bit-tech.net

Windows 8.2 rumoured for autumn launch

Windows 8.2 rumoured for autumn launch

Microsoft is rumoured to be planning Windows 8.2 for an autumn launch, to be followed by Windows 9 and a new product dubbed Windows Cloud.

Microsoft may have only just got its mandatory Windows 8.1 Update 1 release out of the door, but the company is claimed to be looking to launch Windows 8.2 as early as the autumn.

Part of the company's rumoured shift to a rapid release cycle, similar to the six-monthly releases of Ubuntu Linux and Apple's more recently adopted annual OS X release cycle, Windows 8.2 will take over from Windows 8.1 as the company's primary operating system. A precursor to Windows 9, Windows 8.2 can be thought of as a Service Pack release for Windows 8.1 and will include features promised at the BUILD conference earlier this year but not found in Windows 8.1 Update 1 - such as the new Start Menu, which combines the icon-based menu of Windows 7 with a Windows Phone-inspired Live Tile bar.

At least, that's the rumour. Microsoft, typically, is refusing to discuss unannounced products; Russian pirate group WZOR has no such qualms, however, and claims to be in possession of critical information regarding Microsoft's planned release schedule.

According to a message spotted and translated by Myce, Microsoft plans to launch Windows 8.2 as early as the autumn. The release is expected to be the last update to the Windows 8 family, with the next launch being Windows 9 and bringing with it even more serious changes to the divisive user interface first introduced in Windows 8.

Windows 8.2, like Windows 8.1 before it, will be released as a free upgrade for all Windows 8 family customers. The WZOR group has claimed that it has received conflicting reports that Windows 9 will also be a free upgrade for Windows 8.2 users, with Microsoft echoing the upgrade path of Apple's recent OS X Mavericks; others speaking to the group have claimed that it will be a paid-for release, with heavy discounts available for early adopters upgrading from the Windows 8 family.

Other details claimed by the group include the impending release of Windows Cloud, a virtualised version of the company's operating system designed to provide competition at the extreme low-end of the market for Google's Chrome OS. Windows Cloud, it is claimed, would allow users to access core functionality for free and pay a subscription fee for more advanced applications.

Microsoft, as is usual for the company, has not commented on the rumours.

36 Comments

Discuss in the forums Reply
blackworx 22nd April 2014, 10:55 Quote
As with Vista, I will be ignoring all flavours of Windows 8 with a distasteful look on my face in the same manner as if someone had just dropped a stinky fart in an enclosed space. It's time to purge the ghost of Sinofsky. Roll on Windows 9.
DriftCarl 22nd April 2014, 11:15 Quote
They should really adopt the model of buying 2 versions of OS, for example if you buy windows 8, you should get 9 for free when its out. If you buy 9, you should get 10 free when its out.
People use OS's for far longer now than what microsoft wants, so offering a 2 in 1 package would give them an incentive to upgrade early.
stuartwood89 22nd April 2014, 13:31 Quote
I'm looking forward to 8.2. 8.1 is already an awesome OS. Not too sure about the start menu though, I like the Start Screen and going back to a traditional menu seem to be back-peddling to keep the old farts happy.
Jim 22nd April 2014, 13:34 Quote
I guess 8.2 is easier to say than 8 SP2.
Ipatinga 22nd April 2014, 13:54 Quote
Correct name for this: Windows 8 SP3.

Microsoft, can you now help me and give me the ability to make my original Windows 8 notebook BE ABLE TO INSTALL A DVD of WINDOWS 8.1 UPDATE 2 (Windows 8 SP3) with the key that it is in bios? Because I don´t think you know how many days (2) it takes to move Windows 8 from fresh to the latest updates... IT TAKES A ****ING LOOOOOT OF TIME.
Guinevere 22nd April 2014, 14:05 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by DriftCarl
They should really adopt the model of buying 2 versions of OS, for example if you buy windows 8, you should get 9 for free when its out.

Or... they should adopt their model of offering their 'non pro' OS upgrades for free. Commercial users who need to join a domain still get to pay but everyone else get to upgrade for nothing.

More people will upgrade, thus more users will be potential customers for software purchases through the app store.

Just look at the adoption figures for iOS and OSX. Both are free and easy upgrades and the vast majority of users upgrade because of this. Okay, it's easier for Apple to exclude non compatible configurations but MS already have the tech to do this.

MS holding onto the notion that 'average' PC users will ever be willing to pay for an upgrade from (say) windows 7 is crazy.

Just make 8.x free already!
Corky42 22nd April 2014, 14:16 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by stuartwood89
I'm looking forward to 8.2. 8.1 is already an awesome OS. Not too sure about the start menu though, I like the Start Screen and going back to a traditional menu seem to be back-peddling to keep the old farts happy.
I don't think they are going to force you to stop using the start screen, unlike how they forced people to stop using the start menu when they removed it. I would think if you prefer to use the full screen version of the start menu (aka The Start Screen) you will still be able to use it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ipatinga
Microsoft, can you now help me and give me the ability to make my original Windows 8 notebook BE ABLE TO INSTALL A DVD of WINDOWS 8.1 UPDATE 2 (Windows 8 SP3) with the key that it is in bios? Because I don´t think you know how many days (2) it takes to move Windows 8 from fresh to the latest updates... IT TAKES A ****ING LOOOOOT OF TIME.
Can't you use one of the generic keys Microsoft provide and then enter the Bios key when it comes to activating, or change the key once you have installed via the DVD with 8.1 and the update ?
DC74 22nd April 2014, 16:01 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by blackworx
As with Vista, I will be ignoring all flavours of Windows 8 with a distasteful look on my face in the same manner as if someone had just dropped a stinky fart in an enclosed space. It's time to purge the ghost of Sinofsky. Roll on Windows 9.

Couldn't have put it better myself ;). Lets hope they don't tell us they want us to do things a certain way this time or it will all end in tears :'(

Companies should listen to what their customers want not try to force us into doing things their new and to be honest crap way. We like things the way they were done in Windows 7, just improve and make it faster and better without screwing it up please Microsoft.
Hustler 22nd April 2014, 16:04 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by blackworx
As with Vista, I will be ignoring all flavours of Windows 8, Roll on Windows 9.

..but Windows 7 was really just a re-skinned Vista with the bloat taken out, and Windows 9 will be a re-skinned Windows 8 with a huge slice of humble pie added..:)
Corky42 22nd April 2014, 16:30 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hustler
..but Windows 7 was really just a re-skinned Vista with the bloat taken out, and Windows 9 will be a re-skinned Windows 8 with a huge slice of humble pie added..:)

And Vista was a re-skinned XP, that in turn was a re-skinned 98, and that was a re-skinned 95.
There hasn't been a major change in the way people interact with Windows since Win 3.1 even then the change from Win 3.1 to 95, it could be argued didn't change much.

There is far more to an OS than just the way it looks.
true_gamer 22nd April 2014, 16:32 Quote
Windows 7 is where I'm staying, until I'm forced to upgrade...
phuzz 22nd April 2014, 17:51 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corky42
... Vista was a re-skinned XP, that in turn was a re-skinned 98, and that was a re-skinned 95.
There hasn't been a major change in the way people interact with Windows since Win 3.1 even then the change from Win 3.1 to 95, it could be argued didn't change much...
The interface may have looked more or less similar, but there was a big jump from Windows 1-3 (which was just a GUI on top of DOS), to 95-98-ME (which was just about a separate OS from DOS), to XP which was basted on the NT kernel v5 (and didn't require DOS).
The jump from XP to Vista (NT 6) was pretty big from a technological point of view, but between Vista, 7 and 8/8.1 there's been little change, more just tweaks to the underlying OS. The changes to the GUI haven't really mirrored the changes in the OS, XP looked pretty similar to Win 9X, but underneath was a complete change. Windows 8 looks completely different to 7, but it really is just a reskin of a few areas.
Corky42 22nd April 2014, 18:23 Quote
@phuzz, Oh yea i totally agree, it's why is said "There is far more to an OS than just the way it looks." Sadly a lot of people look no further than the way an OS looks.
RichCreedy 22nd April 2014, 18:32 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ipatinga
Correct name for this: Windows 8 SP3.

Microsoft, can you now help me and give me the ability to make my original Windows 8 notebook BE ABLE TO INSTALL A DVD of WINDOWS 8.1 UPDATE 2 (Windows 8 SP3) with the key that it is in bios? Because I don´t think you know how many days (2) it takes to move Windows 8 from fresh to the latest updates... IT TAKES A ****ING LOOOOOT OF TIME.

it still takes a bit of time, but it's quicker than downloading all the time, but cant you get yourself a copy wsus offline updater from here
impar 22nd April 2014, 20:09 Quote
Greetings!
Quote:
Originally Posted by stuartwood89
Not too sure about the start menu though, I like the Start Screen and going back to a traditional menu seem to be back-peddling to keep the old farts happy.
Relax. Microsoft learnt the lesson and is offering StartScreen as an option:
https://twitter.com/MSFT4Work/statuses/451897658912034816
Cthippo 22nd April 2014, 20:34 Quote
Given Microsoft's ongoing problems with buggy updates, doing them more often is not going to make people more likely to want to use their products. At this rate, by the time they get the bugs ironed out of 8.1, 8.2 will be coming out as a "you must install this or we will give hackers root access to your computer" patch.

I'm also really unhappy about MS using the withholding of security patches, which are necessary because the OS is so insecure to begin with, as a way of dictating to users what they run on their machines. I'm really surprised we haven't seen a class action lawsuit out of this yet.
blackworx 22nd April 2014, 20:38 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hustler
Windows 7 was really just a re-skinned Vista with the bloat taken out, and Windows 9 will be a re-skinned Windows 8 with a huge slice of humble pie added..:)

You're right about the bloat, but W7 is visually almost identical to Vista, so "re-skin" is the last word I'd use to describe it. No, I'd say W7 is basically a working version of Vista. As long as you don't count the pig's ear they made of Windows Explorer.

From what I've heard of W8 it does a lot of things right and doesn't have the visceral flaws that made Vista such a dog, so perhaps I was unfair to compare it to Vista. I think this time round I'd probably be happy with a re-skin since it's Windows 8's UI, and the UI alone, that's putting me off.
Nexxo 22nd April 2014, 21:05 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cthippo
I'm also really unhappy about MS using the withholding of security patches, which are necessary because the OS is so insecure to begin with, as a way of dictating to users what they run on their machines. I'm really surprised we haven't seen a class action lawsuit out of this yet.

Yeah, because running the version of Windows you want is an entitlement . It's a God-given right, damn it!

Oh, wait, it isn't. Companies can just discontinue a product if they choose; must be a free market principle or something.
Cthippo 22nd April 2014, 21:18 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nexxo
Yeah, because running the version of Windows you want is an entitlement . It's a God-given right, damn it!

Oh, wait, it isn't. Companies can just discontinue a product if they choose; must be a free market principle or something.

On the other hand, when you purchase a product it's reasonable that you can expect it to function in it's current form for a reasonable period of time.

This is the equivelant of a car manufacturer saying "now that you've had your car for three months, you must paint it blue or else your warranty is void. We'll give you be blue paint, but the painting process may break the car."

MS is essentially making updates, which once again are only necessary because their product was defective in the first place, contingent on the user accepting functional changes to the operating system. These aren't just bug fixes or security patches, these are major changes that you are required to consent to in order to keep receiving the support which you paid for when purchasing the operating system.

They are demanding an unprecedented amount of control over the customer's machine under threat of withholding support which was paid for.

I'm curious Nexxo (and others)... You seem pretty comfortable with allowing Microsoft to require you to accept changes to your computer. Where would you draw the line? How much are you willing to put up with before you would say no?
deathtaker27 22nd April 2014, 21:19 Quote
Also its not like your paying for the update which allows you future support, its not a new OS after all.
Nexxo 22nd April 2014, 21:50 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cthippo
On the other hand, when you purchase a product it's reasonable that you can expect it to function in it's current form for a reasonable period of time.
Don't install the updates and security patches then. Keep your OS running in its current form.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cthippo
This is the equivelant of a car manufacturer saying "now that you've had your car for three months, you must paint it blue or else your warranty is void. We'll give you be blue paint, but the painting process may break the car."

No, this is your car manufacturer saying: "Your car has been discovered to have a design flaw in it which makes it vulnerable to theft. We're giving you a free upgrade to a new car which corrects this flaw. But we're not going to try and fix your old car because it is discontinued anyway.

Your choice is: do the upgrade and accept a different car, or keep the car you know and like but put up with the vulnerability.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cthippo
MS is essentially making updates, which once again are only necessary because their product was defective in the first place, contingent on the user accepting functional changes to the operating system. These aren't just bug fixes or security patches, these are major changes that you are required to consent to in order to keep receiving the support which you paid for when purchasing the operating system.

They are demanding an unprecedented amount of control over the customer's machine under threat of withholding support which was paid for.
First, there is no such thing as a perfect OS. There will be bugs, and patches will be inevitable, like cars will malfunction and break down. To think anything else is to live in Wonderland.

You want your classic car? Deal with the lack of airbags and the fact that you can't get parts from mainstream dealers anywhere.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cthippo
I'm curious Nexxo (and others)... You seem pretty comfortable with allowing Microsoft to require you to accept changes to your computer. Where would you draw the line? How much are you willing to put up with before you would say no?

Until I say to myself: "Sod this, I'm moving to OSX/Linux." I don't live in a world of entitlement; I deal with what is. It's less heartburn that way. :)

Seriously, this is capitalism. This is free market economy at work.
Star*Dagger 24th April 2014, 20:12 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by DriftCarl
They should really adopt the model of buying 2 versions of OS, for example if you buy windows 8, you should get 9 for free when its out. If you buy 9, you should get 10 free when its out.
People use OS's for far longer now than what microsoft wants, so offering a 2 in 1 package would give them an incentive to upgrade early.

I doubt MS wants to encourage cyber luddites. They should send a kill and delete command to all versions of XP, and a kill command to all OS releases every three years.
impar 24th April 2014, 20:15 Quote
Greetings!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Star*Dagger
I doubt MS wants to encourage cyber luddites. They should send a kill and delete command to all versions of XP, and a kill command to all OS releases every three years.
Why would you want companies moving to Linux\Apple?
Star*Dagger 27th April 2014, 22:31 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by impar
Greetings!

Why would you want companies moving to Linux\Apple?

I do want them to move to Linux, even Apple (as you correctly intimated) is 1000 times better than the crap code MS churns out.

Yours in Advanced Gaming Plasma,
Star*Dagger
The Seen and Unseen
Nexxo 28th April 2014, 07:25 Quote
Apple doesn't have to worry about legacy computers or third-party hardware. And Linux? Very user-friendly. Anyone who struggled with the change from Start Menu to Start Screen won't struggle at all with Linux. :p
Corky42 28th April 2014, 08:36 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nexxo
And Linux? Very user-friendly. Anyone who struggled with the change from Start Menu to Start Screen won't struggle at all with Linux. :p

That may have been the case in the past, but some Linux distribution are a lot more user friendly than Windows (imo), at least with Linux you have choices, with Microsoft it tends to be either like it or lump it.
Nexxo 28th April 2014, 09:33 Quote
Most people don't want choice; they want easy. It's why iOS is doing so well.
Corky42 28th April 2014, 10:45 Quote
I wouldn't say iOS is doing well, it has been losing market share steadily for the last 2 years.

EDIT: And people want more than just easy, they want things like the best, the cheapest, the longest lasting, etc, etc. And with the amount of different Linux distribution out there they can choose what suits there needs the best.
Nexxo 28th April 2014, 16:12 Quote
So why haven't they yet? Possibly for the same reason why we see muggles wander around PC World like glassy-eyed zombies. :p
Corky42 28th April 2014, 16:28 Quote
AFAIK They have.
Android, a Linux distribution has the largest share of the tablet/mobile segment.
Cthippo 28th April 2014, 17:49 Quote
I can see x86 Android (or would that be Chrome?) becoming a real competitor to Windows on the desktop space. I wonldn't like it, but if you're going to use a touch OS on your desktop it can at least be one that you're used to and doesn't look like crap.
Nexxo 28th April 2014, 17:57 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corky42
AFAIK They have.
Android, a Linux distribution has the largest share of the tablet/mobile segment.

Pedant. :p It's iOS by another name.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cthippo
I can see x86 Android (or would that be Chrome?) becoming a real competitor to Windows on the desktop space. I wonldn't like it, but if you're going to use a touch OS on your desktop it can at least be one that you're used to and doesn't look like crap.

Google will have to do a lot of work to make Chrome as functional as Windows 8. It's not until you try to use Chrome seriously that the gaping flaws become obvious. Trust me, I've owned a Chromebook and now a Surface RT, and the Surface wins hands down.

Android is much more promising but again, no out-of-the-box compatibility with networked and USB devices. Must change to be a contender.
Corky42 28th April 2014, 18:17 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nexxo
Google will have to do a lot of work to make Chrome as functional as Windows 8. It's not until you try to use Chrome seriously that the gaping flaws become obvious. Trust me, I've owned a Chromebook and now a Surface RT, and the Surface wins hands down.

Android is much more promising but again, no out-of-the-box compatibility with networked and USB devices. Must change to be a contender.

I cant really see Chrome or Android taking over the desktop/corporate sector TBH.

But what with Google and Valve both pushing Linux we are already seeing improved driver support, and really (imho) all it needs from then on is a company to do what Google done with Android.

Valve isn't there yet, but is heading in the right direction to replace Windows for gaming, and i would suggest that the corporate sector would like to see cheap replacements for Windows based machines now that Microsoft has decided on faster release cycles.
Nexxo 28th April 2014, 19:36 Quote
Don't get me wrong; I'd love Linux to go mainstream. But Microsoft has a lot of legacy weight in the enterprise sector.
RichCreedy 28th April 2014, 20:00 Quote
Quote:
MS is essentially making updates, which once again are only necessary because their product was defective in the first place, contingent on the user accepting functional changes to the operating system. These aren't just bug fixes or security patches, these are major changes that you are required to consent to in order to keep receiving the support which you paid for when purchasing the operating system.

if you are referring to windows 8 being defective, you are wrong, it is just a user issue, and the changes are to placate naysayers
TheBitterNoob 29th April 2014, 11:36 Quote
i guest i'll just wait how a NT 7.x based os turns out ......probably linux gaming would probably be well supported by then and windows 7 will be eol.
Log in

You are not logged in, please login with your forum account below. If you don't already have an account please register to start contributing.



Discuss in the forums