Skip to main content

Microsoft Talks a Little More About Windows Blue

Microsoft first acknowledged the existence of Windows Blue back in later March. The company's VP of Corporate Communications, Frank X. Shaw, talked about the next incremental release of Windows 8 on the official Microsoft blog. The reveal wasn't surprising, considering the build had already been leaked and exposed for all to see. Still, it was nice to hear it straight from the horse's mouth. Now, Microsoft is talking about Blue again.

In a Q&A post regarding the first six months of Windows 8, Microsoft's Tami Reller described Windows Blue as part of a broader effort to advance devices and services for Microsoft. She also revealed that the update will be available later this year, will continue on Windows 8's path toward the next generation of PC and incorporate customer feedback.

"It will deliver the latest new innovations across an increasingly broad array of form factors of all sizes, display, battery life and performance, while creating new opportunities for our ecosystem," Reller said. "It will provide more options for businesses, and give consumers more options for work and play. The Windows Blue update is also an opportunity for us to respond to the customer feedback that we’ve been closely listening to since the launch of Windows 8 and Windows RT." 

Unfortunately, Reller offered no information on when we can expect an official version of Windows Blue to be released. In the mean time, why not check out our article on the leaked versions to see what Microsoft has in store for us?

  • shikamaru31789
    Just give us a proper start button and start menu option and it'll sell like hotcakes.
    Reply
  • kawininjazx
    "The Windows Blue update is also an opportunity for us to respond to the customer feedback that we’ve been closely listening to since the launch of Windows 8 and Windows RT"
    Everyone wants the start button, what is wrong with you people.
    Reply
  • lancelot123
    10773489 said:
    ... what is wrong with you people.
    "You people"?! What do you mean by "you people"?!!!
    Reply
  • esrever
    why do people need the start button when the metro screen does the same thing? only difference is it takes up the entire screen.
    Reply
  • henry3
    It may sound stupid to non-Windows 8 adopters but Metro and the new desktop feature as a whole feel significantly more functional and work much better. In retrospect besides the most used applications list which isn't present, the start button is not just useless but annoying in comparison
    Reply
  • ap3x
    Yea, I like many other people where thrown off a bit by the Metro interface until I figured out how to use it. Turns out it is vastly superior to the start button. You can find things allot faster, get information at a glance, switch between applications really fast, and if you want to find a file, folder, setting, document, email, app you name it all you have to do is just type the name click on the result. Works especially well for finding a particular program. Just type the name and it filters out everything else instantly.
    I find that now that I am use to it I am more productive. Is it perfect, no. They need to work on a few things but it works well and makes using my PC faster.
    Reply
  • ssdpro
    henry3 - as someone who uses both Win8 and Win7, Windows 8's start menu just doesn't make sense on a workstation. The "pause to open" functionality is cumbersome and not necessary. On the Start Screen I have to drag to the upper left corner to see open programs. To shutdown I have to drag to the lower right corner and pause to open menus. Why am I waiting when I could just click? Also, flipping back and forth between apps in the Start Screen and apps on the desktop is redundant. There is an IE for Start Screen, IE for desktop. Isn't it just more seamless to have a desktop?
    Then there is performance. Performance of storage is inferior on Windows 8. My PCIe drive and SATA3 SSD's are about 10-15 percent slower in 8.
    I just reinstalled Windows 8 last week and had 1.3GB of updates to run. I counted up functionality vs security updates and it was 950MB functionality and 350MB security. That is a lot of fixing for an OS that is only 6 months old. Fixing is good, but there has to be some degree of proper functionality from the initial release.
    Reply
  • jdwii
    Esrever i'm surrprised to hear you say that unless your being funny since in your discribtion of the new start menu it clearly says what's wrong "it takes up the whole screen"
    Which means lowers multitasking, i'm using windows 8 right now and the first thing i did was download something to fix windows 8, however other people are not so nice i had to put windows 7 on many different PC's because people hated 8 and the best i've heard from someone was they got used to it.
    Reply
  • The masses have spoken they hate the look of Win 8 and metro, regardless if you can tweak it and make it look like 7. Win 8 sucks the sweat off a dead man's nuts so fix it. Until then I'm on 7 64 bit runs great and already fast enough with a Vertex 4 512gb SSD.
    Reply
  • house70
    10773607 said:
    why do people need the start button when the metro screen does the same thing? only difference is it takes up the entire screen.

    You're asking the wrong question.
    Why remove an OPTION from users and IMPOSE something instead?
    Some want Metro interface, some want classic desktop and start button. Give the OPTION to choose and you've satisfied both camps, doubling sales as a direct result. You'll have plenty of time to see if/how fast the new interface catches on, and even more time to make it exclusive when the number of Start button users becomes irrelevant.
    Reply