What is the point of Windows now ?

[Tom]

Ok, yes, Windows comes with almost every pc sold, but aside from that fact, why do we need it ?

From a consumer's pov, I'm not seeing a whole lot I need Windows for, except that it is the platform for pc games.

But.. Microsoft seems to want me to buy an xbox for gaming, and wants to turn pc gaming into the same thing I get on an xbox..is that accurate ? Isn't that direction making pc gaming less compelling, and the the need for Windows less important ?

I've been around a long time, I've always used Windows and have used every new version..but I'm just wondering if laptops start coming with Android, or if Linux latpops become more prevalent, is there any point in buying Windows anymore ?

 

[Nothinman]

For a lot of us, there is no point to Windows besides having to support clients that use it. I've been running Linux at home for years now without any problems.

The other two big reasons are complacency (people fear change) and PC games, as you mentioned. Other than those I can't think of a single reason someone would want Windows, let alone need it.

 

[Dominato3r]

I don't think you need it, but the ubiquity of the platform makes it easy to pick up. It's been consistent in terms of UI (at least until 7) and its a safe way for a lot of people to use a computer. If I go to someones home, chances are they'll have a Windows PC. If they have an issue, I can fix it, if they have software, I can use it, If we need to share things, its pretty dead simple. And for a lot of people the Mac isn't an alternative because they might want want big, small, powerful, less powerful, touchscreen, or pen enabled.

And like you said, software too. There's a million applications written for Windows, and that's also what makes it useful. It's a big reason why the iPad sells as much as it does. And no they are not trying to screw over PC gaming. It's the same its always been. The only difference is that they've got a store now where you'll be able to buy more "casual" games.

 

[Nothinman]

I don't think you need it, but the ubiquity of the platform makes it easy to pick up. It's been consistent in terms of UI (at least until 7) and its a safe way for a lot of people to use a computer. If I go to someones home, chances are they'll have a Windows PC. If they have an issue, I can fix it, if they have software, I can use it, If we need to share things, its pretty dead simple. And for a lot of people the Mac isn't an alternative because they might want want big, small, powerful, less powerful, touchscreen, or pen enabled.

And like you said, software too. There's a million applications written for Windows, and that's also what makes it useful. It's a big reason why the iPad sells as much as it does. And no they are not trying to screw over PC gaming. It's the same its always been. The only difference is that they've got a store now where you'll be able to buy more "casual" games.

Version by version, Windows has probably been the least consistent in the UI department. Win 3.11 program manager, Win95, Vista and now Win8 are all significant changes to how programs are managed and started. Then on top of that the little things they rename, move around, etc between versions can be even more frustrating.

Software is becoming less and less of an issue as more places are pushing web apps. Sure, some things will almost always be local like 3D CAD/rendering, etc. But the vast majority of apps can easily be run from within a browser. I'm not really a fan of it, but that's how things are moving.

 

[BonzaiDuck]

Just to throw in here . . . When I jumped on (what I would call then ) the "microcomputer bandwagon" back in 1983, it was for "serious reasons." Solve multivariate optimization models; do two-stage least-squares regression; Box-Jenkins Time Series analysis, etc. etc.

Soon, the market and the industry took the direction of mass-consumer and office demand: word-processing, accounting apps . . . networking and internet, e-mail, etc. I thought games were a joke in those days and a waste of time, but I already had students preparing themselves to work for game-design software houses.

I've invested very little in "mobile" hardware. But now I see all these "beam-me-up-scotty" devices: cell-phone tablet hybrids, I-pads, "smart-phones," and so on. The market moves toward what the mass-consumer wants, uses and needs.

I was talking to my car-mechanic the other day. It's his shop; he employs maybe five people; they've computerized all the essentials in the office with simple ethernet and web-access. He needs a third desktop machine. They're still using Prescott and Northwood P4's with Win-7 32-bit OS's.

For office purposes, the desktop isn't going to simply evaporate on us very soon. For MicroSoft, whether dominant firm or monopolist, it will still be a mainstay for that broad "serious" market. I just don't know how, when, where things will change beyond that. But -- mark my word -- they will . . . . eventually.

 

[Mem]

Ok, yes, Windows comes with almost every pc sold, but aside from that fact, why do we need it ?

From a consumer's pov, I'm not seeing a whole lot I need Windows for, except that it is the platform for pc games.

But.. Microsoft seems to want me to buy an xbox for gaming, and wants to turn pc gaming into the same thing I get on an xbox..is that accurate ? Isn't that direction making pc gaming less compelling, and the the need for Windows less important ?

I've been around a long time, I've always used Windows and have used every new version..but I'm just wondering if laptops start coming with Android, or if Linux latpops become more prevalent, is there any point in buying Windows anymore ?

I only use Windows for PC gaming (I've no interest in Xbox etc..)and browsing,I've Linux on my other PC and also android smartphone.
I know some people that have never heard of Linux and only know Windows.

A lot of colleges,offices/business still use Windows.
Windows still has lot of life left especially since it has a huge data/customer base etc..not to mention all the software that's available.

 

[BrightCandle]

The sheer volume of compatible software still makes Windows the singularly most useful desktop operating system on the planet. Mac OS X isn't even at 10% of that market and unix is no where at all. While some users have switched to the Linux many still use Windows as a reliable dependable work horse.

5 months ago I was doing a serious dev project and was provided with a Mac. I had major problems setting VPN, doing Virtual machines and many other what should be obviously solved problems. That compatibility is worth a lot. Incidentally Ubuntu also gave me those things out of the box, but its not exactly good for doing web development if your client base is mostly on Windows.

 

[dguy6789]

On the contrary having used OS X and Ubuntu I can't see why I would deliberately choose them over Windows 7 or 8. They do nothing at all Windows doesn't do while also not being able to do many things that Windows does.

 

[hhhd1]

At the time of windows vista, many people, including myself, started to seriously play with ubuntu, and use it as a main OS, I believe that this new windows 8 is going to result in a similar move toward some linux OS, this time I think its going to be a stronger move, because linux has became more mature, and also windows XP is expected to end support soon.

I am waiting for when Windows 8 start shipping with new laptops, the first reaction of the average old windows users are going to be interesting.

 

[lxskllr]

On the contrary having used OS X and Ubuntu I can't see why I would deliberately choose them over Windows 7 or 8. They do nothing at all Windows doesn't do while also not being able to do many things that Windows does.

GNU/Linux gives you freedom. You don't get that with Windows or OSX. There's no artificial limitations, only technical. You can install it on anything you want, and change it if you like. You never have to ask permission, and no entity can change your software without your approval.

If Debian cost money, I'd pay at least as much as Windows to not use Windows. I've often thought about what the ceiling would be, and I've never quite decided. I'm pretty comfortable saying I'd pay $120 for Debian if Windows cost $100 though.

 

[Anteaus]

I am waiting for when Windows 8 start shipping with new laptops, the first reaction of the average old windows users are going to be interesting.

I'm curious also. I think the first few batches are going to be as expected (some people bulking, some people fine with it) but its the late year and next year laptops with the touch screens I'm really interested in. People tend to only think of tablets having touch screens, but in fact it won't be long till desktops and notebooks will also have touch screens. Lenovo is already releasing one.

http://www.lenovo.com/products/us/desktop/ideacentre/

 

[Nothinman]

On the contrary having used OS X and Ubuntu I can't see why I would deliberately choose them over Windows 7 or 8. They do nothing at all Windows doesn't do while also not being able to do many things that Windows does.

Besides games, I can't think of a single thing that Windows does that Linux can't.

 

[Anteaus]

GNU/Linux gives you freedom. You don't get that with Windows or OSX. There's no artificial limitations, only technical. You can install it on anything you want, and change it if you like. You never have to ask permission, and no entity can change your software without your approval.

If Debian cost money, I'd pay at least as much as Windows to not use Windows. I've often thought about what the ceiling would be, and I've never quite decided. I'm pretty comfortable saying I'd pay $120 for Debian if Windows cost $100 though.

I agree with everything you said. The caveat being that Linux requires a certain level of knowledge to use it properly, which most average users lack. Distros like Ubuntu try to help smooth the transition, but what ends up happening is that the first time someone has a problem or tries to use software that doesn't come preinstalled there is a sudden realization that they are out of their depth and run back to Windows. I've seen it a hundred times. Say what you want about Windows, it's still a better choice for the average person....even with the constraints you mentioned.

I think many Windows users are capable of making the transition but its a hard sell. Apple users are another story. Many of them consider Windows to be the wilderness in terms of a controlled computing environments....could you imagine dropping them into Debian? Many of them already think right clicking is barbaric

 

[HeXen]

2 words. Commercial Software

 

[lxskllr]

I agree with everything you said. The caveat being that Linux requires a certain level of knowledge to use it properly, which most average users lack.

I don't know. I think most of the gotchas are hardware related, and whether it's supported well or not. That doesn't change the reality of course, but with all things being equal, I think most would get on fine with GNU/Linux.

 

[Nothinman]

2 words. Commercial Software

How about trying some meaningful words? I'm using VMware Workstation right now which, if I'm not mistaken, is indeed commercial software.

 

[DnetMHZ]

On the contrary having used OS X and Ubuntu I can't see why I would deliberately choose them over Windows 7 or 8. They do nothing at all Windows doesn't do while also not being able to do many things that Windows does.

Try viewing or creating a PDF file in Windows without 3rd party software

 

[ViRGE]

Personally I've used Linux off and on for years, and in the last year I've likely kicked the habit for good. Linux is a fantastic server OS, but at the same time Desktop Linux has always felt and acted like it was created as a side project by those same server nerds. The poor UI (polish is everything), the lack of long-term support for both the OS and software, and the inability to use newer hardware with older OSes has become a great turnoff to me.

As it stands the only practical options for consumer desktop PC OSes are Windows and Linux, and of those only the former is commercially viable. Until someone sits down and decides to spend a billion dollars on tearing up Linux and rebuilding it in a form suitable for desktop use - which is basically what Google did with Android - we're still going to be using Windows because it's the winner by default. All that 15 years of half-assed development has produced is a half-assed desktop operating system.

GNU/Linux gives you freedom.

This gets directly into a philosophical debate, but software freedom is overrated, IMHO. I sometimes dink around with open source software in my spare time, but the OS itself being free (libre) has never been helpful. If anything that kind of freedom has gotten in the way of things like binary driver blobs, which have been far more helpful to me.

 

[lxskllr]

This gets directly into a philosophical debate, but software freedom is overrated, IMHO. I sometimes dink around with open source software in my spare time, but the OS itself being free (libre) has never been helpful. If anything that kind of freedom has gotten in the way of things like binary driver blobs, which have been far more helpful to me.

Binary blobs are convenient, not helpful. Helpful would be opening the code so libre drivers don't suck ;^)

Nothing is more important than freedom. You can't know what the software is doing if you don't have the code, and you can't make it do what you want. years ago I used to program calculators I used for work. I was able to take software that didn't do what I wanted, and made it conform to /my/ needs. That would have been impossible if it had obfuscated code. It wasn't as good as it could have been, because it wasn't libre software. While I could use the changes I made, it would have been questionable for me to distribute the changes outside of the company. Still though, I at least derived benefit from it, and was in a much better position than if I didn't have the code. I even fixed a critical bug in the software. It wasn't especially difficult, but since these came on ROM cards, and weren't centrally patchable, we'd have to wait for the company to ship a new ROM, assuming they even chose to.

Anyway, the greater point is freedom isn't always easy, just like life. But it's always better. My master could completely lay my day out for me. Tell me when to get up, when to go to work, when to eat, when to use the restroom, when to exercise... Couldn't be easier right? I don't have to do any thinking on my own, and my day's planned out. Since brother's always watching, it also makes me secure. The other choice would be making my own decisions, and doing what I felt was best during the day. I wouldn't have the /benefit/ of brother's secure gaze, or be able to use some of the things master setup to make life convenient, but I think I can live with that.

 

[Nothinman]

and the inability to use newer hardware with older OSes has become a great turnoff to me.

The distro itself may not update the kernel long enough for you, but it's not terribly difficult to do if you really need it. And I think the main point is that there's not much effort put into backporting support because the software is free and new releases are put out so often so there's no reason not to keep up.

This gets directly into a philosophical debate, but software freedom is overrated, IMHO. I sometimes dink around with open source software in my spare time, but the OS itself being free (libre) has never been helpful. If anything that kind of freedom has gotten in the way of things like binary driver blobs, which have been far more helpful to me.

No, the non-free binary blobs are what's getting in the way, not vice versa. You may not use the source daily, but someone out there does and the reason Linux is used by everything from phones to the top 10 super computers is because it's open and anyone can port it to anything.

As software becomes more and more important to our society so does its transparency and freedom. Haven't you seen all of the articles about power stations and such having back door accounts or being able to broken into without any real effort and with no updates to fix them being provided? If that software free neither of those would have happened.

Pragmatically, it's not a huge deal right now but it will be down the road. What happens in 100 years when someone wants to go back and read an encrypted PDF and Adobe reader is either nonexistent or doesn't support the current formats any longer? All of that data should be stored in open, well documented formats and all of the main governments are failing terribly in that arena AFAIK.

 

[HeXen]

Try viewing or creating a PDF file in Windows without 3rd party software

Try playing and watching a simple DVD movie in Windows 8 without 3rd party software too

 

[Rangoric]

Try viewing or creating a PDF file in Windows without 3rd party software

I double click and it opens. No 3rd party software. Creating/editing PDFs on the other hand takes some effort.

 

[Rangoric]

As software becomes more and more important to our society so does its transparency and freedom. Haven't you seen all of the articles about power stations and such having back door accounts or being able to broken into without any real effort and with no updates to fix them being provided? If that software free neither of those would have happened.

If the source code for that software was open source, in a repository somewhere, that has no bearing on if those flaws would be in there.

People actually developing or going over that code does. In addition, there being someone to install those updates would also be needed. And to prevent the update from uninstalling everything you need someone to test/vet those changes.

Software being free or open source is not a magic bullet. You still need people.

 

[HeXen]

There is plenty of open source software for Windows

I double click and it opens. No 3rd party software. Creating/editing PDFs on the other hand takes some effort.

7 does not support PDF's out of box. You have to either have a 3rd party app or browser or perhaps some extension for IE. 8 does but its through the default metro app i believe.
So basically MS traded PDF viewing for DVD codecs in W8

 

[lxskllr]

Software being free or open source is not a magic bullet. You still need people.

Of course. That's a statement of the obvious. With libre code ANYONE can review it. Someone that knows absolutely nothing about software can learn, and fix it. With closed code, only the people who made it will know how it works. In some cases you may be able to probe around from the outside, and reverse engineer it, but you'll never truly know what the software does.