My prediction is that it won't matter what MS does with 8. They'll get new customers as well as some adopters from older systems, but for enterprise customers, it will be business as usual given they will resist full scale implementation of a new OS that could and probably will negatively impact their user base. As long as MS continues to support older os's, you'll have a great number of users who will not upgrade/update until their whole system requires it.
And for every iPad that gets implemented into enterprise, MS loses at least a little bit of their brand value. I don't ever see Apple getting the same volume of enterprise acceptance as the back-end support, both in-house IT and 3rd party IT have far too much invested in their own businesses/lives to give up on a system that inherently needs them. I used to work for a company that had two distinct systems, one was all Apple for the graphics / web design team and the other was for the business operations and manufacturing side. The only thing the IT guys did for the Mac side was the occasional hd replaced, as most things, including system and data backup was setup and managed by the design team. I'm not saying that they would be without jobs if the company were using all Macs, but they definitely kept themselves really busy fixing pc's and managing software for the MS based system they were using (Great Plains).
Heck the design team isn't even using the most up to date Macs - they've still got G4's and a few G5's, plus pre-unibody Pro's doing almost all the work - while I don't think the business side has laptops or desktops that are any older than from 2008 as they've needed a much faster replacement cycle. As the saying goes, you get what you pay for...
It's pretty comical the immediate hate generated for Windows 8. People are resistant to change.
Let's glaze over all of the under-the-hood improvements and changes, and let's judge Windows 8 on Metro alone. Further, let's forget that Windows 8 will still work just fine in the desktop environment, and that Metro is absolutely, completely Keyboard/Mouse compatible--and in fact, was designed with it's use in mind as well as touch.
Most people never touch most of the items in the Start menu. You click Start, you navigate to a few standard shortcuts, and that's it. For the most part, Start is cluttered with items you don't use.
Metro eliminates all of that mess, and makes items that you use immediately available. You can still get to it the same way (Windows Key), you can still bring items up with keyboard shortcuts--it's based on the same mechanisms that the current Start menu works, it simply removes the unused items, and creates a touch-orientated design.
<h1 class="forum-h1" id="user_yui_3_4_1_1_1343319561177_623" style="margin-top:0px;margin-bottom:15px;padding-bottom:4px;font-size:26px;line-height:26px;background-color:rgb(243,243,243);">Valve's Gabe Newell predicts Windows 8 will be a 'catastrophe'</h1>
Well is sure as clown-vomit *looks* like one . . .
Here is a pic of the head designer for Windows 8 hard at work.
But seriously, there are some great things MS has done with Win8. Unfortunately very few of them are things the customer will notice and so much of the horrific and confusing decisions they will notice. They need a more fluid transition from the Win7 Ui to Win8. I think we could see a larger exodus than we did with Win Vista to Macs and Apple will be remiss if they don't have a new Mac campaign on the ready.
Pretty cool how people in this forum are actually pointing out that Newell is far from a disinterested party in this.
Also yes the new WP8 start screen eliminates the black bar of negative space on the side. Also opens up to 3 resolutions (fear not devs, it's only 2 aspect ratios, not the android free for all)
Last year there was a demonstration of the new Windows 8 by one of their engineers. It looked good. Everything was working fine. He did a desktop and touch screen demonstration. Has something changed since then? The demo didn't show programs opening and functioning. It just showed how easy it was to navigate around the computer.
What I want to see in any Microsoft computer demonstration is how long it takes for things to open and how well they function when people input information and need to change information. Opening and closing screens is important and switching between processes or programs is too. I have found that doing such things takes a lot of time with Windows. That ruins the computing experience for me. My 2008 2.4 GHz Core 2 Duo Mac Book is getting slow these days and it is bugging me. My 2009 HP with Linux is still very snappy with a slower single core processor by AMD.
Maybe the game manufactures should invest more into the Linux platform. I wonder why this guy Newell thinks some big name OEMs will quit the PC business. Maybe they'll quit the Windows OS partnerships but not the computer manufacturing business. Asus makes things with Android and so does Samsung. Samsung also makes the Chromebook for Google. It uses a Linux based OS. Dell and HP have flirted with Linux in the past. After the Surface announcement it would be very interesting if these companies had a meeting and agreed to offer everything they make with Linux. If they all agreed to do it then the general public would accept it. If that happened all of the major software manufacturers would begin developing for Linux too.
Well.... now there's an example of either a plant or a naive fanboi. Vista was another flop like Win ME. Vista didn't catch on because it was a terrible buggy software design... a rush to market when they should've waited to complete what became Windows 7. Windows 8 torches Win 7 ?!? Really ?!? Have you looked at what it truly is? It's just another bloated LAYER on top of an existing system... It's lipstick on a pig...
Businesses and Professionals I've spoke with are already stocking up on Win 7 licenses.
I agree that Windows 8 will be a disaster, but I don't see people moving to Linux. They'll just stick with Windows 7 until Microsoft comes out with something that they like better. Its like Windows Vista. People just won't buy it if they don't like it. OEMs should be able to continue bundling Windows 7 in the meantime.
As for what's wrong. I've tried Windows 8 and it is really hard to find anything. It also won't work with a lot of existing software. That's just crazy. I've never understood why Microsoft keeps trying to reinvent the wheel when they have such a dominant market share. They should try to maintain continuity from one system (and one version of Office) to another so that people aren't put off by an unfamiliar interface.
It is hard to believe how people can use such an anti-intuitive, awkward and malware-filled operating system as Windows is. Windows is basically maintained by inertia and ignorance. The day the Mac reaches 20% market share, Windows will be history in three years.
I agree that Windows 8 will be a disaster, but I don't see people moving to Linux. They'll just stick with Windows 7 until Microsoft comes out with something that they like better. Its like Windows Vista. People just won't buy it if they don't like it. OEMs should be able to continue bundling Windows 7 in the meantime.
As for what's wrong. I've tried Windows 8 and it is really hard to find anything. It also won't work with a lot of existing software. That's just crazy. I've never understood why Microsoft keeps trying to reinvent the wheel when they have such a dominant market share. They should try to maintain continuity from one system (and one version of Office) to another so that people aren't put off by an unfamiliar interface.
The biggest change I see happening is people buying an iPad for the next tech purchase and just keeping their current WinPC for as long as possible. The problem with that is if they like the iPad they might get a Mac when the time is right.
For MS's sake I hope the Surface works out for them but that isn't looking good either since they couldn't decide on what to focus on.
It's already happening. Microsoft makes a promise that they will maintain Windows 7 until 2020. So, they either know a great many Windows 7 users won't switch, or they are preparing if Windows 8 fails miserably at least they will have Windows 7 to hang onto and to buy them some time to figure what to do with the upcoming Windows 9. Unfortunately, by promising that WIndows 7 will be maintained for that long, it will be less incentive for WIndows 7 users to switch quickly even with the lowly price tag of USD 19.99 for an upgrade.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton
I disagree with Gabe. Microsoft spewed forth Windows Vista on the world, and no major PC OEMs left the Windows PC market for goddamned Linux. Microsoft's customers will simpy cling tenaciously to their Windows 7 copies, the way they wouldn't leave Windows XP back when Vista was released. My belief is that Microsoft will cave and extend the life of Windows 7 well into the 8 era. That's more likely to happen than Dell and HP trying to sell Linux PCs.
As for the rest of Newell's predictions about Jetsons wristbands and stuff... Really?
It sounds like a nice idea having the phone and desktop run the same OS. It will be interesting to see if MSFT is successful with this. I haven't seen much written about how the 2 interact. It would be nice to hear about that. But Tim Cook's line about the toaster and the refrigerator keeps bouncing around my head and I think this will be a problem for MSFT. I see some say that they like Metro but I see more saying that they don't. Some people are being honest and some have an axe to grind. This Newell guy is Steamed that MSFT is going to hurt his business so I take it what he is saying is more business related than anything else so it is hard to take it really seriously. This Metro stuff has been known for a while. If he was really serious about a Linux store, I would imagine that in order to get that up and going he should have something going by now.
That said, while I haven't played around with a Windows phone or with Metro, I find the tiles hideous and very distracting in all the presentations and pictures that I have seen. I have no real idea about its functionality since I can't get past the way the screen looks. I can't imagine having to deal with that all day long on a desktop on a larger screen.
Personally, I'm pulling for Microsoft 8 to be successful. Apple needs competition. It didn't create the iPhone or iPad because it had nothing better to do.
And per the MSFT haters... need I remind you guys... one of MSFT's biggest fans, is the OTHER Steve... Steve Wozniak.
It's not a matter of hating Microsoft and shilling for one company or the other. As for Woz, he was commenting about the design of the Microsoft Surface - we're talking Windows 8 here. Also, my impression of Woz is that he makes every attempt to avoid being perceived as an Apple shill, and so has a tendency to tout the competition (Android, Microsoft, etc.) while being unevenly critical of Apple. That's fine but I'm certainly not taking his opinions as objective.
I've heard that comment a number of times from different sources but nobody ever goes on to say why it's so bad. Not sure if it's just MS bashing or if Metro really is that bad. Perhaps someone would care to explain what's wrong with the Metro interface. I use Mac and PC with my work so I'm genuinely interested to know.
It's a shame there isn't a 15" iPad or a Mac laptop for £500 - Apple would probably clean up and double their market share if Metro is so bad.
We've discussed examples in other threads. One is having the Start menu button in the lower left be the central way to access the computer for 17 years, then completely getting rid of it for no apparent reason.
I think the tile management is clumsy. I've found no way to add control panel to the regular set of tiles. Giving Bing services prominent real estate is annoying.
Less germane to most users, but in a virtualized window, it's very difficult to get the right hand control popout to work consistently. One out of five times is about my record.
He's mostly ticked because app stores that come with the OS compete with Steam.
That is exactly what it is. And shame on the media that just spews out his quotes without calling him out on it.
Personally, I don't like what I have seen in Windows 8 and think I will be sticking with Windows 7 as long as practically possible. That being said Gabe is full of BS and is just trying to protect his own enormous ass.
Windows 8 is the best version of Windows ever. It torches Windows 7. But it's also going to infuriate Microsoft's customers, who cling to legacy for dear life. Look what happened to Vista. Vista was streets ahead of XP, but it was fundamentally different because it was by far a more modern OS than the one it was replacing. And so, despite its improvements, the marketplace hated it, because Windows customers are particularly resentful of change. It's entirely conceivable Windows 8 is too radical for its market.
...
This is lunatic stuff even for a troll.
- Vista wasn't bad it just got bad PR? Give me a break. Everyone else in the tech industry says different than you.
- Windows 8 (the desktop part) is exactly the same as Windows 7 so saying it "torches" Windows 7 is a ridiculous thing to say.
Also, your base thesis of people being resistant to change makes no sense when one considers that people are dropping Windows in droves and moving to Macs, yet Macs are far more different than the move from Windows X to Windows Y.
"I think Windows 8 is a catastrophe for everyone in the PC space," Newell said.
I doubt that Windows 8 will be a catastrophe for everyone in the PC space. It will only be a catastrophe for everyone if Windows 8 is successful, and disrupts the old-school Windows XP/Vista/7 gravy train. And only if Surface really does disrupt the legacy Wintel PC model. Only then will we see the mess that Newell predicts.
On the other hand, I do expect Windows 8 to be a catastrophe, but only for Microsoft itself. The average consumer won't react well to the totally different Metro UI. It's not the same as starting from scratch and releasing a game-changer in a niche market like smartphones were. Back in 2007, only geeks used smartphones. iOS has made smartphones more accessible to mainstream users, hence its popularity. But Windows is a victim of its own success. There are too many users, 99.9% of whom have been trained for generations to believe that "good enough" is all they need. They'll reject an all-new, totally different UI. Because familiarity is a feature.
To push out a totally new Windows interface, with zero migration toward that interface in previous releases, is a recipe for disaster. To the average user, it will feel arbitrary, unnatural, forced. There won't be any sense of continuity, because it didn't develop organically from anything in Windows 7. Microsoft support will be flooded with "How do I get my old desktop back?"
And building a Microsoft-branded Surface pad can only make one manufacturer happy. The rest, with whom Microsoft has worked for decades, will all hope that Surface fails. If it does fail, they will all continue with business (nearly) as usual. Building PCs, installing Windows 7 on them. Yes, 7, because there will be that inevitable backlash against the arbitrary newness of Windows 8. Few consumers will like it. Almost no corporate IT department will want it. Not because they want to make their employees happy. Because their business software runs on XP. They won't care whether PCs they buy on contract from HP come with Windows 8 pre-installed (or Windows 7 or Vista.) They'll simply re-image them with XP like they have done since Vista was introduced. Out with the new, in with the old. Standard practice in Windows shops around the world.
But, if Surface does succeed (in some distorted alternate universe) it will disrupt the legacy Wintel PC model, and yes, it will be a disaster for the HPs, Dells, and Lenovos of the world. Because they won't be in the loop any more. Microsoft's single Surface OEM will make all the money. The rest will see sales decline, they'll need to ship PCs with Linux installed, and the few corporate IT departments and home hobbyists who actually use Linux will support only a tiny fraction of their former legacy Windows PC sales.
Not to worry. Microsoft will claim millions and millions of Windows 8 sales in the first few months. They'll crow about Windows 8 market share in enterprise, thanks to those corporate PC sales by HP, Dell, and others, with Windows 8 pre-installed. But actual usage will be far smaller. Because corporate IT departments around the world will just re-image all those PCs with XP like always. And consumers won't like Windows 8 at all. Only the most rabid Microsoft faithful among them will pay $40 to upgrade. The rest will get Windows 8 by default when their old PC freezes up and they're forced to buy a new one. And they'll hate it.
We've discussed examples in other threads. One is having the Start menu button in the lower left be the central way to access the computer for 17 years, then completely getting rid of it for no apparent reason.
I love the counter to your argument that you can still access the Start Button by using hidden keyboard shortcuts. Keyboard shortcuts are great, I use them all the time, but they should never be the primary or only way way you access any GUI element on a desktop OS.
The day the Mac reaches 20% market share, Windows will be history in three years.
Doubt it, although that day is so far in the future no one can possibly know what will happen.
Apple is definitely disrupting the consumer space, which wasn't that difficult because consumers don't need very much, but they will have a much more difficult challenge converting the enterprise market to Macs on the desktop or the servers in the back office and they probably aren't even interested in that market. For Apple it is better to stick to the portable and mobile space and leave the enterprise to Windows and Oracle. Best Apple can do is make their stuff compatible with Windows which they have an inconsistent up and down track record on. As bad as Windows is, it is a mainstay in enterprise.
... Personally, I'm pulling for Microsoft 8 to be successful. Apple needs competition. It didn't create the iPhone or iPad because it had nothing better to do. ....
OK, I'll bite ... exactly why did Apple create the iPhone?
Comments
My prediction is that it won't matter what MS does with 8. They'll get new customers as well as some adopters from older systems, but for enterprise customers, it will be business as usual given they will resist full scale implementation of a new OS that could and probably will negatively impact their user base. As long as MS continues to support older os's, you'll have a great number of users who will not upgrade/update until their whole system requires it.
And for every iPad that gets implemented into enterprise, MS loses at least a little bit of their brand value. I don't ever see Apple getting the same volume of enterprise acceptance as the back-end support, both in-house IT and 3rd party IT have far too much invested in their own businesses/lives to give up on a system that inherently needs them. I used to work for a company that had two distinct systems, one was all Apple for the graphics / web design team and the other was for the business operations and manufacturing side. The only thing the IT guys did for the Mac side was the occasional hd replaced, as most things, including system and data backup was setup and managed by the design team. I'm not saying that they would be without jobs if the company were using all Macs, but they definitely kept themselves really busy fixing pc's and managing software for the MS based system they were using (Great Plains).
Heck the design team isn't even using the most up to date Macs - they've still got G4's and a few G5's, plus pre-unibody Pro's doing almost all the work - while I don't think the business side has laptops or desktops that are any older than from 2008 as they've needed a much faster replacement cycle. As the saying goes, you get what you pay for...
It's pretty comical the immediate hate generated for Windows 8. People are resistant to change.
Let's glaze over all of the under-the-hood improvements and changes, and let's judge Windows 8 on Metro alone. Further, let's forget that Windows 8 will still work just fine in the desktop environment, and that Metro is absolutely, completely Keyboard/Mouse compatible--and in fact, was designed with it's use in mind as well as touch.
Most people never touch most of the items in the Start menu. You click Start, you navigate to a few standard shortcuts, and that's it. For the most part, Start is cluttered with items you don't use.
Metro eliminates all of that mess, and makes items that you use immediately available. You can still get to it the same way (Windows Key), you can still bring items up with keyboard shortcuts--it's based on the same mechanisms that the current Start menu works, it simply removes the unused items, and creates a touch-orientated design.
Here is a pic of the head designer for Windows 8 hard at work.
But seriously, there are some great things MS has done with Win8. Unfortunately very few of them are things the customer will notice and so much of the horrific and confusing decisions they will notice. They need a more fluid transition from the Win7 Ui to Win8. I think we could see a larger exodus than we did with Win Vista to Macs and Apple will be remiss if they don't have a new Mac campaign on the ready.
Pretty cool how people in this forum are actually pointing out that Newell is far from a disinterested party in this.
Also yes the new WP8 start screen eliminates the black bar of negative space on the side. Also opens up to 3 resolutions (fear not devs, it's only 2 aspect ratios, not the android free for all)
Last year there was a demonstration of the new Windows 8 by one of their engineers. It looked good. Everything was working fine. He did a desktop and touch screen demonstration. Has something changed since then? The demo didn't show programs opening and functioning. It just showed how easy it was to navigate around the computer.
What I want to see in any Microsoft computer demonstration is how long it takes for things to open and how well they function when people input information and need to change information. Opening and closing screens is important and switching between processes or programs is too. I have found that doing such things takes a lot of time with Windows. That ruins the computing experience for me. My 2008 2.4 GHz Core 2 Duo Mac Book is getting slow these days and it is bugging me. My 2009 HP with Linux is still very snappy with a slower single core processor by AMD.
Maybe the game manufactures should invest more into the Linux platform. I wonder why this guy Newell thinks some big name OEMs will quit the PC business. Maybe they'll quit the Windows OS partnerships but not the computer manufacturing business. Asus makes things with Android and so does Samsung. Samsung also makes the Chromebook for Google. It uses a Linux based OS. Dell and HP have flirted with Linux in the past. After the Surface announcement it would be very interesting if these companies had a meeting and agreed to offer everything they make with Linux. If they all agreed to do it then the general public would accept it. If that happened all of the major software manufacturers would begin developing for Linux too.
Well.... now there's an example of either a plant or a naive fanboi. Vista was another flop like Win ME. Vista didn't catch on because it was a terrible buggy software design... a rush to market when they should've waited to complete what became Windows 7. Windows 8 torches Win 7 ?!? Really ?!? Have you looked at what it truly is? It's just another bloated LAYER on top of an existing system... It's lipstick on a pig...
Businesses and Professionals I've spoke with are already stocking up on Win 7 licenses.
I agree that Windows 8 will be a disaster, but I don't see people moving to Linux. They'll just stick with Windows 7 until Microsoft comes out with something that they like better. Its like Windows Vista. People just won't buy it if they don't like it. OEMs should be able to continue bundling Windows 7 in the meantime.
As for what's wrong. I've tried Windows 8 and it is really hard to find anything. It also won't work with a lot of existing software. That's just crazy. I've never understood why Microsoft keeps trying to reinvent the wheel when they have such a dominant market share. They should try to maintain continuity from one system (and one version of Office) to another so that people aren't put off by an unfamiliar interface.
It is hard to believe how people can use such an anti-intuitive, awkward and malware-filled operating system as Windows is. Windows is basically maintained by inertia and ignorance. The day the Mac reaches 20% market share, Windows will be history in three years.
Originally Posted by zunx
The day the Mac reaches 20% market share, Windows will be history in three years.
You talking worldwide? It's something like 15% in the US and Switzerland right now, but good luck getting that recognized…
The biggest change I see happening is people buying an iPad for the next tech purchase and just keeping their current WinPC for as long as possible. The problem with that is if they like the iPad they might get a Mac when the time is right.
For MS's sake I hope the Surface works out for them but that isn't looking good either since they couldn't decide on what to focus on.
It's already happening. Microsoft makes a promise that they will maintain Windows 7 until 2020. So, they either know a great many Windows 7 users won't switch, or they are preparing if Windows 8 fails miserably at least they will have Windows 7 to hang onto and to buy them some time to figure what to do with the upcoming Windows 9. Unfortunately, by promising that WIndows 7 will be maintained for that long, it will be less incentive for WIndows 7 users to switch quickly even with the lowly price tag of USD 19.99 for an upgrade.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton
I disagree with Gabe. Microsoft spewed forth Windows Vista on the world, and no major PC OEMs left the Windows PC market for goddamned Linux. Microsoft's customers will simpy cling tenaciously to their Windows 7 copies, the way they wouldn't leave Windows XP back when Vista was released. My belief is that Microsoft will cave and extend the life of Windows 7 well into the 8 era. That's more likely to happen than Dell and HP trying to sell Linux PCs.
As for the rest of Newell's predictions about Jetsons wristbands and stuff... Really?
It sounds like a nice idea having the phone and desktop run the same OS. It will be interesting to see if MSFT is successful with this. I haven't seen much written about how the 2 interact. It would be nice to hear about that. But Tim Cook's line about the toaster and the refrigerator keeps bouncing around my head and I think this will be a problem for MSFT. I see some say that they like Metro but I see more saying that they don't. Some people are being honest and some have an axe to grind. This Newell guy is Steamed that MSFT is going to hurt his business so I take it what he is saying is more business related than anything else so it is hard to take it really seriously. This Metro stuff has been known for a while. If he was really serious about a Linux store, I would imagine that in order to get that up and going he should have something going by now.
That said, while I haven't played around with a Windows phone or with Metro, I find the tiles hideous and very distracting in all the presentations and pictures that I have seen. I have no real idea about its functionality since I can't get past the way the screen looks. I can't imagine having to deal with that all day long on a desktop on a larger screen.
Quote:
Personally, I'm pulling for Microsoft 8 to be successful. Apple needs competition. It didn't create the iPhone or iPad because it had nothing better to do.
And per the MSFT haters... need I remind you guys... one of MSFT's biggest fans, is the OTHER Steve... Steve Wozniak.
It's not a matter of hating Microsoft and shilling for one company or the other. As for Woz, he was commenting about the design of the Microsoft Surface - we're talking Windows 8 here. Also, my impression of Woz is that he makes every attempt to avoid being perceived as an Apple shill, and so has a tendency to tout the competition (Android, Microsoft, etc.) while being unevenly critical of Apple. That's fine but I'm certainly not taking his opinions as objective.
We've discussed examples in other threads. One is having the Start menu button in the lower left be the central way to access the computer for 17 years, then completely getting rid of it for no apparent reason.
I think the tile management is clumsy. I've found no way to add control panel to the regular set of tiles. Giving Bing services prominent real estate is annoying.
Less germane to most users, but in a virtualized window, it's very difficult to get the right hand control popout to work consistently. One out of five times is about my record.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blastdoor
He's mostly ticked because app stores that come with the OS compete with Steam.
That is exactly what it is. And shame on the media that just spews out his quotes without calling him out on it.
Personally, I don't like what I have seen in Windows 8 and think I will be sticking with Windows 7 as long as practically possible. That being said Gabe is full of BS and is just trying to protect his own enormous ass.
-kpluck
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jensonb
Windows 8 is the best version of Windows ever. It torches Windows 7. But it's also going to infuriate Microsoft's customers, who cling to legacy for dear life. Look what happened to Vista. Vista was streets ahead of XP, but it was fundamentally different because it was by far a more modern OS than the one it was replacing. And so, despite its improvements, the marketplace hated it, because Windows customers are particularly resentful of change. It's entirely conceivable Windows 8 is too radical for its market.
...
This is lunatic stuff even for a troll.
- Vista wasn't bad it just got bad PR? Give me a break. Everyone else in the tech industry says different than you.
- Windows 8 (the desktop part) is exactly the same as Windows 7 so saying it "torches" Windows 7 is a ridiculous thing to say.
Also, your base thesis of people being resistant to change makes no sense when one considers that people are dropping Windows in droves and moving to Macs, yet Macs are far more different than the move from Windows X to Windows Y.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider
"I think Windows 8 is a catastrophe for everyone in the PC space," Newell said.
I doubt that Windows 8 will be a catastrophe for everyone in the PC space. It will only be a catastrophe for everyone if Windows 8 is successful, and disrupts the old-school Windows XP/Vista/7 gravy train. And only if Surface really does disrupt the legacy Wintel PC model. Only then will we see the mess that Newell predicts.
On the other hand, I do expect Windows 8 to be a catastrophe, but only for Microsoft itself. The average consumer won't react well to the totally different Metro UI. It's not the same as starting from scratch and releasing a game-changer in a niche market like smartphones were. Back in 2007, only geeks used smartphones. iOS has made smartphones more accessible to mainstream users, hence its popularity. But Windows is a victim of its own success. There are too many users, 99.9% of whom have been trained for generations to believe that "good enough" is all they need. They'll reject an all-new, totally different UI. Because familiarity is a feature.
To push out a totally new Windows interface, with zero migration toward that interface in previous releases, is a recipe for disaster. To the average user, it will feel arbitrary, unnatural, forced. There won't be any sense of continuity, because it didn't develop organically from anything in Windows 7. Microsoft support will be flooded with "How do I get my old desktop back?"
And building a Microsoft-branded Surface pad can only make one manufacturer happy. The rest, with whom Microsoft has worked for decades, will all hope that Surface fails. If it does fail, they will all continue with business (nearly) as usual. Building PCs, installing Windows 7 on them. Yes, 7, because there will be that inevitable backlash against the arbitrary newness of Windows 8. Few consumers will like it. Almost no corporate IT department will want it. Not because they want to make their employees happy. Because their business software runs on XP. They won't care whether PCs they buy on contract from HP come with Windows 8 pre-installed (or Windows 7 or Vista.) They'll simply re-image them with XP like they have done since Vista was introduced. Out with the new, in with the old. Standard practice in Windows shops around the world.
But, if Surface does succeed (in some distorted alternate universe) it will disrupt the legacy Wintel PC model, and yes, it will be a disaster for the HPs, Dells, and Lenovos of the world. Because they won't be in the loop any more. Microsoft's single Surface OEM will make all the money. The rest will see sales decline, they'll need to ship PCs with Linux installed, and the few corporate IT departments and home hobbyists who actually use Linux will support only a tiny fraction of their former legacy Windows PC sales.
Not to worry. Microsoft will claim millions and millions of Windows 8 sales in the first few months. They'll crow about Windows 8 market share in enterprise, thanks to those corporate PC sales by HP, Dell, and others, with Windows 8 pre-installed. But actual usage will be far smaller. Because corporate IT departments around the world will just re-image all those PCs with XP like always. And consumers won't like Windows 8 at all. Only the most rabid Microsoft faithful among them will pay $40 to upgrade. The rest will get Windows 8 by default when their old PC freezes up and they're forced to buy a new one. And they'll hate it.
I love the counter to your argument that you can still access the Start Button by using hidden keyboard shortcuts. Keyboard shortcuts are great, I use them all the time, but they should never be the primary or only way way you access any GUI element on a desktop OS.
Quote:
Originally Posted by zunx
The day the Mac reaches 20% market share, Windows will be history in three years.
Doubt it, although that day is so far in the future no one can possibly know what will happen.
Apple is definitely disrupting the consumer space, which wasn't that difficult because consumers don't need very much, but they will have a much more difficult challenge converting the enterprise market to Macs on the desktop or the servers in the back office and they probably aren't even interested in that market. For Apple it is better to stick to the portable and mobile space and leave the enterprise to Windows and Oracle. Best Apple can do is make their stuff compatible with Windows which they have an inconsistent up and down track record on. As bad as Windows is, it is a mainstay in enterprise.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LuxoM3
... Personally, I'm pulling for Microsoft 8 to be successful. Apple needs competition. It didn't create the iPhone or iPad because it had nothing better to do. ....
OK, I'll bite ... exactly why did Apple create the iPhone?