Windows 8 is terrible. Free is still too expensive. It's Windows 7 with reduced functionality and an app store. I've been using Windows on my work laptops for the last 4 years because I use the adobe suite, and it's been easier. I've been stuck with Windows 8 on my most recent laptop, and yesterday I finally decided to switch to Ubuntu. Good riddance.
If you don't like Windows that is fine, but with a few check boxes Windows 8 isn't very different that Windows 7. Enable boot-to-desktop, disable hot-corners, set the Start button to take you to apps, change file associations to non-metro apps. Just last week I setup a Windows 8 computer for a co-worker that was using Windows 7 and he hasn't had a single question about it.
Only on the Internet do I see people have these caustic reactions to Windows 8, in the real world but are just slightly annoyed that something changed or they aren't and then they just move on.
Second - I really hope this doesn't happen, as every time I have to use a non-touch Windows 8 machine I end up wanting to throw it at a wall.
More windows 8 machines sounds like my nightmare. The worst part is Windows 7 is actually good, and will run IE 9 and 10 - both decent browsers by MS standards.
Indeed. I'm upgrading my parents from XP to Debian wheezy vs. $$$ for Windows 7 or, now, this possibility of free Windows 8. They're eyes are old enough they need big screens with lots of pixels, which they already own, without touch features (are there even any affordable 24 inch or greater touch screens out there?)
Thirded. Before I refit my main gaming rig (built in 2010, running Windows 7), I'll see what Windows 9 looks like. If it isn't a major improvement over Windows 8, I'll probably get a Mac Pro instead.
"A free version of Windows 8.1? Those M$FT bastards are just trying to make more money!"
-- 90% of responses that will show up here
Anyway, Microsoft definitely needs to do something to eradicate the 29% of desktop users that are still using Windows XP which is a security disaster-waiting-to-happen.
I imagine a lot of machines running XP won't be able to run 8.1. IIRC even the minimum screen resolution of 1366x768 is above the popular old 1280x1024.
It sounds a like this is going to be a gimped money-grab like "Windows 7 Starter edition" (where you can't even change the wallpaper).
Meanwhile, the other two major desktop OSes are completely free. Upgrades too. The notion of paying for the basic software that makes your computer work is quickly becoming outmoded.
I really hate it when people glorify Apple for releasing Mavericks for free. They make money with hardware, not software. OS sales had no impact on their revenue at all, so they made it free and people even think it's because they are such a nice company.
Windows on the other hand is a big deal to MS revenue. Its Apples vs Oranges, no pun intended. Obv. thats a bad situation for MS to be in and they will need to adopt, but please stop thinking Apple did this out of good-will.
I believe that Apple aggressive pricing of the last operating systems (up to the current "free") had much more influence on the decision, together with Ubuntu progress in terms of usability.
Edit: Probably is all off these put together, nowadays most users simply do not expect to pay for an updated OS.
I got a Chromebook for my teenager and one for myself at work for note taking, etc. It's been a win for the kid. At work, it's been a pain in the ass. Google spreadsheets is pretty bad and can't handle many of the spreadsheets I need to deal with on a regular basis. And, gotomeeting doesn't work on the Chromebook, even though they have a new web-based version.
Printing is the Achilles heel, however there are new printers out that have Cloud Print built in.
I use Windows 8 every day at work. It's not that bad as some would have you believe, but I like it less than Windows 7, and every release should be more enjoyable and better. I consider Windows 7 to be the best version of Windows ever. It has a pretty clean windowing UI, it's stable and secure and generally just works.
It's an OS that really appeals to MS's core audience. Why mess with it?
I have my Windows 8 machine set to boot straight to desktop mode, and I have the start menu back; so it's pretty similar to using Windows 7. But every now and then you accidentally open up an app or file in Metro mode, and it's a really disorienting experience when one of my windows is in metro mode and the other is in desktop mode.
The core issue of Windows 8 is that it tries to merge two pretty good UI concepts together, and in the process makes both worse. I like Metro as a tablet and phone UI. I like the Windows 7 UI for desktop computing. It's when you have to use Metro on a desktop or Windows 7 windowing on a tablet that it all goes to hell.
I would suggest that MS end this, and make Windows 9 the best traditional Windows it can. Aim it at businesses and people who want to use the same OS they use at work at home. Focus on networking and cloud support (take OneDrive even further), improving multithreaded support (make it easier for developers to harness 4-12 and more core computers) and improving the file system.
The UI concepts of Windows 7 are pretty good. You can iterate on the UI and add new features like Apple does with OS X, but there is no reason to get away from windowing for desktop computing. It's a conceptual model that works well, particularly for power users and work that benefits from multiple-monitors and multitasking.
Microsoft should then spin off Metro into its own OS without the Windows name, while still using the Windows kernel. This is what Apple does with iOS, and it works very well.
I use OS X at home, and think Mavericks is what MS should be aiming for, not Windows 8. Mavericks is the best desktop OS I've ever used, and, while I really like iOS, I wouldn't want to use iOS on my desktop computer.
the OEMs don't perceive it that way. Acer could have two SKUs. One with the free version at 199 and the non free version at 249. I think a lot will buy the 199 version.
That people are avoiding Windows 8+ is a side affect, it's not the problem. The problem is that developers have been (and are continuing to) fleeing Windows like it's the plague. The solution is to either radically make Windows more developer friendly or open source Windows. At the very least open source XP which you have no interest in supporting. Stick it on GitHub and accept pull requests.
But I thought one of the bullet points of Win8 was that it was more developer friendly.
When you say developer friendly, what do you mean by that? Seems to me you can develop more or less whatever you want in numerous different ways. Are you talking about developing on the core?
As for open sourcing a previous version, there's always something like ReactOS, http://www.reactos.org/.
I dont see why Windows 8 would be any less developer friendly than OSX for example. Of course they have their own platform stuff (and OSX has as well) but you don't need to use it. Even for web development as most people today use vagrant to virtualize their development enviroment, i don't see a difference.
I am actually thinking about going back to windows because i grow worried about the Apple platform lock in and their general direction with OSX/iOS
I hope this doesn't involve intrusive advertising or tracking. Firstly we're all on a slippery path with that one but secondly can you imagine the increased burden of family tech support? When relative X turns up with a $250 windows laptop and wants the ads removed, its going to be painful to explain.
I imagine this will actually cause more harm than good to the brand.
Ever since Vista, every time I run notepad Win calls home to Redmond to let them know I did it(non-intrusive, granted). There are ~ 40 ways Windows phones home to an MS IP when I open something or other these days. They call it 'metrics', I call it none of their business(look how they manipulate the data to say 'most users don't use start menu, anyway'...bwahahaha). TG for 3rd party firewalls, careful what you block...
Just updated Windows 8(#) to 8.1. What a bullshit (still)!
It's not a question of money (free) but of simplifying the experience. It's a bloody mess!
(#) Admittedly I didn't use Windows 8 often (mostly worked with Mountain Lion and Ubuntu 13.04/13.10 however I was a longtime Windows user before (Win98 to 7).
(just saw [this article](http://ignorethecode.net/blog/2014/03/02/windows_8_surface/) on the hn frontpage which describes very well what I meant with bullshit and mess. I kind of like the metro part but as I need the Desktop part... no 'love';)
A few tens of millions of XP users would sure appreciate that, April 8th is fast approaching. MS has extended MSSE updates for XP 'til 6/2015... can't wait to see what they pull out of where next month.
PS: I could have sworn I saw XP workstations running on the ISS while watching NASA archives couple days ago. I do not know how recent the archive footage was...
I could see the benefit being people who have to re-install or want to upgrade from XP/Vista can now do so for free - but wouldn't 9/10 of those people just buy Windows or pirate it anyway?
For non-technical people, is losing Windows XP customers to Linux even an issue for Microsoft?
They do have a good point about combating Chromebooks with a free version of Windows. Will it run efficiently on Chromebook level hardware? The Acer C720 is a Haswell Celeron with 4GB of RAM which should be plenty. I'd be concerned about the OS footprint on the SSD more than anything. 32GB vs 16GB would double the storage cost of the machine.
It would be interesting to see how "free" it will be.
I'm not sure how OSX is accounted, but I suppose it's now defined as upgradable software coming with the hardware, the same way drivers are just software for a device already paid.
Would Windows follow the same way of thinking and be free when bought OEM (as the article hints at) or have a really free tier that anyone could download for any hardware supported ?
It would be nice to have Microsoft let go a lower/barebone tier of windows and focus on a premium version and additional services (unlimited skydrive integration with automatic backups for instance) for profits.
Win8 was an attempt to convert from a desktop interface to a tablet interface. But the thing is, I'm still using a desktop. There's no way you can convince me to use a tablet interface on a desktop, especially when my monitor is not touch enabled. You can offer it to me for free and I would still politely turn you down. I already have Win7 on my current machine and it does everything that I require. Why exactly would I take a step back in interface design when I'm happy right now?
"Guys, I know we've been making around $20 billion a year selling Windows licenses but this guy jmnicolas on Hacker News is suggesting we should give it away".
"That's... brilliant... Why didn't we think of that before?"
Microsoft could quickly sell a Linux version of Exchange or SharePoint even if it's just debugging a Wine version. However, by only selling Windows versions they make more money and increase the Windows ecosystem. Don't forget MS has enough cash on hand to handle huge market shifts so they can focus on maximizing short term profit.
[+] [-] reefoctopus|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] megaman821|12 years ago|reply
If you don't like Windows that is fine, but with a few check boxes Windows 8 isn't very different that Windows 7. Enable boot-to-desktop, disable hot-corners, set the Start button to take you to apps, change file associations to non-metro apps. Just last week I setup a Windows 8 computer for a co-worker that was using Windows 7 and he hasn't had a single question about it.
Only on the Internet do I see people have these caustic reactions to Windows 8, in the real world but are just slightly annoyed that something changed or they aren't and then they just move on.
[+] [-] MattBearman|12 years ago|reply
More windows 8 machines sounds like my nightmare. The worst part is Windows 7 is actually good, and will run IE 9 and 10 - both decent browsers by MS standards.
[+] [-] circa|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] hga|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jackmaney|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] 300bps|12 years ago|reply
http://www.netmarketshare.com/operating-system-market-share....
[+] [-] okasaki|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] gegtik|12 years ago|reply
This links to the Verge which repackaged the original ZDNet article: http://www.zdnet.com/microsofts-monetization-dilemma-bundlin...
[+] [-] Karunamon|12 years ago|reply
Meanwhile, the other two major desktop OSes are completely free. Upgrades too. The notion of paying for the basic software that makes your computer work is quickly becoming outmoded.
[+] [-] kayoone|12 years ago|reply
Windows on the other hand is a big deal to MS revenue. Its Apples vs Oranges, no pun intended. Obv. thats a bad situation for MS to be in and they will need to adopt, but please stop thinking Apple did this out of good-will.
[+] [-] viggity|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jimmaswell|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] forgotAgain|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Kurtz79|12 years ago|reply
Edit: Probably is all off these put together, nowadays most users simply do not expect to pay for an updated OS.
[+] [-] e40|12 years ago|reply
Printing is the Achilles heel, however there are new printers out that have Cloud Print built in.
However, a agree, it is a game changer.
[+] [-] newleaf|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] pwthornton|12 years ago|reply
It's an OS that really appeals to MS's core audience. Why mess with it?
I have my Windows 8 machine set to boot straight to desktop mode, and I have the start menu back; so it's pretty similar to using Windows 7. But every now and then you accidentally open up an app or file in Metro mode, and it's a really disorienting experience when one of my windows is in metro mode and the other is in desktop mode.
The core issue of Windows 8 is that it tries to merge two pretty good UI concepts together, and in the process makes both worse. I like Metro as a tablet and phone UI. I like the Windows 7 UI for desktop computing. It's when you have to use Metro on a desktop or Windows 7 windowing on a tablet that it all goes to hell.
I would suggest that MS end this, and make Windows 9 the best traditional Windows it can. Aim it at businesses and people who want to use the same OS they use at work at home. Focus on networking and cloud support (take OneDrive even further), improving multithreaded support (make it easier for developers to harness 4-12 and more core computers) and improving the file system.
The UI concepts of Windows 7 are pretty good. You can iterate on the UI and add new features like Apple does with OS X, but there is no reason to get away from windowing for desktop computing. It's a conceptual model that works well, particularly for power users and work that benefits from multiple-monitors and multitasking.
Microsoft should then spin off Metro into its own OS without the Windows name, while still using the Windows kernel. This is what Apple does with iOS, and it works very well.
I use OS X at home, and think Mavericks is what MS should be aiming for, not Windows 8. Mavericks is the best desktop OS I've ever used, and, while I really like iOS, I wouldn't want to use iOS on my desktop computer.
[+] [-] Piskvorrr|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] kenjackson|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Touche|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] talmand|12 years ago|reply
When you say developer friendly, what do you mean by that? Seems to me you can develop more or less whatever you want in numerous different ways. Are you talking about developing on the core?
As for open sourcing a previous version, there's always something like ReactOS, http://www.reactos.org/.
[+] [-] kayoone|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] bananas|12 years ago|reply
I imagine this will actually cause more harm than good to the brand.
[+] [-] tunap|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] IE5point5|12 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] chappi42|12 years ago|reply
It's not a question of money (free) but of simplifying the experience. It's a bloody mess!
(#) Admittedly I didn't use Windows 8 often (mostly worked with Mountain Lion and Ubuntu 13.04/13.10 however I was a longtime Windows user before (Win98 to 7).
[+] [-] chappi42|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] shmerl|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] tunap|12 years ago|reply
PS: I could have sworn I saw XP workstations running on the ISS while watching NASA archives couple days ago. I do not know how recent the archive footage was...
[+] [-] bluedino|12 years ago|reply
For non-technical people, is losing Windows XP customers to Linux even an issue for Microsoft?
They do have a good point about combating Chromebooks with a free version of Windows. Will it run efficiently on Chromebook level hardware? The Acer C720 is a Haswell Celeron with 4GB of RAM which should be plenty. I'd be concerned about the OS footprint on the SSD more than anything. 32GB vs 16GB would double the storage cost of the machine.
[+] [-] hrktb|12 years ago|reply
I'm not sure how OSX is accounted, but I suppose it's now defined as upgradable software coming with the hardware, the same way drivers are just software for a device already paid.
Would Windows follow the same way of thinking and be free when bought OEM (as the article hints at) or have a really free tier that anyone could download for any hardware supported ?
It would be nice to have Microsoft let go a lower/barebone tier of windows and focus on a premium version and additional services (unlimited skydrive integration with automatic backups for instance) for profits.
[+] [-] talmand|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jmnicolas|12 years ago|reply
Why don't they give Windows for free ?
[+] [-] chollida1|12 years ago|reply
I think you know the reason, its because they make a shit load of money selling it.
It's not at all clear that they would be better off giving it away for free.
[+] [-] laureny|12 years ago|reply
"Guys, I know we've been making around $20 billion a year selling Windows licenses but this guy jmnicolas on Hacker News is suggesting we should give it away".
"That's... brilliant... Why didn't we think of that before?"
[+] [-] Retric|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] philtar|12 years ago|reply
Here's what I said MSFT should do and it looks like they're on their way:
Have a free version of windows that sends back analytics, displays ads every now and then etc.
The normal version of windows that's for enterprise/government/the rest will get a significant price bump.
I made the mistake of not putting my prediction on the internet before the free version was released. Now we wait for the price bump.
[+] [-] d23|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] corresation|12 years ago|reply
http://www.cnet.com.au/microsoft-eyes-making-desktop-apps-fr...
That's from 2005.
[+] [-] AutoCorrect|12 years ago|reply
Seriously, doesn't this fall under monopoly no-nos?
[+] [-] nsxwolf|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] collyw|12 years ago|reply
http://www.wired.com/business/2013/10/apple-ends-paid-oses/
[+] [-] aroch|12 years ago|reply