- Joined
- Jun 16, 2010
- Location
- Burbank, CA
-
Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!
W8 interface not to horrible
- Thread starter Psittac
- Start date
- Joined
- Sep 26, 2002
- Location
- Indianapolis, IN
One of my friends was interested in checking it out so I installed it for him to play with and he is a big fan of how clean the interface is. There are some times where the interface isn't exactly intuitive but once you learn where everything is in terms of the corners, it doesn't seem too bad.
For me, I never really liked Windows 7 until I spent a lot of time working with Windows Server 2008 R2 then it is like the UI just clicked for me and I haven't looked back. I'm going to a Windows 2012 class in a little over a week so we'll see how well I like the Win8 interface then.
For me, I never really liked Windows 7 until I spent a lot of time working with Windows Server 2008 R2 then it is like the UI just clicked for me and I haven't looked back. I'm going to a Windows 2012 class in a little over a week so we'll see how well I like the Win8 interface then.
- Joined
- Dec 7, 2008
Props
I always try to stay pretty objective because when I start punching I tend to hit hard. And yet you took a pretty good punch and did not flinch heh.
Look, I get that the PC market is gonna diminish. There is only so much computing that we need. But saying that is like saying that the industrial lath market is gonna diminish in the face of plastics.
Does that mean that how we use our PCs has to be changed because we are adopting new tools? Did we suddenly decide to put a grip instead of a handle on a traditional hammer because now we have the nail gun?
MS has made a calculated decision, again say it with me kids, to force this change on us. They could just as easily have included the shell that has been used for many a year now along side of this new UI. They have been the kings of backwards compatibly since that term was invented. Why do you think they are esquing it now? For ****s and giggles?
I like you.Yep, <sarcasm>I'm the MS corporate rep in charge of the massive market of Micronesia and a real newbe here on OC forums</sarcasm>. Please, pointing out something that's not anti-Microsoft does not make one a "shill", although I do still like to lick Bill Gate's boots.
I always try to stay pretty objective because when I start punching I tend to hit hard. And yet you took a pretty good punch and did not flinch heh.Look, I get that the PC market is gonna diminish. There is only so much computing that we need. But saying that is like saying that the industrial lath market is gonna diminish in the face of plastics.
Does that mean that how we use our PCs has to be changed because we are adopting new tools? Did we suddenly decide to put a grip instead of a handle on a traditional hammer because now we have the nail gun?
MS has made a calculated decision, again say it with me kids, to force this change on us. They could just as easily have included the shell that has been used for many a year now along side of this new UI. They have been the kings of backwards compatibly since that term was invented. Why do you think they are esquing it now? For ****s and giggles?
Last edited:
- Joined
- Apr 19, 2003
Pretty rhetorical question, really. As I stated earlier, the entire MS strategy is for what's in their best interests, including eschewing features that don't make a profit. Nothing surprising here. Why should they put any energy into an alternative interface? It would please a relatively limited audience and thus garner little, if any profit and would not push folks towards the higher margin products, i.e., the hardware they're now producing.
This does not make them bad guys in my book, just another company watching the bottom line...
- Joined
- Dec 7, 2008
And what of the general populace's interests? Are you telling me that Embrace, extend and extinguish is a good thing? (Google it.)
You have yet to even offer a single defense on why allowing the native old shell should not be included.
I'm leaning back towards my inclination that you are getting a check from MS in some way shape or form.
- Joined
- Apr 19, 2003
MS is not a charity. They're a business. They're there to make a profit. The fate of the general populace is not their concern, the bottom line is. In this, they're no worse and no better than any other corporation today. If they decide that the shell is not profitable, then so be it. Those who don't like it can stay with Win7 until it dies, install Linux or buy a Mac.
Now excuse me, as I still have Bill's other boot to lick before I kowtow to my image of Ballmer and then prepare to kick a puppy in their name.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Dec 7, 2008
Public Charters
The exist to serve whatever public charter they set forth. Most do indeed set forth a mandate to generate a profit but that is not a requirement. If you set forth a charter that said that we seek X and follow that, well then even if you are public the market gets to decide if that charter is worthy of investment.
Getting further into this argument delves into the minutia and quite frankly bull**** that is our modern day stock market. Something really beyond this topic. And real quick the reason I'm coming back to this topic is that I felt that it was worthy of discussion but that it might have gotten a bit away from me. So that some time away from it would refresh my perspective.
So, getting back to the 'bottom line' is it in MS's interest to force an OS that is not viable for desktop PCs onto the market? Well that clearly depends on your view of what the bottom line is. Of which is another point I will get back to in a moment.
However your point that MS is no worse or better than any other corp today is pretty laughable. They are a convicted monopolist that got a hand slap for that conviction and there are plenty of arguments, case study's, and a hell of a lot smart people that argue that MS has done harm to modern computing. Lucky for them most of that evil is in the past and they are facing a lot of new forces that have taking the focus off what they did but if you think that those of us who stood in the trenches while MS forced IE/Office/OEM contracts/etc don't have a memory...well then sir I demand you hand in your geek card now. I've made my peace with what has happened but I will not forget.
So, what do we have for the bottom line today? Well clearly MS is looking long term as they still have their desktop OS/Office monopoly (again which went unpunished) to rely on as a cash cow. So they are going to sit on their cash reserves, try to force their way into a market that they did not innovate in, and use their desktop monopoly as the wedge for that.
So in the end I'm gonna still call it like I see it. MS is forcing a UI change on the desktop, due to the fact that they want to retain their monopoly, using the leverage that they currently hold with said monopoly to do so, and all we should hope for is that it is 'not horrible.'
Sorry but that is unacceptable and if you are ok with that, then you are licking some boots.
One of the great myths of our modern day capitalism is that public corporations exist only to make a profit. That is not true.
The exist to serve whatever public charter they set forth. Most do indeed set forth a mandate to generate a profit but that is not a requirement. If you set forth a charter that said that we seek X and follow that, well then even if you are public the market gets to decide if that charter is worthy of investment.
Getting further into this argument delves into the minutia and quite frankly bull**** that is our modern day stock market. Something really beyond this topic. And real quick the reason I'm coming back to this topic is that I felt that it was worthy of discussion but that it might have gotten a bit away from me. So that some time away from it would refresh my perspective.
So, getting back to the 'bottom line' is it in MS's interest to force an OS that is not viable for desktop PCs onto the market? Well that clearly depends on your view of what the bottom line is. Of which is another point I will get back to in a moment.
However your point that MS is no worse or better than any other corp today is pretty laughable. They are a convicted monopolist that got a hand slap for that conviction and there are plenty of arguments, case study's, and a hell of a lot smart people that argue that MS has done harm to modern computing. Lucky for them most of that evil is in the past and they are facing a lot of new forces that have taking the focus off what they did but if you think that those of us who stood in the trenches while MS forced IE/Office/OEM contracts/etc don't have a memory...well then sir I demand you hand in your geek card now. I've made my peace with what has happened but I will not forget.
So, what do we have for the bottom line today? Well clearly MS is looking long term as they still have their desktop OS/Office monopoly (again which went unpunished) to rely on as a cash cow. So they are going to sit on their cash reserves, try to force their way into a market that they did not innovate in, and use their desktop monopoly as the wedge for that.
So in the end I'm gonna still call it like I see it. MS is forcing a UI change on the desktop, due to the fact that they want to retain their monopoly, using the leverage that they currently hold with said monopoly to do so, and all we should hope for is that it is 'not horrible.'
Sorry but that is unacceptable and if you are ok with that, then you are licking some boots.
- Joined
- Apr 19, 2003
I ran the beta of 8, then the RTM on test machines and found it interesting, but not overwhelming. After putting Windows 8 on my convertible notebook this past Friday and using it for a few days, however, I now think it's truly a much better interface. It's not, "not to [sic] horrible", it's truly excellent.
Both while docked with my 32-inch monitor and especially when in tablet mode, my workflow is more efficient and it's faster to get to and organize the resources I need.
Overall, 8 is Faster, more efficient, and easier to use than any Windows previous. On the desktop, the Windows 8 UI takes the place of 3rd party launchers, with better organization and faster access to everything I need from a command prompt to Adobe CS6. The new graphical display of file transfer statistics, the excellent new task manager and the great new performance tools are all icing on the cake. I kinda wish they would have kept Aero, though...
IMHO, It's a clear case of positive innovation driving a better product. BTW, Office 2013 is extremely cool when combined with Windows 8. Tons of great new features and scrolling through large spreadsheets has been made much easier.
In terms of MS and their "evil empire" image, take a quick look at the work of the Gates Foundation, Paul Allen's contribution to scientific research here in the Pacific and the recent donations MS made towards initiatives in Washington state. They have my respect. If disagreeing with YoshiMon makes me a "boot licker", so be it.
Both while docked with my 32-inch monitor and especially when in tablet mode, my workflow is more efficient and it's faster to get to and organize the resources I need.
Overall, 8 is Faster, more efficient, and easier to use than any Windows previous. On the desktop, the Windows 8 UI takes the place of 3rd party launchers, with better organization and faster access to everything I need from a command prompt to Adobe CS6. The new graphical display of file transfer statistics, the excellent new task manager and the great new performance tools are all icing on the cake. I kinda wish they would have kept Aero, though...
IMHO, It's a clear case of positive innovation driving a better product. BTW, Office 2013 is extremely cool when combined with Windows 8. Tons of great new features and scrolling through large spreadsheets has been made much easier.
In terms of MS and their "evil empire" image, take a quick look at the work of the Gates Foundation, Paul Allen's contribution to scientific research here in the Pacific and the recent donations MS made towards initiatives in Washington state. They have my respect. If disagreeing with YoshiMon makes me a "boot licker", so be it.
Similar threads
