:21 AM , Rating: 2
They already did. Office was included in Surface RT. But since it is a desktop based applications, you need to get the cover to go with it so the total cost at launch was $600+. It turned out that (1) most people were not willing to pay that much for a "mobile" device just to have Office (2) people who were paying $500+ for iPads apparently want to play games more than using Office with their mobile devices, or Microsoft would have succeeded to completely destroy Apple's tablet market. This shows the underlying customer needs for this market. Microsoft still does not seem to get that.


Since when does
By drewsup on 2/14/14, Rating: 0
RE: Since when does
By happyuser on 2/14/2014 12:00:32 PM , Rating: 2
Be happy in that we have so many choices in OS's. My latest desktop from HP had W8.0 on it. I played with it for an hour or so and could not stand it. I replaced it with Ubuntu 13.10
64 bit and have been very happy with my new desktop. The only thing I use from MS is XP in a VM on Linux to update my Garmin GPS once a year. Linux has all the office type software I would ever need including real publishing applications such as "Scribus." So if you don't like MS products you can move to "free" options. I only regret is having to pay for W8.0 in the first place.


RE: Since when does
By Jeffk464 on 2/15/2014 6:26:47 PM , Rating: 3
Ive installed ubuntu and have to say its pretty functional but I still much much prefer windows on my desktop.


RE: Since when does
By Jeffk464 on 2/15/2014 6:27:44 PM , Rating: 2
In my opinion the best linux on the market is android.


Windows 8 is gaining momentum on all platforms
By Chaser on 2/14/2014 2:20:13 PM , Rating: 3
I own a Desktop PC, Android phone and Android tablet. Unlike many others out there I won't be ditching my desktop anytime soon for anything else. I've grown fond of Windows 8.1.

Android is great for a phone and tablet but it does not has the desktop integration and synchronization that Microsoft offers on nearly all its cross devices. The only other means to get that level of integration is Apple. No thanks.




By Jeffk464 on 2/15/2014 6:22:10 PM , Rating: 3
ahmen


Windows 8 isn't Win7
By navair2 on 2/14/2014 10:37:48 PM , Rating: 2
I'll just point to the fact that Win 8 looks like something my kid would play with, and it doesn't look like a desktop OS...if I had my "druthers", I'd take back XP...;)

Regardless of whether Win 8 performs better or may use less memory at a better efficiency, the real reason I won't buy it is, that it really doesn't look how I want it to look.

Maybe next time, M$.




RE: Windows 8 isn't Win7
By Jeffk464 on 2/15/2014 6:29:29 PM , Rating: 2
win2000 might have even better than XP, its like xp without all the bloat.


8 is a dog
By trajan24 on 2/16/2014 6:11:22 AM , Rating: 3
I really disliked 8. I prefer 7 and I use Android on my Phone and IOS on my tablet. Windows is actually my least favorite OS. The fact is Windows does not dominate the Tablet Phone arena which is growing while PC use is declining. Tablets and smartphones are becoming evermore powerful, feature rich, and adequate for many tasks which used to be done solely on PCs.
This trend is continuing until the PC will really be for specific niches, not general use.
I also wonder about the 200 million number. How many were actually bought by the end user and how many were reverted back to 7?




WIndows7 ?
By synapse46 on 2/14/2014 10:49:29 AM , Rating: 2
Has it surpassed XP?




"Momentum"?
By lol123 on 2/14/2014 4:02:29 PM , Rating: 2
"Windows 8 has surpassed 200 million licenses sold, and we continue to see momentum." What kind of momentum is that exactly behind the market share data of recent months that shows Windows 8 user share as leveling out around just above 10 percent? Lmao.




Running 8.1
By Cheesew1z69 on 2/17/2014 8:36:11 PM , Rating: 2
It's not bad, but it's not terrible. Some things that annoy me but overall, it seems to work ok.




The Real Number?
By ResStellarum on 2/15/2014 4:56:57 PM , Rating: 1
I wonder how many of the 200 million are upgrades to Windows 7? If I remember correctly, even OEM's shipping Windows 7 devices are counted as Windows 8 because of the way Microsoft licenses.

All in all a PR stunt in creative statistics.




STFU doomsayers
By Da W on 2/14/14, Rating: -1
RE: STFU doomsayers
By Da W on 2/14/2014 11:02:07 AM , Rating: 4
And my Surface Pro Rocks! No better tablet/pc on the planet! My Android phone is merely used as a wi-fi hotspot.


RE: STFU doomsayers
By TheEquatorialSky on 2/14/2014 11:52:29 AM , Rating: 1
It would be nice if Microsoft lost marketshare in the operating system and office suite market. I don't have anything against Microsoft, per se... just monopolies. The prospect of being able to choose between several fully functional operating systems and office suites is enough reason for me to cheer Windows 8's poor uptake.

I agree that Windows 8 shouldn't be criticized unfairly, but I don't see how it choking against rising competition is a bad thing.


RE: STFU doomsayers
By atechfan on 2/15/2014 5:49:48 AM , Rating: 1
I wish people would stop throwing around the term monopoly when they obviously have no clue what it means. When their are plenty of other options available, but no one wants them, it is not a monopoly. There have always been multiple competitors to MS products, but the market had chosen MS. I can only buy electricity from one source. Now that is a monopoly, since I cannot choose an alternative without moving, Microsoft does not have, and has never had, a monopoly in either OS or office products.


RE: STFU doomsayers
By TheEquatorialSky on 2/15/2014 2:57:45 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
There have always been multiple competitors to MS products, but the market had chosen MS.


It's that simple, huh? Anti-competitive practices had nothing to do with Microsoft's success? There is no reason for Microsoft to own 80%+ of the OS market other than its own ubiquity and software/file compatibility... both of which Microsoft fought to ensure to the detriment of others.

You are right that Microsoft doesn't constitute a pure monopoly, but very few things do. You can install solar panels and/or a backup generator if you wanted. You can use satellite or wireless for your telephony/internet needs. You can buy synthetic diamonds.


RE: STFU doomsayers
By Jeffk464 on 2/15/2014 6:58:41 PM , Rating: 3
You can buy synthetic diamonds but you better hope your girl never finds out. :)


"A politician stumbles over himself... Then they pick it out. They edit it. He runs the clip, and then he makes a funny face, and the whole audience has a Pavlovian response." -- Joe Scarborough on John Stewart over Jim Cramer














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki