Dev.SN ♥ developers
Sections
Dev.SN
CowboyTeal writes:
"Windows 8 is still being disputed as either the product of a genius or a nerdy sadist but that doesn't mean Windows 9 isn't in the works. That said, how would you guys improve Windows if you could change anything about it? Has windows 8 improved or degraded your overall experience of the Windows platform? If you're not a Windows user, what features would you like to see in Windows for possible assimilation?"
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
How Would You Change Windows 9?
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 1000 moderator points
| 124 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
I'm not a robot like you. I don't like having disks crammed into me... unless they're Oreos, and then only in the mouth.
-- Fry
(Score: 1) by elgrantrolo on Sunday March 02 2014, @08:37AM
I'll try to be less harsh than you were in your critique of MS/Windows 8. I may not succeed :)
Here's the way I see it: the number of people in your generation of PC users is dwindling and even now is dwarfed by the new generation. For the new generation, a "desktop" is not a useful UI metaphor in the same way that a floppy disk does not represent "saving" anything.
Mass market surveys tell us that as of 2013/14 people use their smartphones while having sex, while eating and while sitting in the loo. I don't know what could make it more obvious for the people of the "file manager" generation for them to understand that PC, as in "personal computer", MUST include more than the laptop and mini tower form factor.
In the same way that the power user minority did not stop the PC industry from moving from matte 4:3 screens to 16:9 glossy screens, they will not be the reason to reject the incremental cost of adding a touch screen to the majority of PCs.
When Microsoft rebuilt the Windows UI with Metro, they realigned their main product with where they think the market will be from now on. It's risky like any other change or innovation. It was criticised in the same way that the previous generations of Windows were: clunky, resource draining, change-for-the-sake-of-change. It was just more obvious now that PCs are for billions of users, rather than for people in computer labs. On the subject of Metro and MS not being good at tablets: For applications built in the olde ways of WIMP, there is still a desktop mode. Those applications will still have plenty of "advanced settings" to play with and will remain the domain of keyboard+mouse. At the same time, there will be more applications built for metro, with larger buttons for touchscreen users, with only a subset of the traditional UI clutter. Standard mouse and touchscreen gestures will become as familiar as pressing ALT-F4 or ALT-TAB. These things were never intuitive, what they did was become familiar.
Anyone expecting MS to drop Windows RT should also see that this is to miss out on the opportunity to have a big pool of unofficial testers for any ARM version of Windows. It would be a bad move.
Anyone thinking that MS should drop the consumer market should also notice that the consumer and the enterprise market influence each other. BYOD, the defunct Apple Computer inc. traditionally selling to niches except when it comes to schools are just 2 examples.
Buyers will always moan about things changing. MS and the other players in this market can't have analysis-paralysis every time that happens. The old PC is dead, just move on.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by gishzida on Sunday March 02 2014, @09:30AM
What is the advantage to a content creator to have something that is not useful [other than to push up the price] What is the value added to pay an extra $200 for something that is not needed? [no killer apps in MS app space... all of the innovative "creative performance" apps stuff is iPad / iOS based]. The Dual Xeon Quad Core workstation on my desk is not a tablet and I don't use it for tablet like things.
In addition to the desktops I have quite a few tablet / smart phones... all of them running Android. Why just android? Cost. Features. Design.... and innovation. I have not bought into the Apple mystique as I don't particularly like the garden they are keeping.
MS is playing a catch-up game and so far it keeps stumbling... Vista... then Win 8.0. I am not sold on the idea that MS can actually pull of a transformation to an "Apple clone". The point is why are they trying to do that? Do they really have their ducks in a row to actually beat Apple and Google? I remain unconvinced that becoming more like Apple helps.
MS might be better off if they focus the Xbox line and make Xbox and RT synonymous... and leave the windows desktop / server / app space a part of the "enterprise space". The problem with their becoming a "hardware company that competes with their OEMs is that it gives the OEM motivation to out innovate MS as Samsung is trying to do to Apple. The net result is that OEMs are breaking their necks to bring out "useful" CromeBooks or Android laptops which undercuts MS in the tablet space.
So back on point... MS needs to actually do something innovative. Buying Nokia does not make Microsoft into Samsung. Sure they can make money... but Nokia has been taking a beating from the Smart Phone vendors and long term is a losing proposition. Forcing a mobile OS UI onto the desktop is unwise and unwarranted... whereas it just might work with an XboxOS set top computer. Or an "XboxBook". Ultimately I don't much care what MS does... except I'd hate to see them continue to stumble... because before long they will take a fall and stay that way... and I will be sad if that happens.
(Score: 2) by bucc5062 on Sunday March 02 2014, @09:41AM
"I'll try to be less harsh than you were in your critique of MS/Windows 8. I may not succeed :)
Here's the way I see it: the number of people in your generation of PC users is dwindling and even now is dwarfed by the new generation. For the new generation, a "desktop" is not a useful UI metaphor in the same way that a floppy disk does not represent "saving" anything."
What's this "your generation" crap. Like old people don't have and use smart phones (aka little PCs). LPCs are great, handy, and lousy to work with in the *work* environment. People may use a LPC during sex, but I really doubt they are using it to perform their day to day business. The working world does not revolve around Android, Apple or whatever touch and play device. Perhaps in 10 years there could be a shift, but for now that desktop is still a mainstay for businesses, Enterprise to small size.
As such, Microsoft's introduction of 8 ()RT) was ill planned and it showed. People who work and use Desktops did not want to change and if they did, found the interface to plain suck. "Your generation" maybe liked it, but only because you don't do actual day to work on it (maybe you do, most don't) and it fit the touch and go or short attention span infecting young minds today.
MS better approach (removing greed which is pure fantasy) would have been to split the UI while keeping the kernel intact. Desktops run 7 and beyond by default, mobile runs RT by default. Just as they did with 95 and NT (though I will accept they were different engines under the hood). MS had the smarts to pull that off, instead, they got greedy and "chose poorly".
The more things change, the more they look the same
(Score: 2) by TheloniousToady on Sunday March 02 2014, @12:45PM
The "and" there really painted an ugly picture in my mind. Still, you're undoubtedly right that somebody's done that.