Windows 8 Release Preview ready for download(windows.microsoft.com)
windows.microsoft.com
Windows 8 Release Preview ready for download
http://windows.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-8/iso?ocid=W_OFF_W8P_TechCenter_ISO_en-us
93 comments
Developing for Metro might be amazing, but developing on Metro is a non-starter. After all, Visual Studio is not a Metro app (yet). Since most "hackers" will spend most of their time on the traditional desktop anyway, they see little reason to upgrade from Windows 7.
The jump from Metro to traditional UI is not that big. Your visual studio can have its own tile on Metro that takes you straight to the app in traditional UI. Except when writing code, I am usually back in the Metro.
It's just like web development. I code for the browser, not on the browser. And still, I am always on the browser, except when I am not.
It's just like web development. I code for the browser, not on the browser. And still, I am always on the browser, except when I am not.
And? No one is saying you should develop in Metro. No one is saying "Avoid desktop mode". It's there for a reason. It is there for people who need desktop mode, who need true, all-the-time window-ized multi-tasking.
Then there are the people who buy iPads, iPhones, Androids, WP7 and others by the millions. The majority of users do not produce content. Windows 8 is an effort to bring them an easy to use tablet experience while still allowing them to be highly productive in a traditional Windows desktop if necessary.
Everyone acts like Windows 8 "breaks Windows". I do not understand this mentality. It's an additional set of apps, UX/UI and APIs. You're not forced to use them or even develop for them. But it's very likely that users are going to embrace Metro Apps for a huge number of reasons (performance [async apis, etc], battery life, notifications, live tiles, ARM tablets, etc)
Very little incentive to upgrade is understandable, but I can still list reasons that I will be interested in upping to Win8: (1) upgrading is cheap ($15); (2) Win8 includes the ability to wipe the machine back to "just installed" clean built in (or can wipe Desktop mode (registry, desktop apps) and leave data + Metro apps); (3) hackers will want Visual Studio (or else why is a "hacker" using Windows) and will likely want/need to target Metro apps; (4) even I like to kick back and mindlessly surf Twitter for an hour in the evening.
Then there are the people who buy iPads, iPhones, Androids, WP7 and others by the millions. The majority of users do not produce content. Windows 8 is an effort to bring them an easy to use tablet experience while still allowing them to be highly productive in a traditional Windows desktop if necessary.
Everyone acts like Windows 8 "breaks Windows". I do not understand this mentality. It's an additional set of apps, UX/UI and APIs. You're not forced to use them or even develop for them. But it's very likely that users are going to embrace Metro Apps for a huge number of reasons (performance [async apis, etc], battery life, notifications, live tiles, ARM tablets, etc)
Very little incentive to upgrade is understandable, but I can still list reasons that I will be interested in upping to Win8: (1) upgrading is cheap ($15); (2) Win8 includes the ability to wipe the machine back to "just installed" clean built in (or can wipe Desktop mode (registry, desktop apps) and leave data + Metro apps); (3) hackers will want Visual Studio (or else why is a "hacker" using Windows) and will likely want/need to target Metro apps; (4) even I like to kick back and mindlessly surf Twitter for an hour in the evening.
The $15 upgrade is only for people who buy a new Win 7 PC between now and the end of the year. If you already have a PC, it will be more like $100 for the Professional edition.
Don't get me wrong, I'm trying Win 8 right now and I like certain aspects of it. I don't think it breaks anything important, either. But when I'm in desktop mode, the experience doesn't feel all that different from Win 7. Ribbon in Windows Explorer? I don't care. One-click wipe? I don't think I ever messed up a Win 7 install. Other changes are rather distracting (oversized window titles and excessive color saturation in various UI elements) but I could get used to it. But the bottom line is that it doesn't feel like it's worth $100, especially since I'm not in the business of making Metro apps.
Don't get me wrong, I'm trying Win 8 right now and I like certain aspects of it. I don't think it breaks anything important, either. But when I'm in desktop mode, the experience doesn't feel all that different from Win 7. Ribbon in Windows Explorer? I don't care. One-click wipe? I don't think I ever messed up a Win 7 install. Other changes are rather distracting (oversized window titles and excessive color saturation in various UI elements) but I could get used to it. But the bottom line is that it doesn't feel like it's worth $100, especially since I'm not in the business of making Metro apps.
>Developing for Metro might be amazing, but developing on Metro is a non-starter.
You can run the full Visual Studio 2012 natively on any x86 tablet such as this one:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XxJQotodEVQ
Does Android or the iPad have a full featured native IDE with debugging support without resorting to hacks?
>Since most "hackers" will spend most of their time on the traditional desktop anyway, they see little reason to upgrade from Windows 7.
You do realize that the Desktop on Windows 8 will run all programs that run in Windows 8 right? And Windows 8 contains major improvements to the Desktop like file copying, multiscreen taskbar support etc. etc.
You can run the full Visual Studio 2012 natively on any x86 tablet such as this one:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XxJQotodEVQ
Does Android or the iPad have a full featured native IDE with debugging support without resorting to hacks?
>Since most "hackers" will spend most of their time on the traditional desktop anyway, they see little reason to upgrade from Windows 7.
You do realize that the Desktop on Windows 8 will run all programs that run in Windows 8 right? And Windows 8 contains major improvements to the Desktop like file copying, multiscreen taskbar support etc. etc.
Say that again? :-)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?gl=BR&hl=en&client=mv-g...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?gl=BR&hl=en&client=mv-g...
It is also surprisingly fast. I have VS11 running on a Cr48 with Win 8. It builds fine and I the OS runs ok. I was expecting some severe thrashing given its rather unimpressive resources and the 1 gig of disk-space that remained after I got VS11 on it.
> I do not use a Windows computer (anymore) is because there are so few ways to build things on it, compared to a Mac.
I'm using Windows to build things and I don't have any problems. More than that I remember having issues when I was on a mac (Sony Vegas).
Care to explain what you can do with a mac you cannot do with a PC?
I'm using Windows to build things and I don't have any problems. More than that I remember having issues when I was on a mac (Sony Vegas).
Care to explain what you can do with a mac you cannot do with a PC?
This OS might be the biggest Microsoft flop ever.
There are just way too many fundamental changes which are not proven to be actually better.
I would rather see new Metro UI as another full-screen app to see if it can stand on its own before they go all-in with it. Something similar to what Microsoft did with Windows 3.10 which was basically another DOS program.
I guess, Microsoft is being run by different folks today.
There are just way too many fundamental changes which are not proven to be actually better.
I would rather see new Metro UI as another full-screen app to see if it can stand on its own before they go all-in with it. Something similar to what Microsoft did with Windows 3.10 which was basically another DOS program.
I guess, Microsoft is being run by different folks today.
Disagree. It will be the biggest investment in research Microsoft has placed in the mainstream market to date. Windows 8 is effectively a research project. Microsoft wants to know and understand how people will be using different modalities in their everyday work. Windows 8 will have huge issues, no doubt, but Microsoft will learn enormous amounts from it. Metro is a smart move - window chrome is unnecessary, and takes up more space than it should. Moving to a tighter and more relevant UI will prove beneficial in the long run. It will also test out some of the more tablet friendly interfaces, and most importantly Microsoft will learn how and why those fail in the desktop settings (and how to fix that). These are unknowns right now; Microsoft is going all in so they can discover them.
That said, Metro dashboard aside, it's a nice OS. If you stay in the desktop mode it's really just a faster and more stable version of windows 7. I've been using it as my primary OS for the last few months. The lack of a start menu will confuse people at first, but the keyboard driven execution of programs should be a welcomed change for many power users. There will certainly be a backlash from users, much like there was from Vista. Down the road though, I can see Windows 9 learning a ton from 8. That's where I see the true value of Windows 8.
Disclaimer: I work for Microsoft.
That said, Metro dashboard aside, it's a nice OS. If you stay in the desktop mode it's really just a faster and more stable version of windows 7. I've been using it as my primary OS for the last few months. The lack of a start menu will confuse people at first, but the keyboard driven execution of programs should be a welcomed change for many power users. There will certainly be a backlash from users, much like there was from Vista. Down the road though, I can see Windows 9 learning a ton from 8. That's where I see the true value of Windows 8.
Disclaimer: I work for Microsoft.
I like your point about the backlash being like Vista, considering that I thought Vista was a fine OS. However, I think that was more of a jump sideways whereas this is more of a jump forwards/backwards. I haven't used it since the dev preview, but I'm looking forward to putting this on one machine and trying it out.
I'm hoping for a lot more customization. I don't understand why that's being taken out of every modern operating system. The biggest thing I dislike about Windows Phone is that I can't change the tiles to be non-insane colored. I just want them to be white, dammit! I'm hoping that level of customization is present in Win 8, but I have a sinking feeling that it will not be.
I'm hoping for a lot more customization. I don't understand why that's being taken out of every modern operating system. The biggest thing I dislike about Windows Phone is that I can't change the tiles to be non-insane colored. I just want them to be white, dammit! I'm hoping that level of customization is present in Win 8, but I have a sinking feeling that it will not be.
I believe the windows 8 naysayers will be proved very wrong, people will come to love windows 8, at least on the desktop. Take the start screen.. people are struggling to come to terms with it, but conceptionally it is so much better.
Take the current start menu-- what are the usability problems? -- nested folders, stuff like uninstallers squatting there, small mouse target. The new start screen tackles all these issues, whist still keeping the keyboard/search support (what most here have been doing since vista no doubt). Why should the start area not fill the screen? Similarly, there is no point in a little windows logo/button bottom left.
Take the current start menu-- what are the usability problems? -- nested folders, stuff like uninstallers squatting there, small mouse target. The new start screen tackles all these issues, whist still keeping the keyboard/search support (what most here have been doing since vista no doubt). Why should the start area not fill the screen? Similarly, there is no point in a little windows logo/button bottom left.
This OS might be the biggest Apple flop ever.
There are just way too many fundamental changes which are not proven to be actually better.
I would rather see new iOS touch UI as another full-screen app to see if it can stand on its own before they go all-in with it. Something similar to what Apple did with Classic which was basically another pre-OS X program.
I guess, Apple is being run by different folks today.
The difference is that Windows 8 is an upgrade that will replace older versions entirely. Apple's users who didn't like iOS could stick with Mac OS X, but getting back to old-style Windows from Metro looks tricky (if it can be fully achieved at all). The Classic to OS X transition is a much closer match, except that Apple didn't really attempt to change the way you interacted with the computer at that time (it was/is still basically a WIMP interface).
That's not to say that Microsoft will fail, or that Metro will be worse than the Windows 7 GUI. It's certainly going to be more interesting than the average OS launch, but my gut feeling is that the reaction to this will match the reaction to the Office ribbon.
That's not to say that Microsoft will fail, or that Metro will be worse than the Windows 7 GUI. It's certainly going to be more interesting than the average OS launch, but my gut feeling is that the reaction to this will match the reaction to the Office ribbon.
Apple made the bet that there's a fundamental difference between the mobile experience and the desktop experience.
They didn't replace OS X with iOS, they each exist as expressions of a different type of computing, for different purposes.
Microsoft are attempting to provide one system as a single expression of both types of paradigm, and this is why the jury is out on Windows 8.
They didn't replace OS X with iOS, they each exist as expressions of a different type of computing, for different purposes.
Microsoft are attempting to provide one system as a single expression of both types of paradigm, and this is why the jury is out on Windows 8.
>"Apple made the bet that there's a fundamental difference between the mobile experience and the desktop experience."
It's a bet they may have gotten wrong from a technical debt standpoint.
It's a bet they may have gotten wrong from a technical debt standpoint.
What do you mean?
Assume Windows 8 turns out to be a massive success. Suddenly everyone expects the same apps to run on their tablets and their desktops. Everyone expects to have proper multi-user support on their tablets, full productivity suites on ARM, and the option of buying an ARM laptop with 10+ hours of battery life. They expect these things because Windows 8 proved them possible.
Now what does Apple do? They've bet on single-user tablets, Intel laptops (with better-than-average but still not great) battery life, separate tablet and desktop ecosystems, and tablets that have only basic productivity apps. How do they bridge this gap and pay this debt?
I think Windows 8 is a very nice platform, and though it has some quirks, I think if people try it they will love it. I'm a Microsoft employee, though, so I'm probably biased.
Now what does Apple do? They've bet on single-user tablets, Intel laptops (with better-than-average but still not great) battery life, separate tablet and desktop ecosystems, and tablets that have only basic productivity apps. How do they bridge this gap and pay this debt?
I think Windows 8 is a very nice platform, and though it has some quirks, I think if people try it they will love it. I'm a Microsoft employee, though, so I'm probably biased.
To call Windows 3.1 "basically another DOS program" is to call Linux "basically another GRUB program".
No, it's more like saying "GNOME is basically another Linux program". Which is true.
>"There are just way too many fundamental changes which are not proven to be actually better."
I suspect that Microsoft has mountains of statistical data to support the statement "Metro is a better user interface."
Anecdotally, I'd agree.
How that translates into the market is of course another story. And if history is a guide, it will translate slowly just like every other operating system Microsoft has released since...well forever. In four years when Windows 9 rolls out, we'll still be hearing about people running XP (confession: my oldest laptop runs 2000 when I fire it up).
It's not a big deal for Microsoft because they don't really make money by breaking old hardware via an OS push on a three year cycle like Apple does. Their big money comes from stable relationships with enterprise with manufacturers and their business model supports supporting legacy systems.
BTW, there's no way to top Clippy.
I suspect that Microsoft has mountains of statistical data to support the statement "Metro is a better user interface."
Anecdotally, I'd agree.
How that translates into the market is of course another story. And if history is a guide, it will translate slowly just like every other operating system Microsoft has released since...well forever. In four years when Windows 9 rolls out, we'll still be hearing about people running XP (confession: my oldest laptop runs 2000 when I fire it up).
It's not a big deal for Microsoft because they don't really make money by breaking old hardware via an OS push on a three year cycle like Apple does. Their big money comes from stable relationships with enterprise with manufacturers and their business model supports supporting legacy systems.
BTW, there's no way to top Clippy.
[deleted]
It'll ship on almost 90% of desktop PC's and there are millions of ageing PC's running XP that have to be near the end of their useful life. In short, how big of a flop could it be?
The potential for a big flop is that instead of buying a PC to replace that aging XP box, the customer will just buy an iPad.
"Hey, look, there's a Windows iPad too. I liked my Windows computer before it just wouldn't turn on anymore, I should try one of those."
People are moving to smart phones and tablets anyway. Not because Windows has changed too much, just because they're easier and more convenient.And that's why we have Metro: if Microsoft doesn't follow their customers they're going to lose them.
Bingo. I think this could be a huge threat to Microsoft in enterprise use. What happens when ISVs decide to just target web apps rather than rewrite to Windows Runtime?
heh funny you say that, I do some residential work on the side and lately every time i tell a customer it's time for a new laptop, a good 90% ask "what about an ipad?"
What sells this os to me, is that it will be an option to Android and the Ipad. Both of these fail in certain areas related to playing windows media content. A lot of radio stations,and a lot of Windows media content will not work with iOs or Android. But they do work with Windows 7 and hopefully Windows 8.
I will ditch my android tablet for a Windows 8 tablet in a heartbeat, if my windows media content works on it and if it's reasonably priced.
I will ditch my android tablet for a Windows 8 tablet in a heartbeat, if my windows media content works on it and if it's reasonably priced.
Oh boy, here comes the obligatory HN-contrarianism and knee-jerk Microsoft bashing. I dislike Microsoft, in particular, Windows, as much as the next guy but you can't just throw out blanket statements like that with nothing to support them.
Why will this be such a flop? Are you maybe exaggerating? If it is because of the fundamental changes you mention? Which ones in particular and how are they not proven to be better?
I'm not defending Windows8 at all. Like I said, I'm no Microsoft fan myself but even I can give them credit for some of the things they're doing in Windows8. I think it'd be far more constructive to give us some specifics so that we can have a real discussion rather than throwing out generalizations that'll turn this into another religious debate.
Why will this be such a flop? Are you maybe exaggerating? If it is because of the fundamental changes you mention? Which ones in particular and how are they not proven to be better?
I'm not defending Windows8 at all. Like I said, I'm no Microsoft fan myself but even I can give them credit for some of the things they're doing in Windows8. I think it'd be far more constructive to give us some specifics so that we can have a real discussion rather than throwing out generalizations that'll turn this into another religious debate.
I'm not bashing Microsoft. Windows is my primary platform, all I'm saying is that I'm disappointed at how radical Microsoft is becoming.
99.9999% of applications for Windows are not going to look like Metro apps including flagship products like MS Office. So Metro is going to get in the way most of the time.
I'm not sure what desktop users should really appreciate about Windows 8.
99.9999% of applications for Windows are not going to look like Metro apps including flagship products like MS Office. So Metro is going to get in the way most of the time.
I'm not sure what desktop users should really appreciate about Windows 8.
I'm disappointed at how radical Microsoft is becoming.
This makes me laugh. It was not long ago, not long ago at all, everybody was complaining about how old-fashioned and unresponsive Microsoft was being.
This makes me laugh. It was not long ago, not long ago at all, everybody was complaining about how old-fashioned and unresponsive Microsoft was being.
Exactly. I would rather see them err on the side of radicalism at this point.
I have primarily been a Mac user for the last couple of years (whenever I have a choice about it), but I'd love to see MS start making its self more relevant again. I feel the consumers (i.e. my) interestes are best served when progress from the tech giants are spurred on by their competition. Not when a single platform has the majority of mind share in terms of perceived innovation.
I have primarily been a Mac user for the last couple of years (whenever I have a choice about it), but I'd love to see MS start making its self more relevant again. I feel the consumers (i.e. my) interestes are best served when progress from the tech giants are spurred on by their competition. Not when a single platform has the majority of mind share in terms of perceived innovation.
How do you think we get anywhere in computing without taking a few risks and trying new things? The fact that the old operating environment is right there means you can carry on as you are and the rest of the world can give it a shot and move things on.
>"I'm not sure what desktop users should really appreciate about Windows 8."
Apps.
Apps.
Windows 8 is an interesting release from a historical standpoint. Microsoft has been a long proponent of preserving APIs. Just as Windows95 supported DOS, and WinNT supported Win32 APIs. Windows 8 is a totally different beast. It's a new API, not even .NET, that's built on an existing OS. As such, it is more like Android, which is a mobile phone API built on top of Linux.
In many ways, programmers are discouraged from interacting with existing operating system services. One can't even access database drivers when writing WinRT programs. Everything is managed via web services.
So MS is not in a position of strength:
1. It is not a backwards compatible release (by necessity, due to battery life requirements)
2. It will have to create a market - i.e. ecosystem of developers and consumers
3. It has lackluster record - Windows Phone has little market share, despite being a solid OS
4. It has burned a lot of bridges and karma by abandoning their ethos of supporting old APIs. e.g. Silverlight, Windows Phone 7.5
This means that developers who take a risk with Windows 8 will find that if it tanks, they do not expect the APIs to be maintained in the future. Despite MS baking these WinRT APIs into Windows 8, they represent such a departure from desktop models that you couldn't bring those investments back to the desktop without significant work.
Meanwhile, the iPads are making deep inroads into enterprises and schools. Even if aficionados BYOD use Windows 8, MS will have to play underdogs from now on.
The only problem is - MS no longer know how to act like one.
My prediction? Lackluster adoption, massive layoffs just like HP in the next 20 months.
In many ways, programmers are discouraged from interacting with existing operating system services. One can't even access database drivers when writing WinRT programs. Everything is managed via web services.
So MS is not in a position of strength:
1. It is not a backwards compatible release (by necessity, due to battery life requirements)
2. It will have to create a market - i.e. ecosystem of developers and consumers
3. It has lackluster record - Windows Phone has little market share, despite being a solid OS
4. It has burned a lot of bridges and karma by abandoning their ethos of supporting old APIs. e.g. Silverlight, Windows Phone 7.5
This means that developers who take a risk with Windows 8 will find that if it tanks, they do not expect the APIs to be maintained in the future. Despite MS baking these WinRT APIs into Windows 8, they represent such a departure from desktop models that you couldn't bring those investments back to the desktop without significant work.
Meanwhile, the iPads are making deep inroads into enterprises and schools. Even if aficionados BYOD use Windows 8, MS will have to play underdogs from now on.
The only problem is - MS no longer know how to act like one.
My prediction? Lackluster adoption, massive layoffs just like HP in the next 20 months.
> Windows 8 is a totally different beast. It's a new API, not even .NET, that's built on an existing OS. As such, it is more like Android, which is a mobile phone API built on top of Linux.
You need to make a distinction between WOA (Windows RT) and Windows 8 on x86. Windows RT is a different beast yes in that developers will only have access to the WinRT API, but no restrictions are in place on the x86 version of Windows 8. Developers still have access to the Win32 API and are NOT discouraged to use it.
You need to make a distinction between WOA (Windows RT) and Windows 8 on x86. Windows RT is a different beast yes in that developers will only have access to the WinRT API, but no restrictions are in place on the x86 version of Windows 8. Developers still have access to the Win32 API and are NOT discouraged to use it.
The problem I see is that the WinRT API sits side by side with Win32. There is no intermixing.
You'd either program to one or the other. Sure you can run WinRT on the desktop. WinRT is so sandboxed it is worse than virtualizing XP on Windows 7. From a political standpoint, I can see the Windows 8 server people sneering at the team from Windows Mobile who have managed to sneak their toy OS into a heavy duty operating system. They are putting up with these kids for a while, but they will be booted out at the first sign of failure.
I see this as a hedged bet. If WinRT ends up as a market failure, they'll potentially abandon WinRT. After all, it will be like ditching a bit of Windows Mobile code in a proper OS. The whole thing is so cut down that WinRT is best thought of as a presentation layer and little else.
You'd either program to one or the other. Sure you can run WinRT on the desktop. WinRT is so sandboxed it is worse than virtualizing XP on Windows 7. From a political standpoint, I can see the Windows 8 server people sneering at the team from Windows Mobile who have managed to sneak their toy OS into a heavy duty operating system. They are putting up with these kids for a while, but they will be booted out at the first sign of failure.
I see this as a hedged bet. If WinRT ends up as a market failure, they'll potentially abandon WinRT. After all, it will be like ditching a bit of Windows Mobile code in a proper OS. The whole thing is so cut down that WinRT is best thought of as a presentation layer and little else.
I'll tell you why this OS will be the biggest Microsoft success ever...
Most consumers can be clueless, attention deficient, instant-gratification seeking, work/knowledge averse ... or can just want something simple.
A lot don't even understand the concept of the file-system (let alone the other 95% of Windows).
A lot can't even download a picture from a camera's memory card and place it into the proper folder after you show them how to do it 12 times over 3 months.
And most can't be expected to do anything that requires more than 1 or 2 easy steps (whether they can but don't want to, or just can't).
Metro re-invents the way the average consumer experiences and works with Windows to the point that even the village idiot could do something useful with this OS.
Why do you think the iPad was such a success, and where do you think 95% of its users are coming from?! The dusty PC running Windows.
With Metor, Microsoft will keep dominating the home desktop market (as they do now), prevent the outflow of users, and introduce themself in a very serious way in the tablet and phone market.
Most consumers can be clueless, attention deficient, instant-gratification seeking, work/knowledge averse ... or can just want something simple.
A lot don't even understand the concept of the file-system (let alone the other 95% of Windows).
A lot can't even download a picture from a camera's memory card and place it into the proper folder after you show them how to do it 12 times over 3 months.
And most can't be expected to do anything that requires more than 1 or 2 easy steps (whether they can but don't want to, or just can't).
Metro re-invents the way the average consumer experiences and works with Windows to the point that even the village idiot could do something useful with this OS.
Why do you think the iPad was such a success, and where do you think 95% of its users are coming from?! The dusty PC running Windows.
With Metor, Microsoft will keep dominating the home desktop market (as they do now), prevent the outflow of users, and introduce themself in a very serious way in the tablet and phone market.
I actually think W8 is ultimately going to be a disaster for Microsoft because it's so consumer-focused.
Microsoft has been a juggernaut for the past decade because of the enterprise. Part of the reason for this are technologies like Active Directory and Exchange built on top on the Windows stack. Another big part of it are enterprise applications that are also built on top of that stack.
Windows RT (aka Windows on ARM) doesn't support AD management. It's instead employing a self-service style portal that's meant to address bring-your-own-device situations rather than corporate device management.
Additionally, Windows RT will only run applications written targeting Windows Runtime; traditional W32 apps aren't supported.
So here's the thing: from a corporate IT perspective, what does Windows 8 give me that other devices like iPads or Android tablets don't if I'm going to give up full device management, especially if I'm trying to address the BYOD problem? (And from a corporate IT perspective, wanting to run line of business apps on iPads etc is probably the most frequent request I hear from end users).
From an ISV perspective, if I'm rewriting my app to target a new platform anyway, why not just go ahead and move as much as you can server side, present the UI as a webapp, and then be able to support all these non-Windows devices that users are clamoring for anyway?
W8 really feels like Microsoft painting themselves into a corner by chasing the consumer market while doing a poor job of addressing the market that's made the company what it is to date.
Microsoft has been a juggernaut for the past decade because of the enterprise. Part of the reason for this are technologies like Active Directory and Exchange built on top on the Windows stack. Another big part of it are enterprise applications that are also built on top of that stack.
Windows RT (aka Windows on ARM) doesn't support AD management. It's instead employing a self-service style portal that's meant to address bring-your-own-device situations rather than corporate device management.
Additionally, Windows RT will only run applications written targeting Windows Runtime; traditional W32 apps aren't supported.
So here's the thing: from a corporate IT perspective, what does Windows 8 give me that other devices like iPads or Android tablets don't if I'm going to give up full device management, especially if I'm trying to address the BYOD problem? (And from a corporate IT perspective, wanting to run line of business apps on iPads etc is probably the most frequent request I hear from end users).
From an ISV perspective, if I'm rewriting my app to target a new platform anyway, why not just go ahead and move as much as you can server side, present the UI as a webapp, and then be able to support all these non-Windows devices that users are clamoring for anyway?
W8 really feels like Microsoft painting themselves into a corner by chasing the consumer market while doing a poor job of addressing the market that's made the company what it is to date.
Windows RT is just for dedicated tablets. It's for iPad competitors, basically.
Proper PCs will continue to use Windows 8 for x86, which will still have Active Directory, etc.
Proper PCs will continue to use Windows 8 for x86, which will still have Active Directory, etc.
>Windows RT is basically just for dedicated tablets. It's for iPad competitors, basically.
i.e., the exact devices that users want software support for.
So as an ISV, do you rewrite to target Windows RT tablets or just go web app and target all tablets? You'll have to do some level of rewrite either way.
As an IT department, if you're going to give up device management to support tablets, is it preferable to be tied down to Windows-based tablets or does it make more sense to choose a solution that works on any tablet and be done with it?
That's the problem I see Microsoft facing. Sure, W8 x86 still works like before, but the tablet market is a new space where there's definite user demand and Microsoft just doesn't seem to have a good answer to it.
i.e., the exact devices that users want software support for.
So as an ISV, do you rewrite to target Windows RT tablets or just go web app and target all tablets? You'll have to do some level of rewrite either way.
As an IT department, if you're going to give up device management to support tablets, is it preferable to be tied down to Windows-based tablets or does it make more sense to choose a solution that works on any tablet and be done with it?
That's the problem I see Microsoft facing. Sure, W8 x86 still works like before, but the tablet market is a new space where there's definite user demand and Microsoft just doesn't seem to have a good answer to it.
Why exactly do you think it's easier to use when it's so different from theyre used to?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v4boTbv9_nU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v4boTbv9_nU
the final version will include some self-learning demo/video upon initial startup. so users will hopefully be less clueless than the video here.
i think the battle is more with whether microsoft can convince users to upgrade/buy. most people do not like big change unless you prove them how the chance is for the better.
Right, because everyone watches those videos.
That video does almost nothing to show windows 8 is less easy to use. All this takes is to say 'go to the bottom left'. Windows 8 is not littered with things like this.
I really don't understand what all the complaining is about. For most desktop users Microsoft took away the start button and added a new app launcher. The rest of the OS functions the same or better.
They didn't need to take away the start button, and it's going frustrate a lot of users. See: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v4boTbv9_nU
I've been running the preview in a VM, and getting back to the launcher frustrated me so much I had to install a small utility made by Stardock that makes a fake start button that takes you to the launcher: http://www.stardock.com/products/start8/.
I'm a Mac guy, but my job requires me to be in Windows half the time. I hope they take a hint from Stardock and that video and put the start button back in.
I've been running the preview in a VM, and getting back to the launcher frustrated me so much I had to install a small utility made by Stardock that makes a fake start button that takes you to the launcher: http://www.stardock.com/products/start8/.
I'm a Mac guy, but my job requires me to be in Windows half the time. I hope they take a hint from Stardock and that video and put the start button back in.
It seems that the only people who click the start button are people who don't use Windows all the time. Commonly used apps go in the launch bar and infrequently launched apps are found by hitting the Windows key and typing the name. Nothing in Windows 8 changes that workflow for me.
I think your theory is wrong. Specifically, I use Windows for work all the time (due to Visual Studio) and I never do the typing thing. I can't even remember the name of the applications I don't use often, but I remember the icon so that's what I look for. I really don't think I'm alone with that.
If you don't use the application often, then you're probably not hunting for it in the Start Menu often and thus not going to be wasting your time in the new Start Screen often. For the very few times you do need to find the application, I'm sure the Start Screen will make whatever you're looking for discoverable.
"Windows key"? What's that? ;)
Oh, these videos about first time users are painful to watch. It seems Microsoft isn't doing UX tests with avarege users.
The new non-Aero interface is interesting, I find it interesting how they are very delibaretly going in the opposite direction to Apple in their interfaces... Don't like the Calendar app - try Windows 8!
It's easy to assume Microsoft is basing decisions on what Apple is doing but I don't think Apple's design choices have any bearing on the new Windows8 interface. I can definitely see why it's easy to assume the connection because of Microsoft's "embrace and extend" motto and their one-step-behind lime of products like Zune, Windows Phone, etc. This time I really think they're thinking independently. It seems as though they've taken note of all the criticisms of Aero and tweaked it to be better and unique to Microsoft. If they've taken cues from anywhere I think it's Google and the minimalist web in general. The new UI chrome is very reminiscent of Google's design across all their products. It's very minimal, functional, and focuses more on readability and utility than what they've come up with n the past. Metro itself is a very cool idea that I really haven't seen from their competitors in any form.
I think you're right that they're deliberately going in a certain direction but I don't think Apple is playing as big a role in that decision as you imply. Despite Apple's growth and popularity Microsoft is still by far the biggest player in the OS market. Because of that I would doubt that they're as concerned with what Apple is doing on the desktop front and more interested in taking cues from them in the mobile device space.
I'm actually a huge Apple fanboy but I have to say the new Windows desktop is really beautiful! I haven't used a PC in years but I'd be happy to look at the New Windows non-Metro desktop all day. Microsoft is still making a lot of mistakes in cluttering their UI with buttons and ribbons and the like but hopefully the next step is to continue their momentum with the new Windows8 UI chrome and tackle the button/ribbon mess next.
I think you're right that they're deliberately going in a certain direction but I don't think Apple is playing as big a role in that decision as you imply. Despite Apple's growth and popularity Microsoft is still by far the biggest player in the OS market. Because of that I would doubt that they're as concerned with what Apple is doing on the desktop front and more interested in taking cues from them in the mobile device space.
I'm actually a huge Apple fanboy but I have to say the new Windows desktop is really beautiful! I haven't used a PC in years but I'd be happy to look at the New Windows non-Metro desktop all day. Microsoft is still making a lot of mistakes in cluttering their UI with buttons and ribbons and the like but hopefully the next step is to continue their momentum with the new Windows8 UI chrome and tackle the button/ribbon mess next.
Yeah, don't get me wrong, I do like the overall feel of Metro. Bearing in mind that this is in part a tablet OS, it is directly in competition with iOS, which has a very glossy, gradient rich, often skeuomorphic design. This is the the antithesis of that. Squares, rectangles, block colour etc.
I have been using Windows 8 Consumer Preview (and Developer Preview before that) as my primary OS and I love it. I use Windows 8 like Windows 7. All the applications that I use are pinned to the taskbar and I barely enter Metro UI. The only reason I need enter Metro occasionally is to search for apps, files and/or settings. Doing all that in one place without lifting my hand from the keyboard can be handy.
I think at best it will have moderate success, and at worst it will be a disaster bigger than Vista. There's no way it can be the "most successful ever", for 3 reasons:
1) Windows 7 has that title covered, because people waited for something like it for 10 years, and were very frustrated with both XP and Vista. It also came at a time when there was still no competition in sight for Microsoft. There was a real, painful need for Windows 7. There is no such thing for Windows 8. Plus it arrives at a time when people just got Windows 7 and they are happy with it.
2) Windows 8 does a dramatic change over previous Windows versions, which means most users are much less likely to be interested in it because most users don't like change, and Windows 8 would have to follow the technology product life cycle all over again (innovators -> early adopters -> early majority, etc.). So it has to actually convince people to use Windows 8 over anything else out there, including Windows 7.
3) People are less likely now to be interested in a Windows machine. You have Macs which are getting increasingly more popular (at least in US). You have iPads and Android devices. You even have Ubuntu and Linux Mint which are starting to leak a bit into the mainstream. The point is, the competition landscape is a lot less friendly to Microsoft right now than it was for previous versions over the past 17 years.
1) Windows 7 has that title covered, because people waited for something like it for 10 years, and were very frustrated with both XP and Vista. It also came at a time when there was still no competition in sight for Microsoft. There was a real, painful need for Windows 7. There is no such thing for Windows 8. Plus it arrives at a time when people just got Windows 7 and they are happy with it.
2) Windows 8 does a dramatic change over previous Windows versions, which means most users are much less likely to be interested in it because most users don't like change, and Windows 8 would have to follow the technology product life cycle all over again (innovators -> early adopters -> early majority, etc.). So it has to actually convince people to use Windows 8 over anything else out there, including Windows 7.
3) People are less likely now to be interested in a Windows machine. You have Macs which are getting increasingly more popular (at least in US). You have iPads and Android devices. You even have Ubuntu and Linux Mint which are starting to leak a bit into the mainstream. The point is, the competition landscape is a lot less friendly to Microsoft right now than it was for previous versions over the past 17 years.
Here's an official video/ad that highlights some of the ways people will use Windows 8 in Microsoft's eyes.
http://windows.microsoft.com/en-US/windows-8/release-preview
http://windows.microsoft.com/en-US/windows-8/release-preview
That looks pretty cool. I wonder how easy its going to be for people to discover the gestures because they seem to be so different than Android/ios. That swipe from the edge is going to be a hard one to learn/commit to muscle memory.
it looked like that kid wasnt really doing that stuff on his screen.
it looked like that kid wasnt really doing that stuff on his screen.
They look a lot more intuitive/natural than iOS. I actually had to use Google when I first got my iPad to figure out how to do some pretty basic things. In fact, I didn't even think to look into it until I accidentally put my whole hand on the screen and unexpected things happened -- it made me question what else was there.
Why is "swipe from edge" hard to learn? This is one of my favorite things about Windows 8, because in hindsight it's so obvious.
Disclaimer: MSFT employee
Disclaimer: MSFT employee
I doubt that the average android/ios user even attempt that gesture. Is what Im saying.
I feel that doing all of the touch gestures with a mouse is a bit much, especially pull down from top to close.
I still havent seen a better solution to multitasking/app management than webos.
I feel that doing all of the touch gestures with a mouse is a bit much, especially pull down from top to close.
I still havent seen a better solution to multitasking/app management than webos.
Discoverability is a much different issue than learnability. I don't know how discoverable edge swiping is, but it seems really easy to learn.
I doubt that discoverability is going to be a major issue, though, because edge swiping will get a lot of exposure through ads, and through any in-store use as well. It's such core functionality that every Windows 8 touch user will have to learn it in the first 2 minutes. If nothing else, they'll turn to the person next to them and say "how do I get back to the start screen"?
As for closing metro apps, there's not really any need in general. Just go back to the start screen. You can also close apps in the app switcher on the left, but the current app isn't in there if I recall correctly, and it's still not necessary in general.
I doubt that discoverability is going to be a major issue, though, because edge swiping will get a lot of exposure through ads, and through any in-store use as well. It's such core functionality that every Windows 8 touch user will have to learn it in the first 2 minutes. If nothing else, they'll turn to the person next to them and say "how do I get back to the start screen"?
As for closing metro apps, there's not really any need in general. Just go back to the start screen. You can also close apps in the app switcher on the left, but the current app isn't in there if I recall correctly, and it's still not necessary in general.
I wonder what will happen with the server version, surely that can't become Metro too?
It's using Metro as well.. http://www.engadget.com/2012/05/31/microsoft-outs-windows-se...
It can and will.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Server_2012
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Server_2012
I have to say, they've made a ton of improvements since the last release. I'm still not super happy with it (and it still feels like Vista) but it's definitely taken many steps ahead.
I still don't think anyone is going to be using the metro menu. It's just not what people want from Windows.
Edit: Wait, nevermind, I got it to crash within fifteen minutes. Apparently if you remove a tile from metro while moving it to a new column it will hang the metro menu and break the windows key (at least for me).
I still don't think anyone is going to be using the metro menu. It's just not what people want from Windows.
Edit: Wait, nevermind, I got it to crash within fifteen minutes. Apparently if you remove a tile from metro while moving it to a new column it will hang the metro menu and break the windows key (at least for me).
So much for a release preview...
Isn't the whole point of a preview that users run it and find and report errors? Otherwise why not just go RTM?
That's true, although that seems like a pretty big bug.
Can anyone tell when this preview expires? I can't seem to find that information in the FAQ.
Someone needs to install it and execute the process described in this article http://techdows.com/2012/03/windows-8-beta-expiry-date.html to figure it out.
I beleive it is 1/16/2013
Have they addressed the need to explain how to do something yet (getting to desktop or back to metro view)? That's really the biggest killer on any app that would theoretically be adopted by the masses.
I think you're spot on. It took me awhile to figure out what was what, and I'm not sure everyone has as much patience as me.
It's seems to be mentioned no where but what is the difference b/w consumer preview and this? Should i upgrade or will it automatically be updated to RP?
32-bit: 2.5 GB, 64-bit: 3.3GB
Why?!
Why?!
The 64-bit ISO will include copies of most of the 32-bit binaries for compatibility.
Thanks. That makes sense.
The WOW compatibility layer couldn't account for 700 MB.
Perhaps x64 built-in drivers plus their x86 equivalents? I'm tempted to download both, extract, and compare.
Perhaps x64 built-in drivers plus their x86 equivalents? I'm tempted to download both, extract, and compare.
> The WOW compatibility layer couldn't account for 700 MB.
I'm not that sure... Plus 64 bits binaries are probably something in the order of 10% bigger.
I'm not that sure... Plus 64 bits binaries are probably something in the order of 10% bigger.
So if I understand corrently it's Metro vs. Chrome OS?
This is computers, not the Highlander. There's no "vs." except for individual purchasers' decisions.
And Chrome OS looks more like Win7 than Win8 does.
vs iOS.
They're totally different philosophies. ChromeOS is about Web applications and there's no touch hardware or support AFAIK. There will be no third party native apps, while on Metro the focus is third party touch compatible applications. So it's more like Metro vs. Android.
The only reason I do not use a Windows computer (anymore) is because there are so few ways to build things on it, compared to a Mac. I remember back in the day when I used Windows exclusively because Visual Studio was the only way to do build awesome things fast. With Windows 8, MS has brought back those days. Developing for Metro is absolutely amazing. I have never felt the urge to write native desktop apps in years until Metro. Not that Apple and Google didn't try.
Anybody looking at screenshots and making predictions should download the preview, fire up that Virtualbox, hack together an app and then decide. This is nothing like ChromeOS, believe me, I am running the 30th May build of Chromium on my other machine. This is something that sits between iOS-ified Mac and Web-ified ChromeOS.