General Discussions

This.

i'm likely to be using Win7 for a long time to come mostly because i've come to like it and have gotten used to it. i can game and use trainers to my hearts content on it.

and as a matter of habit i don't rush into things. i like to see how they play out over time and then decide.

as someone wise once said: 'don't fix something that's not broken'.

I agree with the Vista analogies. I have no clue as to why MS went for an OS primarily designed for tablets/touchscreens or other mobile platforms when their main target audience for any (full) Windows version is desktops and laptops. If anyone's come across any kind of explanation from MS as to the new direction would you mind sharing a link?

Sure, you can hide the tablet layout for a traditional desktop environment, but it's a cut down version to say the least. In my opinion, any Windows where you have to manually add the start button using a script/workaround isn't Windows at all.

Unfortunately, people will flock to buy it because it's "New", or because it has a higher numerical value than 7, which in turn will give MS huge sales figures, encouraging their idea that this is what people want. Then again, they did turn things around from Vista to 7, so there may be hope for Win 9.

Either way I'll be sticking with Win 7 for the foreseeable future personally. At the very least I can say with complete certainty that I'll never upgrade to 8.

Well the thing that bugs me about it is that you're forced to use the Metro UI regardless of what system you're on. Now if you can turn this off in favor of the classic start menu, this issue would cease to exist. The ViStart application does do this but it only goes so far.

I guess it's me being picky similar to the GNOME 2 to GNOME 3 transfer where I did not like GNOME 3 (it's good but I loved GNOME 2 that much). Fortunately by virtue of that being free software, a group forked the old code and created MATE-Desktop which is essentially GNOME 2's look on modern releases.

Maybe they'll make a good compromise with Windows 9.

[Edited by Neo7, 5/30/2012 7:19:51 AM]

Here's a good read on Win 8, though it's technically an article referencing another article, but I couldn't find the original source with a cursory glance.

Link

The three scenarios is a good point:

I'll put money on scenario 2, personally.

Yea I wouldn't put any money on 3.

The only alternative is Apple products and I'd rather just stick with a messed up Windows OS instead.

If the layout is pretty much the main difference, then I'll be sticking with my current version of Windows for a while longer.

I suppose it does seem a bit odd that Windows 8 is more suited to tablets and whatnot, but it's starting to feel like everyone has a tablet now, and a lot of these people use their tablet more than their computers or laptops, so it's not really surprising that MS is trying to keep up with the times. Not that I'm happy about it, that's for sure. The tablet layout should be secondary, while the PC layout is the primary one.

But like I said, I'll be waiting for a while yet. I'm used to my current system, and it works for me.

I say ya its doomed. Microsoft should have created windows 8 for the tablets/crappy smart phones (android ftw!) and left 7 for desktops. Win 7 has just started to get old xp users to finally cave in within the past 12 or 13 months. So the idea of another os already is ludicrous. If they want a way to make money off the desktop they could just sell acutally decent products.

Just my $.02

dssas

Yeah, but sticking with Windows 7 is what #2 is about, which is why it's the most likely. Similar to people sticking with XP instead of upgrading to Vista. Windows 7 is an example of a great OS. Vista and Windows 8... well, to put it politely, not so much.

Scenario 1 is the one you don't want to put any money on.