Windows 8 - Deeper Impressions

[TELVM]

Are there "Metro versions" of ... Pale Moon ... ?

BLASPHEMY !!!!

[JorgeA]

If Windows 8.1 does not detect a touchscreen input on your device, it'll boot directly to the desktop to keep keyboard-and-mouse types away from the finger-friendly Live Tiles. The operating system then tosses up this new tutorial prompt to tell you how to find the Metro Start screen.

If this works as advertised, it'll be a halfway step toward the type of choice-of-UI concept that we've been calling for (where the user could decide which UI or UIs, Metro and/or Desktop, to install on his machine).

--JorgeA

Windows 8 = windows 1

windows 8.1 = windows 3

windows 8.1 u1 = windows Chicago build?

Its fun watching Microsoft trying to reinvent the 95 UI. At the pace their going to reinvent in time for windows 9.

LOL

The funny (or sad) thing is, even the Windows 95 UI was superior to that of Windows 8. No Aero Glass, but it did have a proper Start Button and Start Menu, and it even had 3D buttons so that you could tell at a glance what was clickable and what wasn't. Heck, even Windows 3.1 had 3D buttons.

--JorgeA

[JorgeA]

For the benefit of american friends who might be wondering WTF is Jaclaz talking about :

Thanks TELVM, that was in fact helpful.

Looking at the picture of that ridiculously tiny put-put next to the humongous bus, I'm not surprised it didn't make it in the auto marketplace. Imagine being in one of those go-carts with a semi truck coming up behind you on the highway... The trucker might not even notice anything out of the ordinary as you get turned into pizza.

--JorgeA

[JorgeA]

Six clicks: What we think we know about Windows 9

Things aren't looking real promising right now. Check out the text for Image 6:

Windows 9 will *not* do away with the Metro design language or the tiled Metro interface/start screen.

Metro haters: Windows 9 is not your savior. Windows 9 is still expected to feature the Metro-Style/tiled Start Screen that Microsoft first introduced with Windows 8.

According to Windows SuperSite Editor Paul Thurrott's sources, Windows 9 will feature an updated 2.0 version of the Metro design language.

Let Metro stay in the codebase. Unless Windows 9 offers a way to banish Metro totally, utterly, and completely from the user's consciousness, I'm thinking that after Win7 I will be moving on to Linux.

--JorgeA

Edited March 17, 2014 by JorgeA

[JorgeA]

OneDrive trademark whoops:

https://one.ubuntu.com/

Sync & 5GB storage free

Keep your content safe, access it anywhere, and share it with friends, family and colleagues. Spread the word and earn up to 20GB extra free cloud storage with our referral program.

http://www.one.com/en/

Access your files anytime... anywhere with Cloud Drive

Sync, backup, share and access your files and folders from multiple places on your PC, Mac and your mobile devices. If your laptop breaks down or your phone goes for a swim, no matter what happens your files are safe with One.com Cloud Drive.

Wonder what these companies' lawyers will have to say about the newly rebranded OneDrive...

--JorgeA

[Flasche]

Six clicks: What we think we know about Windows 9

Things aren't looking real promising right now. Check out the text for Image 6:

Windows 9 will *not* do away with the Metro design language or the tiled Metro interface/start screen.

Metro haters: Windows 9 is not your savior. Windows 9 is still expected to feature the Metro-Style/tiled Start Screen that Microsoft first introduced with Windows 8.

According to Windows SuperSite Editor Paul Thurrott's sources, Windows 9 will feature an updated 2.0 version of the Metro design language.

Let Metro stay in the codebase. Unless Windows 9 offers a way to banish Metro totally, utterly, and completely from the user's consciousness, I'm thinking that after Win7 I will be moving on to Linux.

--JorgeA

Well then you got six year, and I will be joining you. I'm sick of anything that has to do with windows 8. It was the worst operating system I have ever used.

[bpalone]

Six clicks: What we think we know about Windows 9

Things aren't looking real promising right now. Check out the text for Image 6:

Windows 9 will *not* do away with the Metro design language or the tiled Metro interface/start screen.

Metro haters: Windows 9 is not your savior. Windows 9 is still expected to feature the Metro-Style/tiled Start Screen that Microsoft first introduced with Windows 8.

According to Windows SuperSite Editor Paul Thurrott's sources, Windows 9 will feature an updated 2.0 version of the Metro design language.

Let Metro stay in the codebase. Unless Windows 9 offers a way to banish Metro totally, utterly, and completely from the user's consciousness, I'm thinking that after Win7 I will be moving on to Linux.

--JorgeA

More from the article:

There's a good chance Windows 9 will be where and when Microsoft makes available a single, common Windows Store for apps for all three Windows platforms.

The emphasis is mine. I think it was in this thread where I made my comment about where they were headed with UEFI and it appears that this may be conformation of my fears. They want to have TOTAL CONTROL of the system and have total control over your data, nothing is yours anymore. It all belongs to the collective. Kinda reminds me of the old bumper sticker:

"We are Microsoft, you will assimilate, resistance is futile."

And more fine points:

Word is there could be three primary SKUs: A "modern" consumer SKU; a traditional/PC SKU; and a traditional enterprise SKU.

The modern SKU would be focused on delivering WinRT apps. This SKU may be available for both ARM- and Intel-based devices, but wouldn't be optimized to run Desktop/Win32 apps. A more traditional consumer SKU would include the Desktop and be updated through the Windows Store, like Windows 8 is now. A traditional Enterprise SKU would support Win 32 apps and have all the usual bells and whistles. It may be for volume licensees only.

Again my emphasis. Almost sounds like JorgeA is going to be practicing his Penguin waddle. Almost makes me wonder what is in the water cooler in Redmond. They all probably think that everyone has a high speed internet connection, oh wait, that is what they think isn't it? I think the Xbox One was built upon that premise.

Better get off my soap box.

bpalone

Edited March 18, 2014 by bpalone

[bpalone]

For no real reason other than I think most of us can relate to the little fellow in the image linked to.

http://jwenet.net/notebook/1337/1023.html

bpalone

[Tripredacus]

And more fine points:

Word is there could be three primary SKUs: A "modern" consumer SKU; a traditional/PC SKU; and a traditional enterprise SKU.

The modern SKU would be focused on delivering WinRT apps. This SKU may be available for both ARM- and Intel-based devices, but wouldn't be optimized to run Desktop/Win32 apps. A more traditional consumer SKU would include the Desktop and be updated through the Windows Store, like Windows 8 is now. A traditional Enterprise SKU would support Win 32 apps and have all the usual bells and whistles. It may be for volume licensees only.

I'd like to highlight something else. We all know MS's original plans never truly worked out because the market rejected them while in process or after the fact. It isn't just the who Metro interface. We knew back when Windows 8 was only rumbled as being Windows Next that there was not supposed to be a 32bit version. The original plan was to have a 64bit, 128bit and ARM versions. This is the entire reason why 32bit Vista and 7 was never made to work properly (or be supported) on UEFI 2.3.1 firmware. Windows 8 32bit, however, was made to work and is supported.

Getting people to drop 32bit is nearly a success, because compared to previous offerings (XP) WOW compatibility is pretty good in Windows Vista and 7. There are only three types of customers that wish to hold onto 32bit:

1. They need to run legacy (16-bit) applications.

2. They need to run legacy (32-bit) applications that do not work properly on WOW.

3. They are afraid of the name due to past issues with XP. I often see this similar thing when trying to steer clients to using an Embedded SKU. They won't because they remember having a tough time with XP Embedded.

Plus, we can pretty much agree that no one would be buying 128-bit Windows. You could probably say the current 32/64 sales ratio is 25/75%. If the only options would be 64/128bit, the ratio would likely be 99.99999/0.00001% with a large volume decrease. Also consider the current Downgrade cycle, if those OSes were made available, you could only downgrade on the 64-bit SKU.

Alright enough of that.

So when Windows 8 came out the idea of the "future" was the same. The difference was that 32bit replaced 128bit. Since MS came out wanting to make their own product with the Surface, they initiated an exclusive program to only make the RT OS available to select tablet manufacturers. You can probably remember the stories from around GA about how MS doesn't care about the OEMs and they are hurting them, OEMs rebelling, etc. There's more to that, but it was more people complaining about this exclusive deal in which MS was showing favoritism to certain OD/EMs. It was only supposed to be a year (from GA or RTM, I forget) and then RT was going to be available for anyone to make devices. That didn't happen. Its like the whole wrap-around Taskbar that was talked about at BUILD that you never heard from again.

So I am just saying that it could be that MS is going to get WindowsRT out of the exclusive deal and you can potentially see some competition on the market. That is just a guess (or a hope) as I've seen nothing to show that deal is going away.

bpalone, you can have your soap box back now.

[bpalone]

bpalone, you can have your soap box back now.

Thank you, I will.

You highlighted one issue I noticed as well, and that was the RT or Arm branch. I mentioned some time back on this thread, that we may be watching the conversion from one platform to another. Arm owns the mobile market and is making inroads in other areas. I agree that it does appear that they are taking away the 32 bit option. Now to my issues, or concerns if you will:

1.) Who REALLY needs 4, 6, 8 or more cores? I mean really need, not just want because it is cool. Some sever centers and a handful of professionals in specific fields.

2.) Who REALLY needs 6, 8, 16 gigs of ram? Again some server centers and a handful of professionals.

3.) Who REALLY needs 2, 4, 6 Terabytes of hard drive storage? As above again.

Now on the storage front I will concede that with all of our creation of digital content, such as MP3s, pictures, and videos, we have a larger appetite for storage than we used to. But, a normal contract, business letter, term paper or whatever still takes pretty much the same space as it did a few years ago, unless of course you have moved to one of the NEW and IMPROVED file formats. Same thing for most spreadsheets, however some of those have become monsters in and of themselves.

With the above in mind, I have to come to the conclusion that there really isn't much reason or justification for moving to 64 bit or 128 bit. I did agree that the moves from 8 bit to 16 bit and 32 bit were all improvements. But, there just isn't quite as much of a compelling reason to make the move to 64 and beyond. For an analogy, there were a lot of compelling reasons to move from VHS tapes to DVDs, but not as much to move from DVD to Blueray.

Now, backing off and looking at the moves Microsoft is making, it appears to look a great deal like a livestock working corral. They keep crowding us forward into a narrower and narrower alley way, until there is no option but to follow in single file to where they want you.

I relinquish the soap box back.

bpalone

[Tripredacus]

1.) Who REALLY needs 4, 6, 8 or more cores? I mean really need, not just want because it is cool. Some sever centers and a handful of professionals in specific fields.

I'm sure there is *something* that can make use of this. I currently have a notebook here that you can put 2x 8 core Xeon CPUs in and it supports hyperthreading. What kind of notebook needs 32 cores?

[jaclaz]

Now on the storage front I will concede that with all of our creation of digital content, such as MP3s, pictures, and videos, we have a larger appetite for storage than we used to.

Allow me to correct you on this point.

"with all the contents that, mostly, SOMEONE ELSE created and that we took the habit of storing locally on hard disk, after having - largely - got them through far from kosher methods"....

Seriously , our hard disks are cluttered of senselessly large files we never used or used/viewed/listened to just once.

Once upon a time you had printed photographs.

On average you had one good shot every 72 prints.

Then came slides, raise your hand anyone old enough to have endured a post-dinner vacation slides show and failed to sleep through 1/3 to 3/4 of it.

The ratio "decent image" to shots was still around 1/72 (but, at the cost of a slide projector and screen, we saved thousands of bucks of prints).

Now we have digital photography.

The ratio 1/72 has fallen to a mere 1/144 or 1/288 as - since it costs nothing to make a shot, and you have a camera with you *at any time* as it comes with your phone or tablet, you shoot an incredible number of pictures.

A few years ago, you were tricked (like everyone else) into buying a "high resolution" photographic inkjet printer, and it took you all of a few months to understand how you had only two choices, either continue buying inkjet cartridges and photographic paper (which, after several hours of work and at the 5th or 8th attempt produced an almost decently looking print) or continue paying your house mortgage.

So you stopped printing even that 1/288 picture if not on the office (colour) laserjet (and on common paper, which sucks) or started sending photos to printing services.

Still, you have n sets made of the 287 images that really suck, and that clutter your hard disk.

Exactly the same goes for movies, those Super 8 movies (with the rare exception - because of their emotional value, NOT for their visual one - of your toddler(s) playing in a sunny day ) sucked (and sucked big).

The videos you make today also suck big, come on, admit it.

Still, you have n home made movies on disk, of which only a handful have any relevance.

But all the above is a fraction of what fills your hard disk, which is mainly, downloaded videos or movies (and/or n versions of Linux distros or senselessly large programs that you tried only once in a VM and that became obsolete the sheer moment you downloaded it, having been instantly replaced by the updated version).

The videos (youtube like) are mostly senseless and will never be viewed again (if and when you will want to view one, you won't be able to find it).

The movies (your collection of movies, the one that replaces that whole section in your library where you used to keep your collection or videotapes and now host improbable new designer's art) are - just as it was originally your collection of video tapes - the reason why you argue with your partner for two hours after dinner about WHICH movie you are going to watch (and never watch because in the meantime it's late).

Then there is music.

Your iPod (or Mp3 player, or - again - phone) already contains more music than what you will ever be able to listen to in a lifetime (and anyway you only listen to more or less, 100 to 200 titles at the most).

Yet you continue to download songs and saving them on hard disk.

Then there is p0rn, which actually is quite repetitive and/or "narrow in scope", yet you have n movies all more or less revolving around the same topic, and seen from the same "angle":

Finally, there are Windows Updates, which take what little space is left.

The content you actually generated/created is a very little amount when compared to the rest, and it's quality is most probably so low that the good MS guys are doing whatever in their power to prevent you from creating more , and seen in this light they may not be entirely wrong .

jaclaz

Edited March 18, 2014 by jaclaz

[JorgeA]

Mozilla scraps Firefox for Windows 8′s Metro citing low adoption of the platform

Well, it looks like all that is left is the Wake.

Here's a concurring opinion:

Mozilla's Metro move shows that modern apps belong in the mortuary

[...]For such a big player to completely drop support for a particular platform should be seen as what it is -- a terrible blow for Microsoft. Users may bemoan the fact that they're extremely unlikely to see a modern-friendly version of Firefox, but it is Microsoft that should be licking its wounds. After more than a year of work and investment, Mozilla sees it as a better option to simply walk away "than the real costs of investment in a platform our users have shown little sign of adopting".

The problem with modern apps is that they are pale imitations of their desktop siblings. Users have become accustomed to being able to tinker with software, getting right under the hood and changing every setting imaginable. This is simply not possible with modern apps. Modern apps are watered down shadows of their former selves. They are an embarrassment to the world of software. It's time to consign them to the digital graveyard.

--JorgeA

[JorgeA]

What's good for the goose...:

With Credit Card Data in Play, Who Hacks the Hackers?

Not even hackers are immune to hacking.

Websites that were used to sell credit card data stolen in the massive holiday data breach at Target Corp. were themselves shut down by unknown culprits Monday.

“Hi subhumans and miscreants, your fraud site is gone now. Go away,” reads the first line of a message posted on rescator.so and rescator.cm, two sites are used as clearinghouses for troves of credit card data stolen from retailers like Target, Neiman Marcus and Sally Beauty Holdings Inc. in recent months. (Warning: some rough language can also be found at those links).

--JorgeA

[Tripredacus]

I'll just leave this right here...