ultameca said:
I wish Microsoft would stand their ground and have no start button in windows 9, Most people who are criticizing windows 8 are miss informed and refuse to try it out, even just for a while, they hate change.
I was one of those users who decided I would give it a spin for a little while and ended up realizing how much better the metro interface is. I added my programs to it, ordered them the way I wanted and installed some metro apps, now my desktop is uncluttered and I don't have to fumble around with an alphabetical list of software any more.
Windows 8.1 is by far the best windows OS I have ever used and I'm a mouse/keyboard power user and have been since windows 3.11.
Yeah i am sure W8 has everything to do with people resisting change. I wonder why people are choosing Android, Apple, Linux or their outdated XP systems over W8. It's pretty easy to walk into a store and walk out dissatisfied because W8 is pretty much the only OS in stores.
Just because you like it doesn't mean everyone else will. Most people don't buy new $800 PC's just to fiddle around with the new OS that happens to be so different unless they were switching platforms. Geez, i use W7 and my desktop is not cluttered and i still get my most often used programs on the start menu. If i need to look for a certain program i'd just type it in the search bar on the start menu. I tried the start screen for awhile. It doesn't offer me anything but a headache. While there is an amount of people who will listen to their tech guy about W8 not being a good OS, those people don't even know that unhooking their USB data drives without removing it from the desktop can cause corruption.
Bottom line is MS could have done a much better job in the beginning with having a start menu and not change everything so their desktop PC doesn't function like a tablet. W7 was word of mouth too, the same with Vista. Did W7 fail because of a few people disliking it? No, it worked because W7 catered to most users and gave them what they wanted. W8x didn't do that and is failing in other areas such as the updates. It's quite funny how people like to use the "people don't like it because they haven't' tried it yet". If the OS was any good to begin with people wouldn't be 'Too scared to use it'. MS prevented a few desktop/laptop hardware companies from putting in an Android OS. Might have saved both the company and Android itself from embarrassment, because Android was designed for touch, not for desktop usage. Yet with the first incarnation of W8, i still prefer to use Android. Desktop UI's should not change just because people are bored with the existing ones. If there's a useful feature in mind like modern apps i would imagine putting those in using the traditional windows format. However MS has ruined their ability to get users on modern apps for the reason that they chose to keep the touch UI instead of removing it and making it a proper desktop UI in place. That is why W8 has not done so well. Not because people refuse to try it because they were told by others.
If Ford released a car that only worked for one day, Ford is going to not gain anything out of selling that car. The same with MS selling W8. If W8 was indeed good, there would not be any or much resistance. I don't see resistance in Android phones or iPads, that took off pretty quickly. People are not that resistant to change, they are resistant to bad technology that doesn't serve a purpose for their needs. Just as much if your software does not work with another WIndows system or how you can't find equivalent software that you use on Windows to work on Linux. That is one reason why XP users will not upgrade to W7 or W8. The other reason is because they don't want to use W8. The same will be for W9 users if MS really chooses to have the same UI look that W8 has. Some might give it a shot especially if their current OS is expiring but again i don't think it will be much unless W7 users really want to get the latest.