Report: Windows 9 Being Prepped For April 2015 Launch

Recommended Videos

ATRAYA

New member
Jul 19, 2011
159
0
0
Here's hoping they finally learn that touchscreens only go so far, and are NOT the future of computers. I think MS is trying to eventually herd us all into the virtual workspace, akin to Mass Effect's colourful screens that you flail your arms at, and nobody wants that. I want to move as little as possible, be able to find something without going through a million different menus, and have compatibility with all programs, all the time. Until we're ready to make a LITERAL virtual workspace, where you just put on a pair glasses, stick a cord in your head, and "jack in" to the "net" (or, you know... whatever), let's just stick with the tried and true - keyboard-and-mouse OS's that you DON'T have to mod just for the basic functionalities of the old version.
 

AD-Stu

New member
Oct 13, 2011
1,287
0
0
I've followed the "good" side of the cycle - went from 3.1 to 98 to XP to 7, never had a PC at home running 95, Vista or 8 (though I used the first two on work PCs from time to time, still haven't had any direct contact with Win 8).

Hoping they'll go back to a more conventional interface next time. I won't be in any raging hurry to move from Win 7 anyway, but will no doubt be forced to upgrade eventually.
 

Something Amyss

Aswyng and Amyss
Dec 3, 2008
24,756
0
0
TomWiley said:
as well as the fact that the Mavericks (OSX) was actually marketed by Apple as being "inspired" by their mobile operating system iOS.
Which doesn't change the fact that it's still a separate OS. Far as I can tell, while there are some ideas integrated from the iOS OS (God does that feel redundant), it's still distinct.

What you've argued is that other companies are going the way of the MS OS, which still doesn't fit with Dragonbums' claim that MS was going the way of Apple. Quite the opposite, you're indicating that Apple WILL go the way of the MS OS.
 

Lightknight

Mugwamp Supreme
Nov 26, 2008
4,860
0
0
It's really fairly simple. Microsoft just has to keep improving on the previous Windows OS's without trying to force something down our throats. Win8 made a lot of advances (I really like the server features and the diagnostics of the "client" OS), but they forced a look and feel when all the previous versions allows skins to be used to emulate previous OS's. They overstepped, significantly, in the name of "This is what the future is...". That's bullshit and will hurt them every time. The clients I've remoted into who have Win8 have custom modded their start button back. Most of my clients stick with win7.

It's just really a bad move to try to force clients on something like this. Remote accessing win8 was also a nightmare for that reason. So reliant on touchscreens and hotkeys that it forgets everyone is moving to remote environments and hotkeys usually don't transfer over when you access a remote site.

So, they really just need a marriage of win7 and win8 and we'll be good. Throw in a few other features and security upgrades and we'll be golden.
 

grigjd3

New member
Mar 4, 2011
541
0
0
I ended up using Windows 8.1 at work and I found that it's pretty good. It's certainly no worse than Windows 7, OS X 10.8 or Ubuntu 12.04, all of which I also use at work. There are a number of efficiency gains from the system that were all advertised back in the windows 98 days but weren't really reasonable back then. The system actually does a good job of identifying the libraries I make the most use of and making them easy to access. I would note, however, that I am referring to 8.1. I had to use 8.0 a few times and they had done so much bad to the UI that it felt like they were trying to limit me to using my desktop like a tablet which I just didn't get. I like tablets, but there is a lot that they just can't handle. Why artificially create an environment that is so limited if you don't have to? At any rate, I'll want to wait and see if they're dramatically overhauling things or just making minor tweaks. I'm happy with 7 at home and 8.1 at work.
 

frizzlebyte

New member
Oct 20, 2008
641
0
0
votemarvel said:
Maxtro said:
I've been using Windows 8 since it was in beta and never had an issue with it. Granted I'm a fairly computer savy person so I know how to modify the OS to be usable for me.

I would not recommended it for my mother or grandparents.

Maybe Windows 9 will be more layman friendly.
The biggest irritation for me with Windows 8 was that functions were split between the Metro and classic sides of the OS.

For example managing user accounts. I could create an account in the Metro control panel but to delete it I had to go to the classic version.
I agree. Windows 8 is certainly not the antichrist that lots of people make it out to be, but the split personality is just ridiculous. I never felt like I was "adapting" to Windows 7 coming from Windows XP, but Windows 7 to WIndows 8 (I use both, Win7 desk; Win8 laptop) just feels cludgy.
 

TotalerKrieger

New member
Nov 12, 2011
376
0
0
I recently bought a laptop with Windows 8 installed and was quite surprised to find out that it really is as bad as people claim it to be. I hate the non-optional focus on touchscreens and apps. I really hate the loss of the start button and how f-ing difficult it is to find simple applications. So much control appears to have been taken away (or at least hidden away) from the user. The worst was the amount of time wasted having to constantly switch between the bloody Metro UI and the desktop. Anyway, I nuked the HDD and installed Ubuntu for the first time and am really quite enjoying it. Simple and straightforward.

I'm quite happy with Windows 7 and it looks like it will be the main OS on my desktop for quite some time. However, Ubuntu is a pretty decent substitute. Hopefully things like Steam for Linux will gain some ground in the future.
 

KevinR1990

New member
Apr 10, 2008
20
0
0
Microsoft's whole disaster with Windows 8 reminds me of a similar boondoggle from the military-industrial complex back in the '50s and '60s. For some reason, the US military wanted to replace their submachine guns, battle rifles, light machine guns, and marksman rifles with a single standard service rifle. That rifle was the M14, which was too big to be a submachine gun, too overpowered for a battle rifle, and had too small a magazine to work as a light machine gun. The Pentagon learned the hard way that you need different weapons for those different roles, and so they switched to the M16 as a battle rifle (which had its own problems initially, but which were soon worked out), the M4 as a smaller, lighter carbine (submachine guns being obsolete as military weapons by then), and the M240 and M249 as light machine guns. The M14 was kept around only for the one role it excelled at -- a designated marksman rifle.

Today, you've got a similar situation with the Joint Strike Fighter program, an attempt to design one fighter jet for the Air Force, the Navy, and the Marines. The Air Force needs a jet that can take off from land-based runways, the Navy needs one that can be launched from and land on carriers, and finally, the Marines need a VTOL jump jet to replace their aging Harrier fleet. A single aircraft design had to take all of those needs into account, and the result is the F-35 Lightning II, which is, by all accounts, an utter dog of an aircraft that's badly outclassed by comparable Russian Sukhoi fighters.

Microsoft is in the same trap that the Pentagon was in with the M14 and the JSF. Say what you will about Apple being the trend-focused "hipster" computer company, but they're smart enough to realize that desktops and laptops need a completely different operating system from smartphones and tablets. Even as they've been earning (much-deserved) mockery for their iDevices, they've also been quietly upgrading OS X for over a decade now, doggedly holding onto their version of the Start button, the menu bar. The new iMacs may look sleek and modern, but they maintain continuity with the old UI and software so that longtime users don't have to relearn everything. They love their flashy gadgetry, but they also know that there's a time and a place for it. Someone high up at Microsoft, on the other hand, seems to have played a bit too much Mass Effect or seen Minority Report one too many times, to the point of risking Windows' status as the OS of choice for business and government in order to push technology for technology's sake, regardless of how it actually works. They think that touchscreens are the future, even though there are many cases where the traditional mouse and keyboard is still superior, and so they load down Windows desktops and the Xbox One with useless bloatware in the name of tech fetishism.
 

Darxide

New member
Dec 14, 2009
81
0
0
A-D. said:
That picture is wrong, its missing Win98 Second Edition, Win NT 4.0 and Windows 2000, though the curve would still be correct for the most part
You want every service pack ranked, too?

Come on, even if we included all the fluff it would still be Win95(bad)-Win95 OSR2(goodish)-Win 98(bad)-Win 98 SE(good)

You also cannot count NT (and by extension 2000 because it was just NT with a different name) because they were NOT part of the same line of operating systems. If we include NT then we should also include DOS and Windows CE, and that's just silly.
 

VoidWanderer

New member
Sep 17, 2011
1,551
0
0
sb666 said:
It will be interesting to see if it will follow this cycle.
I was actually going to ask that, but I stuck with Windows XP for a while, especially when Vista came out.
 

Xman490

Doctorate in Danger
May 29, 2010
1,186
0
0
Microsoft might actually be listening to gamers here. Windows 9 could be a fairly cheap, open source OS with stronger capabilities than ever; that would provide serious competition against the Steam machines and the predicted rise of Linux.
Or it might just be Windows 7 with 8's new features. One can dream.
 

Triality

New member
May 9, 2011
134
0
0
I work tech support for internet users (read: old people that bought new windows 8 computers), and it is a nightmare to tell them how to get around. Now Microsoft wants to make me go through this again with an even more inferior product next year?

I stuck with windows xp for almost 8 years. I'm now 2 years into my windows 7.

Dear Microsoft. You are now the triple-A blockbusters of operating system companies. Just stop while you're ahead.
 

lacktheknack

Je suis joined jewels.
Jan 19, 2009
19,305
0
0
SourMilk said:
Kinitawowi said:
It's also got to stop alienating technically savvy users. The Secure Boot / UEFI bullshit is fine for people who have no interest in getting under the hood, but occasionally I need to boot from an Ubuntu Live USB and I shouldn't have to change four different BIOS options to do that, and then change them back afterwards.
You say this as if it's Microsoft's thing. UEFI is going to replace the standalone BIOS and even then, the Steam OS is also pulling this kind of shit.
Yep. In fact, my motherboard's lack of UEFI (I got it less than two years ago, it was one of the last BIOS only motherboards in the store) is the only reason I'm not running SteamOS.

So... I'm going to install it on an external HDD at a friend's house and see if that works.
 

Reed Spacer

That guy with the thing.
Jan 11, 2011
841
0
0
Oh christ...Anyone want to start a betting pool on what they'll fuck up this time?
 

Hairless Mammoth

New member
Jan 23, 2013
1,595
0
0
All they need to do to Win 8 to fix it is bring back the full start menu so businesses and users don't have to waste time relearning a new system, give us an option to start at the desktop on boot up, make that option the default on ALL non-touchscreen computers, and don't get greedy by making it a closed system like what Gabe and other rightly fear they might do. Win 8 is powerful under the hood, but it's like making a sports car and replacing the steering wheel, pedals and shifter with a game controller. (Why do you think there's still a market for $120 steering wheel controllers that only work for systems that gets 5 years of game support.) I use Win 7 but have to mess with my sister's laptop a lot and Win 8 is a pain to work with if I have to go through Metro to change something. Even she uses desktop mode all the time. When a non computer savvy person chooses not to use your new UI you might have failed majorly somewhere, Microsoft.

Dropping the whole Home and Pro editions and going with one with full features could help. If a company is gonna buy a lot of licenses, they would go for enterprise edition for the premium support anyway. I already bought Win 7 Pro retail boxes for both my mother's and my own pcs that I built back when Win 7 was new and they were cheaper than Home Premium on Ebay! There's nothing extra but some domain services, XP mode, and other bells and whistles most people woudn't use but would be a nice extra for people than might decide to bring their laptop to work or school in the future.
KevinR1990 said:
I think you may have made a prediction there, friend. The F-35 program has had so many budget overruns and delays and is flawed since they still are working on variants that undermine the whole point of making one mutli-role fighter. It's estimated it costs more to develop and support all F-35 variants than just developing a new plane for each role. Back to PCs, Microsoft is struggling to sell this horrid beast in a market that is shrinking since the induction of Apple and Android tablets. AND Microsoft has developed a Win 8 that runs on ARM tablets, so you can now buy a Win 8 tablet that can't run the typical x86 Windows programs you use on the desktop. Anyone who doesn't know this is gonna be pissed they bought this $400 brick hoping to use it for more than surfing the web and using Office 365 and now can't run their favorite Windows software because of this.

If they really want to copy Apple and its success, they should copy just what you said about OSX and iOS. Otherwise more and more people are gonna move to Android and Apple for tablets and Linux for desktops, and Apple if they start making a decent sub $600 iMac or sub $400 mac mini. It might be time to start learning bash, everyone.
 

Mad World

Member
Legacy
Sep 18, 2009
795
0
1
Country
Canada
I think that some people just don't like change. Honestly, I use Windows 8.1, and it's fine. Perhaps I am just ignorant of certain functions which I don't use (functions which worked better on 7).

Also, it is MUCH better optimized for running Battlefield 4 than Windows 7.
 

skutbag

New member
Feb 16, 2009
20
0
0
One thing comes to mind when talking about Microsoft making a big, long term gamble on the move towards touchscreen devices - the Xbox

We get the original Xbox in 2001 - first entry into the console race, generally suffered to the more popular PS2, significantly more expensive at retail, and overall MS loses a whole boat load of money. (also notably, Xbox Live turns up in 2002). X360 appears in 2005, plenty of initial fails, a whole UI overhaul, more focus on general entertainment, sells about 4 times more than the original over its life. Now in 2013 we have the XBONE, which - as many people have mentioned - shares a lot of OS with Windows 8.

What we can see from this, whether you think it's a good idea or not, is that MS is perfectly willing to throw money down a hole for decades if they think something will take off in the long run. What will we be saying in 2023 when we *are* using Minority Report/Mass Effect style devices with holographic doodads and all the rest? What about voice control, let alone touch control? I don't know, at the same time it seems we can just be waiting forever for these things to work in a robust way - fusion power, hoverboards...

Having said this I would still rather have my 'does everything' Ubuntu Phone :( We could call it a pho-tab-top
 

Oskuro

New member
Nov 18, 2009
235
0
0
CpT_x_Killsteal said:
I don't really see anything inherently wrong with Windows 8, it's just that it was made for TABLETS and basically told anyone without one to go fuck themselves.
The real problem is the same as with Windows Vista: Microsoft trying to impose their "vision" on their costumers. The details of what their "vision" is really doesn't matter, people want an OS to conform to their needs, not the other way around.


Regarding the Metro interface, I don't think they were wrong in adding it, as more and more laptops now include a touchscreen and tablets are becoming the standard computing device for a lot of people.

The part of Windows 8 I expect them to drop is their attempt at locking-up the market through their Store (mimicking Apple). If Windows 9 is announced to allow anyone to develop and install Metro apps regardless of whether they were bought through the Microsoft Store or not, I foresee it will be accepted.

Oh, and the "lock out your ability to install other OS" crap should go to.


I'll insist for as long as I can: An Operating System is a tool that must meet the expectations of the user. No matter how good your technology is, if you don't meet that basic criteria, your OS is crap, and should be treated as such.

Besides, the niche for people who like to be told to conform to the wishes of the OS/Hardware manufacturer is already cornered by Apple.
 

Kahani

New member
May 25, 2011
926
0
0
Steven Bogos said:
According to a recent Steam hardware and software survey [http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/directx/], just 11.58% of gamers use a version of Windows 8, and 9.17% a version of 8.1, compared to 65.84% still using a version of Windows 7.
You say "just", but that's actually quite a lot of users. Consider how many businesses, and home consumers for that matter, are still using XP. Until recently it was actually the majority, and that's only changing now because there's a rush to upgrade before MS stop supporting it. The fact is, the vast majority of home users never actually buy an OS. They simply take whatever happens to come with a new computer. Businesses are slightly more complicated, but generally stick with whatever they already know works regardless of how much better a replacement might be. If they don't buy a new computer, they don't get a new OS. Windows 8 is only just over a year old, and PCs don't need replacing more than every 5 or 6 years at most. So having 1/5 of Steam users on Win8 doesn't actually say anything meaningful about the OS at all, it simply tells us that people are only upgrading their PC every 5 years or so, and most of those who do simply take the latest Windows OS along with it.
 

PoolCleaningRobot

New member
Mar 18, 2012
1,237
0
0
I bought a touch netbook to experiment with and I figured if I was using Windows 8 then I might as well get a touch screen right? Except there's literally nothing to do with the touch screen. It I have to do any file managing or typical computer stuff I have to be on the desktop which doesn't work so well when the interface is made to be used with a mouse and tiny cursor. I didn't realize how little I used the touch screen until I installed Android 4.3 for x86 on it. Luckily I bought this computer to learn about Linux anyway. After all the pushy Microsoft account and connectivity bullshit, I doubt Windows 9 would be any different. All aboard the Linux train. Credit where credit is due I guess, they seemed to have removed a lot of the bloat and I only use 700 megs of my 2 gigs of ram so it runs smooth. And I like a few of the tweaks. Maybe if they take a lot of steps back and eat their words ("the start menu isn't coming back") and just make a touch version and keyboard and mouse version we'll have less to complain about this time

Colt47 said:
Well, right now I'm running windows 8.1 and it's not nearly as bad as people make it out to be.
Have fun if your computer shits out on you. Windows 8 removed booting to advanced start up options by pressing f8 and 8.1 removed system restore so if your computer gets messed up, all you can do is restore it to its factory state. Assuming you can boot it or made a recovery tools disk that is. I couldn't downgrade back to 8 fast enough