Microsoft claims Windows 8 'most widely used' yet
Windows 8 has been downloaded and tried more time than was Windows 7, Microsoft claims - but how many testers will be paying to upgrade?
According to a post on the Building Windows 8 blog by Microsoft's Brandon LeBlanc, the pre-release versions of Windows 8 have proved popular indeed. 'Windows 8 is the most widely used and tested pre-release product we’ve ever delivered,' LeBlanc claims of his company's creation.
'Across every audience, Windows 8 has been downloaded and used by more people than Windows 7 during the same period,' LeBlanc adds, confirming that - if the number of people actually paying to upgrade to Windows 8 is anything like the number of people trying it out for free ahead of its official launch - Microsoft is expecting big things from its next-generation operating system.
Feedback from the trials hasn't been ignored, either: LeBlanc claims that Microsoft has collected around a billion hours of telemetry feedback, a figure collated from all the pre-release editions from the very first previews to the latest Release To Manufacturing (RTM) version.
Quite what the company has done with that telemetry data, however, is unclear. Despite numerous concerns both from the public and industry figures as to its suitability for non-touchscreen devices, Microsoft is ploughing ahead with its plan to make the tile-based interface once known as Metro UI the default user experience under all versions of Windows 8 - including, bizarrely, the server editions.
It's a move that has left the company open to considerable criticism, with even one of Microsoft's own - former - employee were lamenting the system's various drawbacks. Public opinion on the interface appears to be softening, however, but it still remains to be seen if the dramatic shift will be welcomed by consumers or left on the scrapheap of history alongside Microsoft Bob.
Previous Article
61 Comments
Discuss in the forums ReplyI wish they'd stop pandering to the lowest common denominators of common sense and give us choices as to how we use our OS's..
I refused to even try it, but my dad said if he was going to slag it off or praise it then he had to of used it.
I was very excited to switch to 7, it's one of the most satisfying pieces of software I've ever used tbh.
You do have a choice. If you don't like it, don't use it.
I like the spin put on listening to feedback as well "feedback telemetry" not the actual feedback from users then? Just the automated feedback from the OS, lol.
I believe the only drawback is not having a tick box for start menu yes/no but apart from that I have found the software stable and fast and user friendly. The new menu layout makes things very easy for the general consumer. I will be surprised in a market where Tablet, Smart Phone and All in one PCs that it doesn't succeed.
Though I won't be upgrading from W7 due to the rock solid stability I was impressed by the OS and I do urge people to try it and not jump on the 'bash metro' band wagon otherwise you're no better than what people call 'iSheep'
For me it was going from XP Pro X64 to Vista, and actually getting driver support...
I know there would be speed improvements on my boot time compared to Win 7 but my ssd's are fast enough.
I am happy with Win 7 and won't be changing unless MS decide to patch in the normal Start Menu, and I won't be recommending Win 8 to anyone simply because the people that ask me about stuff all prefer to use a mouse, instead of touch interfaces.
This.
My laptop lives in desktop mode; I just sleep and resume without ever seeing the start screen. I only see metro if I search for something, and it's actually a lot better for that than 7 was due to the category/app search features. The main benefits of 8 are the redesigned desktop window UI and the speed improvements.
Give it a good go, i'd say it's worth it.
Ignoring the massive boot speed increases, all applications I tried performed better, and the general desktop was noticeably snappier even just moving windows around.
From a nerdy point of view, the new task manager is fantastic, and combined with the improved performance, that's enough for a £25 upgrade for me :)
http://www.bit-tech.net/news/bits/2012/08/30/ms-win8-upgrade/
I wonder if these people hating the W8 Start screen would have been there during the W3.11->W95 UI change, then we would be reading about how bad the removal of Program Manager is... :D
I skipped both of those train-wrecks and held on with XP Pro 32 to x64 7 Pro, well worth it. :D
Like the ribbon bar, new task bar in Windows 7, we freak out and call doom too easily. Plus, we get our-self influenced too much with sites that bashes a new Windows, as it attracts clicks.
As a Windows 8 user, I have a list of complaints, short one, none of them are enough to make me not buy it, but all items in my list aren't mentioned anywhere in those bashing Windows 8 ""articles"", or only a hand full mention them.
For example, if you have a Modern UI/Metro App that can open a file type, despite having another program, set as default, that can open it. When you'll double click on that file type, Windows will open it using the Metro App, THEN a pop-up will open on the corner of the screen saying "Another program can open this file". Which you click on it, to get a list of program installed on your computer that can open it.
So for example, let's say you installed PhotoShop, and set in Photoshop to open jpg files. You double click on a jpg file, and the Metro/Modern UI picture viewer opens, and you have Windows popping up a box saying "Another program can open this file". You click on it, and then a list of program shows up. NOw you get to pick PhotoShop, and it sets to it for next time.
Now you have to do this for EVERY file type, that a Metro App can open.
Now why it's not a killer, well, once you install Windows 8 and all your programs, you just need to open Default Program panels, and click on every program and click on "Set As default". It's annoying, but you do it only once. And it only applies to apps that a Metro/Modern UI App can view, that you have installed. So if you remove that Metro App, you are good as well. And if you don't, well you only need to do it for: Web browser, Picture viewer/editor software and video/music player, pretty much.
So its just an extra step for me. Not the end of the world. To me, Windows 8 has more benefits which compensate for this drawback.
Hopefully the've ignored it. The OS is just better, I use the start screen instead of a menu (the same way just hit the windows button on the keyboard) and your at a bigger and better start menu. Its actually better for me because I can get to the start screen while in game, whereas I couldn't with the start menu.
It does seem like desktop users are annoyed purely because for the first time, they aren't the sole attention of Microsoft.
Agreed, I forgot to mention that. I actually miss it when using 7 now.
Some people seem determined to make Win 7/8 look like 95 too, reverting to the oldest looking theme available as if it looks or performs better.
I didn't even notice this. I guess I installed software prior to trying to open anything.
Looks that way to me too. I'd rather have an OS that is successful and widely used than restricted to one relatively small user group, though. It seems to have brought the price down, for one thing, which I guess is partly due to a larger market.
i had to google it first
because pressing the power button sent it to sleep mode ......
worst OS ever made for desktops
i wish if microsoft just installed something that would give the user a choice to use the new UI or not
why is that soo hard ? why are they forcing every one
the good news is that i heard most companies will have win 7 options even after win8 comes out
Holding down, rather than pressing the power button usually shuts it down, and all of the options are in the charms menu (its in the intro when starting the os for the first time). They aren't forcing anyone, win 7 will be supported for a long time yet. However, soing that runs the risk of being left behind, as both microsoft and apple, and ubuntu I believe are moving to a mobile and desktop combined OS.
You can change the power button does the same way and location as in Windows 7.
Shutting down your computer doesn't provide any benefits over sleep, assuming you won't unplug your computer, or want to change stuff inside the system. I always sleep my computer, since Vista.
Different ways to turn off your computer:
-> Change what the power button does
-> Win+I > Power > Shutdown
-> Alt+F4 on desktop
-> Open charm bar > Settings > Power > Shutdown.
You can't have "Choose the way Windows looks" option, else it creates fragmentation and makes documentation and helping other a serious pain.
Most businesses won't update to Windows 8. They follow a 6 to 10 year OS update cycle. Some companies, and even banks still runs on NT 4 or Windows 2000. This is nothing new. Microsoft obviously tries to change that. But they take this opportunity where many businesses already upgraded to Win7, to experiment and improve their product related to new telemetry data related to the new interface. A very smart move.
Consumers are easy to adapt. Business are worst than many of us, when it comes to change.
http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9231900/Poor_pre_launch_showing_plagues_Windows_8
One of them has the numbers skewed.
Why ?
1.64% of Windows computers in 2009 and 0.33% of Windows computers in 2012 can look like a huge difference in percentage, while in absolute values Windows 8 numbers can be higher than Windows 7 numbers in 2009.
And you need to put those numbers in the context as well. When 7 came out, what we had was extremly old XP or Vista with very bad press. That means both XP and Vista crowd was trying out the new OS, and both crowds had reason to stay and use 7 - because it was that much better than XP/Vista. Now with Windows 8, people try it, and then return to their tested Windows 7 because they don't have such huge reason to upgrade.
In short, those numbers are not comparable - it's like comparing Windows Mobile 6.1->Windows Phone 7 numbers (comparable to XP/Vista->7 switch) versus Windows Phone 7 to Windows Phone 7.5 updates (7->8).
They don't say how they collected the data. If they are looking at "popular websites", then it probably obvious that the mainstream user won't get Windows 8 Beta release. Many also tried Windows 8 under Virtual PC. Back in Windows 7, most people, even here, didn't have the computation power to run Windows 7 under Virtual PC environment smoothly, so they installed it as main OS, and started to use it. When you are in a virtual environment, you just have a quick peek, and close it, and stay with your current OS. you don't actually USE the OS. You won't even install your preferred web browser really surf the web, and why would you? Even if you have the computation power, it's still not as smooth experience as the main OS.
Indeed, but IMO I think it applies to both computerworld and the Windows 8 blog.
Also, I have yet to meet people (you know, IRL) who actually _like_ TUICRTATUIFKAM* on the desktop (I don't mind, and actually applaud, it on mobile touch-enabled devices). Actually, outside the few MS apologists I don't really see anyone liking TUICRTATUIFKAM* on the desktop.
I sincerely hope that Win 8 in its current form tanks spectacularly, so MS goes back to the drawing board with regard to its UI decisions.
*The UI commonly referred to as the UI formerly known as Metro
My mum even liked the look of it said that although it might seem a bit weird at first she could see herself getting used to it because it "seemed more user friendly".
Calling it. Windows 8 is going to be popular with mainstream users. Especially those with some sort of smartphone.
This is absolutely true.
I work part time in IT at a medium sized company (around 50 people in the office) and we have a mixture of machines with XP and 7. We wont be getting 8 for quite a while because it is simply a pain to have multiple OS's to maintain. We cant afford an office wide upgrade so we get Win7 as we get new machines. If we started getting Win8 machines we would just be making support harder.
If Windows 8 fails, we will see what we are seeing with sports games: http://games.yahoo.com/blogs/plugged-in/ea-blasted-selling-same-fifa-game-two-years-184754450.html
Don't change what works, they say. Well, they don't. Literally. It sales well, and continues to do so for ages. And every couple of years, add 1 or 2 features and up the graphics a bit.
It will be a sad day.
And, even if true, it fails to explain the way W7 graphic line went upwards as compared to W8 steady movement upwards. W7 had an excelent reputation before its release, W8, meh!
Funny thing is that if Microsoft allowed for UI choice, W8 would be an absolute success, even in the enterprise environment.
But it would have been a failure for Microsoft.
Because then you won't be able to enter a new area if you will in computers, and in a business side of thing, Modern UI/Metro Apps won't kick-off as much or at all as most people would use the classic way, and that mean low to even loosing revenue for Microsoft due to the low sales (maintaining the store cost a lot of money, not to mention the amount of research and development in creating WinRT. You need billions of dollars to pay that off, and possible several millions of dollar per year to maintain the infrastructure world wide).
Whoever wanted Metro, Start Screen, Charms, Metro apps, would still be able to use them, whoever doesnt want to use them wouldnt be forced to.
Win-Win.
Booting into Windows 8 once or twice, poking around to find a few things you don't like so that you can come online and bash it, and then going back to Windows 7 really doesn't do what is actually a superb OS justice.
The comment about the Program Manager made me LOL IRL ;)
Read the second part of the post, that explains it why it doesn't climb up so sharply.
Do you know anyone downgrading to WP7 after trying WP7.5?
Your reading skills are really poor then.
The second part was about :
1) XP/Vista->7 being a big change (an usable 64-bit OS for XP users, better memory management and SSD support for both etc), and that being the reason for extremely high use of Release Candidates. Similar to Windows Mobile->Windows Phone 7 Change.
2) 7->8 is a relatively small change compared to that, there are no big architecture changes in the underlying architecture (maybe except the new Storage Spaces), all changes are centered pretty much on UI (Metro, new Start Screen etc). Many users now have Windows 7 and don't feel the need for upgrade for those new UI features, thus adoption is much lower.
Simply put there is no way you can compare the pre-7 market with the pre-8 market, before 7 you had only bad (Vista) and worse (XP) choice.
I've installed it in virtualbox, both CP and RP. I've gave it a good going over, used it instead of my linuxmint and ubuntu installs, which I use for pretty much everything besides playing games. I like the look of metro but everything, to me at least, seems to take longer. I know that sometimes its only one or two extra clicks or there's a new win+*some key*, but it never seemed obvious. I love trying out OS's so you can't say I have just flash used it to slag it off, I genuinely think it looks nice but is a pain to use. Win7 is a solid easy to use OS, LinuxMint and Ubuntu are different to it but almost everything is obvious once you have a quick scout around. Win8 to me is just a step too far.
To me it's like they have changed the position of some controls in my car, changed the action of some and removed the rest. this means i have to 'relearn' how to drive, whats the point when theres nothing wrong with Win7. If the improvement was drastic then fair cop, but it isn't. it's a different way of doing the same thing. I will be sticking with Win7/Mint/Ubuntu, which is a shame as I was looking forward to Win8 and like the look of it (which appears to be unusual).
I think Microsoft are trying to put out positive media coverage for the release. Which has been shown to enable rubbish products to be positively received. At least we won't have new PC's with crippled OS's like Win7 with their Starter & Home Basic editions.
I agree with you that by default, they are some things in Windows 8 that take a few more clicks. But that can be rectified by adjusting the start screen.
For example, accessing downloads, drives/my computer, documents, profile, pictures... takes more time. But what I did, is pin these area on to my screen screen. Even some Control Panel panels that I use often on there. And of course, position these tiles, the ones I use most, closer to the the corner, for easy reach. It ends up being just as fast as Windows 7, and sometimes faster, as the distance travel is smaller, or simply less clicks.
For example. I use on my laptop the sound panel a lot. I have an external sound card for my laptop, when I plug it in, it's not set as default. So I need to do manually. In Windows 7 I would have to do Start > Control Panel > Sound. In Windows 8, because I have the room, it's simply Start > Sound.
A cool trick I found, if you don't like the fact that the search doesn't allow you to find control panel items. Make a shortcut of them and put it on the "Start menu" folder (C:\Users\<ACCOUNT>\AppData\Roaming\Microsoft\Windows\Start Menu\Programs), now when you search under Apps, that control panel item will be listed. Anyway.
And of course, you have the right-click menu at the bottom left corner of the screen, which is customizable.
It's a bit of shame that the default layout sucks for desktop and laptops, even if they had touch screens. But it's adjustable. Maybe in Windows 9, they'll perfect things on seeing what users are doing from their telemetry data.
See I don't mind learning new ways. But when there is significant change in an OS for no apparent benefit (other than being good for touchscreen/tablet) and with a significant set up effort and relearn. I just don't think anyone with Windows 7 needs to upgrade especially with desktop or standard laptop. Anyone on XP or with a HTPC (where i think the new setup and layout works better) would benefit from Windows 8.
With regards Ubuntu / Unity there are ways around it with linux you just don't get with Windows. Linux Mint basically keeping the old Ubuntu style/interface with Cinnamon, which you can stick on Ubuntu if you so wish (which appears to be very popular). Although Unity was different, it was (to me at least) fairly obvious to navigate, with benefits to the new interface.
That's like staying with Windows 7.
Again, you do have a choice. If you don't like it then don't buy it.
Sam
I would say it was like having Win8 with Win7 layout. With the ability to add the bits you want from Win8. Linux is much more customizable than windows, although I rarely change much, I prefer to use distros in their vanilla state. I like cinnamon and unity. I found them both extremely usable from the outset. For me the learning curve was minimal almost on the verge of unnoticeable.
If everybody thought like that we wouldn't have half of the technology we take for granted today.
Huh?
This guy.
Most computers I've used with windows default to sleep mode with a power button press, rather than a shutdown.
Also that's not a legitimate reason to dislike an OS.
Like I said previously, if its for some benefit then fine, but they appear to have changed it to the detriment of desktop users, just to tie in with tablet/touchscreen use. I try different versions of linux regularly some I like some not so much, I'm not a Windows hater either I like Windows 7.
Today we are working with high definition monitors, and soon higher. Already people here are switching to 27/30inch higher than HD monitors. In a few years, it will reach mainstream. Probably higher pixel density for the same size (2560 x 1440 on a 23inch for example).
The new Start Screen takes advantage of that, by not only giving you more icons which you can position and group the way you want, but also give you live information on what's going on in the world. For example, you have direct notification, and small short description of new e-mails, RSS, social networking, different news, weather. All in front of you. Imagine a bit-tech.net news app. As you open the star screen, you can see the latest news, clicking on it, opens it up to read more about it, and from the Share menu, you can easily share the news to friends via IM, Facebook, e-mail and wtv other communication method. Its easy, simple, and direct.
So Windows 8 is an OS for not only today's system, but also tomorrow. I won't be surprised if we have Windows 8 ready keyboard, where they have special keys to do stuff with the OS. I wont be surprised if Wacom style monitors being the norm:
79SdxuA1WjY
Obviously not as fancy, as this technology isn't cheap, and also maybe not exactly the same setup, but it give you an you idea. The same for when GUI based OS. It introduced the mouse, which now becomes the defacto standard, and the currently prefer method of navigation, especially after all the years of evolutions for that pointing device to make it more precise, more responsive, conformable, works on more surfaces, and so on.
You mean cashing out to get such screen?
Well like I said, This is a professional monitor, PLUS Wacom super fancy digitize pen and multi-touch. The professional monitor is over 1000$ just by itself, also the wacom pet support many pressure points and the corner are just as accurate as the center, with pin point accuracy. Do we need that? Not really. Maybe something like the base models of Wacom or other manufactures of such tablet technology, implemented on the screen. Let alone pen support at all. You are dropping the price a lot.
Getting numbers out of my ass here, but let's say you get the U2410 panel.. that's about 400$ cost, plus the stand which is probably 100$, plus multi-touch support, and low reflective glass surface... we are looking at what 200$ more ? So that 800$. Which was 50$ more over the U2410 original price, back in 2009. And again this is assuming very high quality product, and a U2410 display, all technology at current price. So that's a good price. At least to me.
Drop in a 6-bit eIPS panel instead of a 8-bit H-IPS panel, remove the fancy color processor, all the inputs of the U2410 and reduce over all built quality a bit, without going cheap. And maybe you are looking at about 400-500$ product. Wait a few years and the technology will drop in price further, to possibly even 350$.
Full Microsoft Blog article:
http://blogs.msdn.com/b/b8/archive/2012/10/09/updating-windows-8-for-general-availability.aspx
[Holding the power button] you do know that is called an Forced power down (you may had just unplug the pc from the wall its the same thing) holding the power button 4-5 secs is telling the motherboard to tell the PSU to just Turn off
its an good way of trashing the windows install if you catch it doing something important to the registry or worse an windows update
---
any way, i cant see my self yet using windows 8 unless i am forced to really, its going to confuse the Hell out of your avg joe user who is clueless normally (Hiding important stuff like the Corner actions adds to that) touch screen Yes, desktop with no touch screen no (unless they fix the hidden corners to be not hidden any more)
dam it was bad enough when they removed Turn Off or log off from start menu (why do you think they Put Shut Down in the start Menu in widows 7 as it was the most asked Question for tech support to OEMs and most likely MS them self's, "how do i shut my pc down as the Power light is still flashing i have to pull the plug to turn the pc off"
as Mobo makers like to make the power light Flash when sleeping + vista Default power button is Sleep (should be shut down on the case button allways) users do not like that as its as good as still On for them, if they removed the Flashing power light when sleeping Windows Vista/7 (apple do it no LED any more) but no one wanted sleep on windows due to 1 LED
or even changing the start menu to an Gem start (where is the start button....)
you can see from an point of an new user they just take the PC back and get an windows 7 pc as they just not be able to use it (no one ever uses the help system in windows, Google is faster) or they get an reconditioned windows 7 pc when MS stop selling windows 7 (more should i say Force the OEM makers getting Win7 stickers cheap)
you got to take it to the level that Most of the user base of windows do not Want to learn or care to, when big change happens, there is No way in the next 10 years or longer that business will touch windows 8 the Cost to re train there stupid staff that can just get by opening MS word is norm hard work for them would be a lot cost wise, apart from the hardware XP to 7 is Simple move over once you sorted out the software that's not been updated in 10-20 years (limited start menu all icons are on the desktop for what they need to use)
it is very interesting though. i have a wp7, upgraded to wp7.5. i was planning on buying an android phone and tablet, however seeing the developments i might just be tempted to get w8 smartphone & tablet instead. i do see a lot of potential in this setup! just not sure if it's "there" yet. probs wont hop in early on this one
You are tempted to a touchscreen device with Metro.
You can position it like a normal monitor and use a keyboard.
I know that there are A LOT of people that don't even desk space for a computer POINT.
the keyboard barely fits with the monitor, and they WAY to close to the screen, and complain about why their eyes hurt. Well that's a different problem. They need to purchase a proper desk, and not their insult to humanity table... literary.
Well I'm an experienced os user and have done my fair share of tinkering in the past. Thing is make these things obvious, easy or have a setup guide with these fixes to common complaints that should have been ironed out long before now. I have a job, two kids and a load of steam games I have yet to install. I don't want to be tweeking a whole os. I have much more important things to do with my life. I'm guessing Joe public mostly feels the same way.