To be fair Microsoft always take away some choices now and then,remember when DOS was phased out for Windows,did DOS users have a choice to stay on DOS?...We all know they phased DOS out for Windows.
Aero fans could argue where is my aero?...Again Microsoft like to change and remove things now and then,end of the day only real choice you have is what OS to use,however in general things removed are not deal breakers or a major issue IMHO.
You can bet it will continue in Win9,10,11 etc...
I could also argue things get removed in some Linux distros now and then as well,Linux is a very good example of Start menu changes over the years.
3.0, 3.1, and 95 sure did.
I don't care to be honest
That's fine but there are others who do. And Microsoft certainly does.
Win 8 does have under the hood improvements that make it more secure than windows 7.
Sadly it took a while to overtake Windows Vista, which did actually have some problems on release, and that was arguably mostly because of the interface without an option to use a windows 7 style gui.
I'll definitely get Windows 9. Windows 7 will be sufficiently long in the tooth by 2015.
....
You'll always get some people that care and others that don't.
Hopefully that is correct! That would be a welcome come back for many many (old) users!
I'm getting Win9,10 etc regardless of UI or what they add or remove,to me they are all the same.
If they are all the same why bother to spend money on a new version?
Also you should incredibly easily pleased about your OSs, why would you buy something regardless of UI or what was added or removed? I can send you blank DVD with Windows 9 written on it if you want? You can pay me by PayPal.
Any particular reason why believe this? Wasn't "Windows 9" supposed to be about merging Windows Phone and Desktop together and "Windows 10" was about moving everything to the cloud? Making Satya Nadella (Cloud boss) the CEO seems to go along with that vision.On the upside Windows 9 will probably follow the pattern laid out by Vista then Windows 7
Thankfully, many Linux distros still focus on the desktop experience.
Any particular reason why believe this? Wasn't "Windows 9" supposed to be about merging Windows Phone and Desktop together and "Windows 10" was about moving everything to the cloud? Making Satya Nadella (Cloud boss) the CEO seems to go along with that vision.
Thankfully, many Linux distros still focus on the desktop experience.
Any particular reason why believe this? Wasn't "Windows 9" supposed to be about merging Windows Phone and Desktop together and "Windows 10" was about moving everything to the cloud? Making Satya Nadella (Cloud boss) the CEO seems to go along with that vision.
Thankfully, many Linux distros still focus on the desktop experience.
Vista launched with a couple of Kernel problems, not enough time spent on tuning the OS for as much performance as possible, and some hardware vendors not changing how they write their drivers upon release.
Windows 7 had enough improvements on Vista while keeping the good parts of that OS and in the process of developing 7 delivered a worthy successor to XP after it's period of being refined.
Linux at the moment as far as I know keeps desktop PC version seperate,they do have a tablet version of Ubuntu however,I doubt they will try a hybrid OS(PC and tablet mixed) but you never know.
http://www.ubuntu.com/tablet
I'll say even Ubuntu tablet version looks better then Windows 8 tablet version,not surprising that I like Linux .
Win7 was a rehash of Vista with minor improvements ie speed increase and less UAC nagging,some bug fixes IMHO so nothing really special,Win8 was a breath of fresh air in the way they dared to try something new with both UI and new features over Win95 to Win7 which is like almost 20 years rehash of same UI.
All you did was repeat my points in so many other words with a different opinion about those points.
Yes Windows 7 probably could have been Vista SP3. However, the Vista "brand" was tainted. Partially for reasons that were MS's fault and partially for reasons connected with hardware that MS had no real control over.
So they released it as a "brand new" OS.
Much like the Win 8 brand is tainted enough (again as I said previously mostly wrongly for reasons almost entirely connected with the gui) that MS will happily showcase Win 9 asap. If Windows 8 had sales similar to windows 7 I'm willing to bet that MS
MS learned from the mistake of Vista by releasing an OS that had no downsides under the hood and improvements compared to the previous OS other than the gui.
Otherwise it's a fine OS, as evidenced by the people who just installed something like startisback and continued with Win 8
I'm sure that if I spent the same amount of time tweaking the 8.1 start screen as I did organizing my all programs list in Win 7 my time to access commonly and uncommonly used programs on both of them would be quite similar.
It was a mistake by them if you go by Win 8 to not have an option to to use an older style interface if the customer didn't have a touch screen.
No amount of looking down of the unwashed masses who "can't adapt" is going to change the numbers, but you're welcome to rehash that talking point if you wish.
....
I was stating my opinion,funny you seem to like stating yours then attack others here like myself because I've a different point view,sorry if I burst your bubble but we are all allowed to disagree with each other here,some in more of a polite manner then others .
I was a DOS 6.22 fan and hated Windows back then but adapted and learned to live with every new Windows release,even got use to some Linux distro's as well so if I can adapt to the changes etc...then anybody can, some people don't like change or can't be bothered to customize or relearn a different OS,end of the day if you are willing to adapt and except changes for better or worst then you will find it a lot easier in the long run,remember no OS is perfect.
not unlike looking down one's nose at those who don't adapt as an attack.Look at his first post he gives no constructive reasons why ,it seems most of the anti-Win8 campaigners for 98% of the time are just moaning for the sake of it with no constructive feedback and refuse to even try to get use to Win8,let me say I'm not a Windows fan as such,my first PC OS was DOS 6.22 and I will always be a DOS fan and have fond memories of it decades ago,I got use to Windows and the changes after every new Windows release for better or worst,one thing I do know you get some anti-8 campaigners that give honest constructive feedback,then you get others that just troll and give no reasons,I've seen this since Win95 and onwards
I'll chime in with a more positive response,I too am also a desktop/gamer user and have seen many changes over the decades from DOS 6.22 to latest Windows,personally I can adapt to the changes and except some things get removed for good plus new UI changes etc...
Yes, we are allowed to disagree.
I disagree with your characterization of me calling your statements about users who are too set in their ways (to broadly paraphrase some of your past statements)...
not unlike looking down one's nose at those who don't adapt as an attack.
Of course the unspoken corollary might be interpreted as I can adapt but some others can't.
But if MS wants to sell to those people who can't or just won't then MS might just have to include easy to find options to make Win 9 look like an older windows version.
Remember, MS sells consumer level (aka average user) editions of Windows 8. Why shut out some of their potential customers who just might not be interested enough in tech to post in an online forum?
But Hey, that's the beauty so to speak of everyone not having the same rote opinions. ^_^
No OS is perfect not even Win 8 however, if MS had an option for desktop users non-touch screen laptop owners to use win7 style interface instead of metro then there would have been almost no sales of start menu replacement menus and imo Win 8 would have sold better.
Maybe not as much as 7. The main reason being functionally there wasn't really anything wrong with 7 the way there was with Vista at its launch.
....
If Windows 9 has the interface choices of both Win 7 and Win 8/8.1 and the kernal is not borked completely and the software bloat is managable on older hardware, that is the holy grail for Microsoft products.We'll have to see what people complain about in Win 9
If the kernel remains as solid at Win 8 while providing even incremental advances in security and features while the direction in which the interface seems to be going remains unchanged then I don't see what people would complain about.
As for bloat laptops and desktops that will be available by the time Win 9 is out will surely have no issue with the typical MS OS installation space requirements.
Perhaps they will have to trim the fat on the tablet and phone devices but there's really no reason that I see that they need to include anything other than a touch interface.
Who knows? Perhaps non-volatile memory will become cheap enough over the next 12 to 16 month that they won't have to trim too much from Win 9 for tablets and phone.
....
because then you have another XP and decade long upgrade cycles where no one moves to newer stuff. :hmm:
They'll already have that problem on their hands again with Windows 7. I think that will be the last version of windows that has 10 years of support. Moving on, I think with Microsofts recent decisions I think Windows from year on out will be supported for 3-4 years.If Windows 9 has the interface choices of both Win 7 and Win 8/8.1 and the kernal is not borked completely and the software bloat is managable on older hardware, that is the holy grail for Microsoft products.
Microsoft probably doesn't want a product that does all of the above because then you have another XP and decade long upgrade cycles where no one moves to newer stuff. :hmm:
Moving on, I think with Microsofts recent decisions I think Windows from year on out will be supported for 3-4 years.