Item — HN Reader

Yeah but, Windows 8 itself is a train wreck. Seriously, who is going to upgrade to it? It's too different.

Nobody is going to go out of their way to buy it, the only installs it will get is as OEM's on new hardware.

And I bet even the OEMs will offer Windows 7 for as long as they can.

I think if users _have_ to have something different they will seriously consider OSX and Linux. One is more polished on better hardware for people who have money and want the best. The other is free for people who don't care.

4 comments

As much as I wish this were true (I've been gunning for the MS downfall forever), I doubt it will be the case.

My (non-technical) girlfriend recently needed a reformat, so on a whim I installed the 8 RC to see what her reaction would be.

She loves it. It is, quite simply, the first Windows release that presents software in a friendly and usable way that allows the non-technical user to get just as much from a PC as they could from a Mac.

Difference drives the uptake of software, otherwise we'd still be on Windows 95. 8 is just as rock stable as 7, but faster, and with an interface that is more logical and easy to grasp. I see no reason why it won't be a huge success (besides some kind of major corporate-IT catastrophe).

Newell's comments are leveled at Microsoft's monopoly on software distribution for Windows RT, which may in fact cause a disruption much like the one he outlines. The consumer, however, will finally learn what the "flag button" on their keyboard is for.

Wow, this is the first positive reported use-case I've heard for Windows 8 "in the wild". Can anyone corroborate this from a non-technical user experience?

I think the lack of positive feedback on the blogoweb is due to the the degree that 8 is directed at non-technical users. Many HN'ers and the tech writers we read will be put off by the metaphorical down-talking of the start 'menu'.

I doubt any technical users will have any interest in Metro apps on PCs. The same features that make non-techies feel less affronted with interface elements will feel childish to experienced users. (Just take a look at the HN discussions surrounding the skeumorphic calendar app in Moutain Lion - its the same distaste, just to a lesser degree.)

And, if you don't get any benefit from the Metro apps or start 'menu', you really don't get much benefit out of 8.

Gabe is absolutely correct to offer Steam on Linux. Many technical Windows users who have invested in their PCs (read: many gamers) will use their distaste as an opportunity to try Ubuntu. People are always looking for something new, especially in regards to software.

None of this, I believe, will make 8 a business failure for MS.

I'd be hesitant to predict this sort of result. Vista was very weird for those of us used to XP, and was widely panned in a similar way as a train wreck -- but people started buying, certainly. Ubuntu's Unity desktop environment was new and surprising, but it seems to be holding up.

Comfort is only one of the huge driving factors in these sorts of scenarios. That Microsoft has given up the mantle of comfort in the name of pushing forward is probably a good thing. Had they stuck with comfort, I'd still have to support the nightmare that was IE5. ^_^ Now you see big companies turning to Apple in the hopes of not only seeming more urban and modern to the people they're recruiting, but also to hopefully keep a very standard set of features and UI: it is quite possible, if admittedly a little crazy-sounding, to imagine that in ten years or so the post-Jobs Apple will reverse places with the post-Gates Microsoft.

Ultimately, if you change others, and others change you, that is a building-block for love in the most general sense. The things that we are fanatical about are the programming languages that really changed our lives, the operating systems that we put in the effort to understand and master, the technologies which altered our workflows and our day-to-day living. Love is always transformative, and Microsoft was getting too stagnant to be loved. Only time can tell whether their present changes will bring back some of that fanaticism which is sorely lacking.

>One is more polished on better hardware for people who have the money and want the best.

Is this at all true? If you spent an identical sum of money on a PC would you not get better hardware?

Depends on what you mean by better hardware. The specs will probably be better, I have a Thinkpad and it would have cost me twice as much for an equivalent Macbook. That said, the build quality of the Thinkpad isn't even close to the MacBook, it just depends on what's important to you. For me, an aluminium case isn't worth $1500, and I don't really want to be seen with an Apple product anyway :)

Well with the thinkpads and other business-centric laptops you tend to get the advantage of modularity as well. Keyboards, screens, hard drives, RAM, batteries, and optical drives can all be replaced fairly easily on Dell Latitudes and Lenovo Thinkpads. (The ones I've had at least.) On a Macbook, replacing the RAM and hard drive are the only ones I know to be fairly simple.

It just doesn't exit. I've been shopping to a windows laptop for ages and really nothing is as good as what apple is offering.

> I think if users _have_ to have something different they will seriously consider OSX and Linux. One is more polished on better hardware for people who have money and want the best. The other is free for people who don't care.

I use Linux and I care, probably too much, about it.

I would love to take the plunge but need photoshop. Gimp is a long way behind.