Exclusive Microsoft blames PC makers for underwhelming Windows 8 sales over
Christmas, The Register has learned. The software giant accused manufacturers of
not building enough attractive Win 8-powered touchscreen tablets.

...

But the computer makers are fighting back: they claimed that if they'd followed Microsoft's hardware requirements and ramped up production, they'd have ended up building a lot of high-end expensive slabs that consumers didn't understand nor want.

....

Our well-placed source said that bad sales combined with PC makers "ignoring" Microsoft's advice has left Redmond executives fuming.
...

Now Microsoft is planning to reboot its launch of Windows 8 next month. On Tuesday the company gave 9 February as the date for the US and Canada unveiling of the Intel-powered Surface Pro tablets. But sources tell us Microsoft is actually preparing for a February "relaunch" of Windows 8.

"Microsoft is not blaming itself for not selling enough Surface, it's blaming OEMs for not having enough touch-based product," our supply chain source said. [!]

No, it could have nothing to do with the dozens UI of issues and various usability regressions of W8, that thing is just perfect! Boy, they have really thick skull with this so-so product. It's like they are in collective trance. Just like with the new Office.

So, W8 relaunch in February.. The most dormant time frame of the year for commerce.. This will be surely a hit!

And what's with the obsession that "touch" is the savior in this? Quote from another blog: 
---
Proclaiming that the future of computing is "touch" is like saying the future of eating is by using your fingers.

Knives and forks? How primitive! Roll up your sleeves and get in there and get dirty! WEEEEEEE!!!! The only button that matters anymore is the 'PURCHASE NOW' button...because we don't actually do anything useful on our machines except stare slack-jawed at moronic YouTube vids.
--

Also, read this.

IMO It is way too early to declare anything.

a moment ago, Ian2 wrote

IMO It is way too early to declare anything.

That excuse gets old. Three months of failings in the market is enough for a re-evaluation.

Windows 8: Weak sales, multiple usability experts slam it, people all over the net post huge posts going through all the various UI disasters of it (and this time Windows devs and admins, not the usual anti-MS brigade) annoyed partners and OEMs, longtime developers speaking out against it, mostly sub-par reviews..

Even science magazines join the W8 slam:

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=why-touch-screens-will-not-take-over

And for good reason.

The bestselling notebooks on Amazon.com run ChromeOS and MacOS now.

and the bestelling notebook on Amazon Germany runs .. DOS!

Seriously, here's the top 10 list.

Asus F55A-SX091D

It was released on November 6, 2012 - just in time for for the W8 release.

Screenshots:

http://s2.postimage.org/kfxowusd5/DOSbook1.png
http://s2.postimage.org/mztbqyfx5/Dos_Notebook2.png

You know a Windows version is bad if such a product is the Number One bestseller since months.
There is a law in Germany that allows the re-selling of OEM Windows versions. That means you can buy "refurbished" Win7 versions very cheaply (they cost around $70). It's very likely that people buy this DOS notebook and put one of these Win7 OEM versions on it (otherwise they would buy just a W8 device. The cheap W8 upgrade version also can't be installed on blank HDs).

It's NOT NORMAL that a DOS device is the number 1 seller in one of the wealthiest markets. Without W8, this wouldn't have happen.

W8 is doing worse than Vista in stats, despite the Christmas boost. let not forget that.

Complaints common to Windows releases: interface details, hardware suitability, bugs, sticker price.

Complaints NOT common to Windows releases: high profile employee termination, public mudslinging at external entities, 52 week stock lows RIGHT AFTER RELEASE, significant sales slowdown, massive price hikes on other products to compensate for slow sales, near universal lukewarm to negative press, expensive marketing campaigns that produce no results, DOS devices being number one sellers right after release of new Windows version...

Even the W8 standlone upgrade is doing badly:

http://www.amazon.com/best-sellers-software/zgbs/software#1

The more expensive Win7 Home Premium is selling better than W8 Pro upgrade.

Clinging to Windows 8 as it is right now is not rational on Microsoft's part.

2 minutes ago, Heywood_J wrote

Why are you still beating this dead horse?

It's a discussion point. Do you think they will indeed "relaunch" it in February?

From a business point-of-view, that's not such a bad thing. There's good news in that.

While it means that they will not have much immediate revenue from it, the good thing is: it will get talked about a whole lot. That will give Microsoft feedback and time to fix things until the product matures.

In time, I think Windows 8 will be a robust and successful operating system. All ground-breaking products take time to mature. In a sense, Windows 8 is a trail-blazer but they took it out too soon.

While in the short term, it seems like bad news for everyone, from the long looks of it, it's good business sense.

My weird review here: http://sathyaish.net/writing/WindowChange.aspx

There is no reason to castrate the desktop for the sake of Metro. Metro can co-exists alongside a full functional desktop that should be a refinement/evolution of what we had in Windows 7, not some Frankenstein monster that most desktop users seem to hate.

And this horse isn't really dead since this is a big issue and will continue to be a problem for MS until they fix it. Those that like to pretend nothing is wrong are free to ignore threads with titles that clearly show what it is about.

I did not say, however, that Windows 8 is any good (or bad).  

Personally, I have gone through some UI changes on the Linux front (Gnome2, Gnome -shell, Unity, KDE, Xfce, etc.) and the one thing I have gathered from this is that you cannot go into a new interface and expect it to run just like the other interfaces.  It's a mind-set that most people haven't had to use because Windows has predominantly stayed the same in a UI manner since 95!

So Microsoft is starting something new, a new UI and a new "philosophy" of how to navigate the system. This after waking up and realizing the world has gone on without them and IE 6 is no longer the only browser in the market (let alone Office, Windows Server, etc.).  It's taken a while for them to rub the sand out of their eyes, and I think they are still working on their first cup of coffee but at least they are shambling around like a Monday morning zombie.

The OEMs, though, are grumbling and whining about having to change their way of thinking, to include touch, mobile devices, power AND efficiency and more device-like computers than the old beige boxes sitting on a desktop.  Coupled with strong Apple sales and a slower economy to navigate through and they have had to actually... um... work!  Innovate!  Come up with something more than same-old-same-old.  And just to help drive home the point, now they have to compete with Microsoft themselves!  Gosh, guess they can't be caught sleeping at the wheel anymore.

Microsoft "rebooting" Windows 8 does make some sense.  The name "Vista" became synonymous with "sucks" and though it was more of a bug-fix and polishing up of Vista, "Windows 7" has become the heir of Windows XP's mantle of being the most popular operating system (of the world).  

Technical issues will exist regardless of how long they tested and developed the OS, especially at the size and and magnitude Microsoft and Windows exist. Really what Microsoft needs is a marketing "reboot", not a technical one!

Hopefully they have learned.  They have had 3+ months of real-world feedback that they could address so that Windows 8 Pro on Surface can benefit from it and have fewer flaws.  The world has had 3+ months to learn how to operate this new UI.

I think that Microsoft needs to push the education (books, video, blogs, etc.) on HOW to work the Windows 8 interface and push the deals to get it into the hands of people so they can get used to the new interface.  Also, there are plenty of improvements "under the hood", let people know how it benefits them whether it be safety, security, stability or even putting into place a framework that can easily handle massive changes in the near future.

Now is their time to push and push hard on it; Apple is looking old, Linux's competition is still young and the mobile market is young enough that nothing is set in stone.  

Yet.

2 hours ago, Sathyaish Chakravarthy wrote

In a sense, Windows 8 is a trail-blazer but they took it out too soon.

A trail-blazer? They have been doing operating systems for decades, tablets for 10 years, and had the Metro UI out in Windows Phone for several years. How can Win8 be referred to as a trail-blazer in light of that?

37 minutes ago, Hometoy wrote

Personally, I have gone through some UI changes on the Linux front (Gnome2, Gnome -shell, Unity, KDE, Xfce, etc.) and the one thing I have gathered from this is that you cannot go into a new interface and expect it to run just like the other interfaces.  It's a mind-set that most people haven't had to use because Windows has predominantly stayed the same in a UI manner since 95!

No, the problem is that Windows 8 is a solution in search for a problem. have any of you tought before W8 "dang, I wish I could stretch my arms out to poke the screen!" ? The tablet and smartphone form factors are entirely different in handling to how you use a PC or laptop most of the time.

The apparently lackluster sales and extreme opposition to W8 show it. And all the "wait & see" stuff and claiming it's all just because unfamiliarity doesn't cut it. The iPhone and iPad were unfamiliar too, yet they sold. But with Windows 8 we've got rejection reactions like DOS computers being number one bestsellers in major markets to avoid W8. Pretty much all the market reactions have been considerable negative.

This comment nails it:

And the Windows 8 disaster unfolds as predicted by thousands of analysts and technical evaluators, all of whom were 100% ignored by supremely arrogant and completely tone-deaf Microsoft management. It's going to be one of the worst years in a very long time for PC vendors and retailers, and it's all because those fools stupidly drank the Windows 8 Kool-Aid without considering what was in the cup.

Touch screen laptops were a miserable failure two years ago when they were promoted as the next "must have" gadget. Don't know why Microsoft thought things would be different now. No one really needs touch on a PC, and all Windows 8 does is turn a vastly overpriced touch-screen-enabled PC into a cellphone look-alike with an interface that looks like it was ripped off from 1996 AOL. Gosh, who wouda thunk consumers wouldn't jump at a deal like that!

And does Microsoft really expect 100 million CAD/CAM designers, accountants, and other industrial content makers and knowledge workers to hold their arms up all day inaccurately poking smudges on their 42" vertical monitors with their fat fingers, working at 1/100th the speed as before Windows 8 with 1000 times the physical effort?

Also, you need to read this.

32 minutes ago, wastingtime​withforums wrote

*snip*

No, the problem is that Windows 8 is a solution in search for a problem. have any of you tought before W8 "dang, I wish I could stretch my arms out to poke the screen!" ? The tablet and smartphone form factors are entirely different in handling to how you use a PC or laptop most of the time.

Ignoring the loaded question, yes, I have wanted to "reach out and poke the screen". I know I'm not alone in this, either, as it's a common complaint that after using a touch screen device it's common to find yourself "poking" non-touch screens out of habit. More to the point, a device like the Surface is something I've been wishing existed for the last ten years, and such a device couldn't exist without Windows 8 (or a similar radical change from the old UX). So I'm sorry, but you're simply wrong. Whether or not Windows 8 UX is good, it was not a solution in search of a problem.

Seriously, you moaners need to give it up. We get it. You don't like it. Telling us again won't make us (or Microsoft) "get it" any better than we already have.

Put another way: millions of people complaining will get Microsoft's attention, but one person complaining a million times won't. While the reality is somewhere in between those two statements, it doesn't change the fact that YOU screaming some more does nothing but make you look like a moron.

4 minutes ago, wkempf wrote

*snip*

Ignoring the loaded question, yes, I have wanted to "reach out and poke the screen". I know I'm not alone in this, either, as it's a common complaint that after using a touch screen device it's common to find yourself "poking" non-touch screens out of habit.

Instead of locating my mouse cursor and trying to align it with precision over a scrollbar control that is far away from the content I am looking at, I've always just wanted to flick the page up or down.

Seriously, you moaners need to give it up. We get it. You don't like it. Telling us again won't make us (or Microsoft) "get it" any better than we already have.

I think they're just lonely. They want other people to "join them" in their opinions/likes/dislikes so they won't feel alone anymore.

My personal reason for complaining is that to me Windows 8 is a clear step backwards, and it does affect me since I spend a lot of time doing real work in Windows. I've given it quite a bit of time now and it annoys me more and more each day. MS is going out of their way to destroy 20 years of UI refinement, I think complaining about it is to be expected. And saying "we get it" misses the point completely.

If it annoys you guys so much, why do you take the time to consciously click, read and comment on threads that are clearly marked with an accurate title? It's an honest question.

54 seconds ago, MasterPie wrote

Instead of locating my mouse cursor and trying to align it with precision over a scrollbar control that is far away from the content I am looking at, I've always just wanted to flick the page up or down.

I've talked about this before. I owned a touch screen laptop long before Win8 came around. I constantly find myself dismissing dialogs with the touch screen rather than using the keyboard, trackpad or even the mouse (I use a mouse with my laptop frequently). It's easier, more intuitive and with the exception of using the keyboard, faster. I also scroll fairly frequently using the touch screen as well. On the desktop things will be *slightly* different, as the monitor is a bit further away. However, I *have* wanted to purchase a touch screen monitor because I love the touch screen on my laptop so much.

54 seconds ago, MasterPie wrote

I think they're just lonely. They want other people to "join them" in their opinions/likes/dislikes so they won't feel alone anymore.

That's pretty much what I said is stupid here. No one is going to "join them" because they whine and moan so much. If anything, this behavior will have the opposite result.

have any of you tought before W8 "dang, I wish I could stretch my arms out to poke the screen!" ?

Actually, long before Windows 8 came out  I had those thoughts.  It feels more natural.

It is all just getting tiring because practically the same things have been (and are being said) over and over again with the changes to the Gnome desktop and Unity on Linux.

SSDD (same sh.., different device)

56 seconds ago, BitFlipper wrote

If it annoys you guys so much, why do you take the time to consciously click, read and comment on threads that are clearly marked with an accurate title? It's an honest question.

The title indicated there was something worth reading about (the "re-launch"), even though it was obvious that most of this was going to be another rant from our favorite troll. Why I bothered to comment was because the constantly complaining is simply stupid and annoying. I will, however, admit that there's a bit of irony there, as I'm exhibiting some of what I'm pointing out is so stupid. However, there is a slight difference: there is NOTHING new initiating his (and your) further complaints, while YET ANOTHER THREAD is something new to complain about. Even just having to filter out these threads when reading the RSS feed is a waste of my time, and well worth trying to get you guys to go away.

I agree, you had a right to complain. I do NOT agree that continuing to do so accomplishes anything worthwhile.

4 minutes ago, wkempf wrote

*snip*

Ignoring the loaded question, yes, I have wanted to "reach out and poke the screen". I know I'm not alone in this, either, as it's a common complaint that after using a touch screen device it's common to find yourself "poking" non-touch screens out of habit.

....

On the desktop things will be *slightly* different, as the monitor is a bit further away. However, I *have* wanted to purchase a touch screen monitor because I love the touch screen on my laptop so much.

Now that's what I call a minority position. But even if you have the occasional desire to press on "OK" with your fingers, this gets old very fast. Redesigning the whole UI of a productivity OS around such edge-cases is crazy.

It's like designing the OS primarily around voice recognition, because I have sometimes the desire to scream at it!

4 minutes ago, wkempf wrote

More to the point, a device like the Surface is something I've been wishing existed for the last ten years, and such a device couldn't exist without Windows 8

Really?

The Surface ios neither full laptop replacement (doesn't function well on the lap) nor a full tablet replacement. The touch-cover experience is also far from ideal. Of course, everyone is different, but I find it really hard to believe that you dreamt about the Surface for ten years.

4 hours ago, wastingtime​withforums wrote

Do you think they will indeed "relaunch" it in February?

No.

9 minutes ago, wastingtime​withforums wrote

*snip*

Now that's what I call a minority position.

Evidence that it's a minority position?

9 minutes ago, wastingtime​withforums wrote

Really?

The Surface neither full laptop replacement (doesn't function well on the lap) nor a full tablet replacement. The touch-cover experience is also far from ideal. Of course, everyone is different, but I find it really hard to believe that you dreamt about the Surface for ten years.

Oh, so you're calling me a liar, and projecting you're opinions as the only opinions that are valid? Never mind, I forgot you're not just a whiner but a troll. I'll stop feeding you.

35 seconds ago, wkempf wrote

*snip*

Evidence that it's a minority position?

Opposition to Windows 8? The sales of it? Touchscreen sales on laptops/desktops?

Gorilla-arm problem?:

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=why-touch-screens-will-not-take-over

Oh, so you're calling me a liar, and projecting you're opinions as the only opinions that are valid?

I can very well believe you, that you thought it would be a neat to have a more flexible/powerful tablet PC. But that you wished for a device full of compromises like the Surface?

As I said before in this forum: They should have completely separated both worlds. Both uncripppled UIs on the same device, switchable, would work (connect your tablet to a keyboard, mouse and display, switch to the uncrippled desktop -> you have a productivity device) but this FrankenOS abomination they did instead suits just about NOBODOY. Metro gets in your way on the Desktop and the Desktop gets in your way on metro (many settings are only reachable through the desktop CP etc.). It's a mess, pure and simple.

I believe you, that you thought about all-in-one devices. But I don't buy it that you had seriously a FrankenOS experience like this in mind all the time as your dream-device. Sorry.

30 minutes ago, BitFlipper wrote

@wkempf: I don't know about that. While I agree starting endless threads about how much Windows 8 sucks probably doesn't help, telling people to stop complaining about Windows 8 isn't the right approach either. If everyone followed that advice then MS would start thinking Windows 8 was actually a good idea.

My personal reason for complaining is that to me Windows 8 is a clear step backwards, and it does affect me since I spend a lot of time doing real work in Windows. I've given it quite a bit of time now and it annoys me more and more each day. MS is going out of their way to destroy 20 years of UI refinement, I think complaining about it is to be expected. And saying "we get it" misses the point completely.

Completely right.

Quote from another W8 forum:

-------------

What people don't get about writing complaints is that issues don't get fixed otherwise. Nothing was ever resolved with a "wait and see" attitude. Nothing. Not ever. If people aren't complaining and/or voting with their dollars by purchasing competing products then nothing gets fixed.

If Windows 8 were to disappear, Microsoft would (rightly) conclude that the issues weren't such a big deal after all. The people with the most vested interest will complain the loudest. That's why it's the same people over and over again. The rest of the world will complain once, return the product, and buy something from Apple or Samsung instead.

Ironically, it's the people who don't really give a *, the ones who say "Enough with the complaining!" that are most detrimental to the industry. It's really hard to believe these people really think this is all about Apple's share price dropping. It should be patently obvious that anyone who posts deep technical criticisms has a high level of vested interest.

If/when the complaining dies, it's either because Microsoft fixed the problems or that people have given up and are looking for exit plans

EVERY device is full of compromises. YOU don't like the compromises they've made. I don't agree with you. Simple as that. THAT is why these constant threads are stupid (wish I could use the words I want to here). If you had something new to point out that you don't like, that would be one thing. But you point out the SAME things every time. Some of us don't agree with your opinion. Doesn't make you wrong, but by the same coin, neither are we. What matters is what the majority thinks. If you and every other person that's stuck in a cycle would shut up, I bet there'd be crickets. No one new is complaining. So there are no new data points to draw on.

Look, if you don't like it, don't use it. If you're correct that it's a pile of dung and everyone follows that advice, things will correct themselves one way or another. What you are doing though isn't helpful. And it's becoming more than just annoying, but actually harmful to this forum. I understand why they are reluctant to, but it's fast coming time for you and the others to be banned from here, IMHO.

I don't know what, if any, official channels Microsoft employs for communicating issues such as bug reports.

3 minutes ago, Hometoy wrote

Do Microsoft and/or Windows developers (employed by Microsoft) actually frequent these forums?  Most Linux forums I follow, when people make comments or suggestions they are told that developers don't usually read posts/threads there.

I don't know what, if any, official channels Microsoft employs for communicating issues such as bug reports.

Crashes: Windows Error Reporting (automatic)

Ux / Usage: Windows Feedback Program (automatic)

Bugs: connect.microsoft.com

Microsoft developers usually don't venture into the coffeehouse - and that's partly because idiots like WTWF and earlier incarnations of the same (SirHomer, all the way back to Beer28) have made them get pissed off and leave.

2 minutes ago, evildictait​or wrote

WTWF and earlier incarnations of the same (SirHomer, all the way back to Beer28)

Same as in the same category, or did you mean same person? If you mean latter; I was never related to those.

have made them get pissed off and leave.

What what made them "pissed and leave" on the B8 blog backback then? Most of the good and hard hitting questions got censored there. That was a new one for MS.

23 minutes ago, BitFlipper wrote

telling people to stop complaining about Windows 8 isn't the right approach either.

... And saying "we get it" misses the point completely.

It's not telling people to stop complaining...it's telling them to stop shoving their complaints down our throats to put us in a defensive position for no good reason other than to annoy us. We're not the ones who made the decisions that the haters seem to hate. Microsoft is the responsible entity...go complain to them.

Now, if the reason people keep prattling on and on about their hatred for these things is to convert people to "their side" in order to incite some mass online protest against Microsoft's actions in Windows 8 territory...it's not going to work. People here aren't stupid so as to mindlessly change their opinion, especially to support the efforts of those who have relegated themselves to copying and pasting, from random threads, anonymous comments that reflect their world view.

"We get it" doesn't mean to stop finding fault - it means to stop slinging the same thoughts our way and to instead promote proper discourse around reasonable solutions.

2 minutes ago, MasterPie wrote

*snip*

to support the efforts of those who have relegated themselves to copying and pasting, from random threads, anonymous comments that reflect their world view.

Thin nerves, huh? My copy and paste activities are pretty negligible. One of the main complaints just a few weeks ago was that my posts (original content) are way too long.

I wonder why you guys have such a fragile mood over anything W8 related. I mean it's not like me or the other critics are spamming this forum without end with fishy titles to lure you to click on them. There are plenty of other posts to chose from.

9 minutes ago, kettch wrote

@wastingtimewithforums: I read through some of the "questions" posted to B8. They weren't questions. There were no usage scenarios, reasonable discussions of issues, or constructive criticism. 99.99% of it was "waaa waaa, it's different and I don't want it".

And yet, such censorship actions didn't occur before to such extend.

If W8 provoked these reactions, you better ask why. 

" waaa waaa, it's different and I don't want it".

So, where's the big success story of W8? Almost all sales news are gloomy, and so is the general perception of the OS as a whole. Was there ANY OEM that spoke positive about W8 so far? 

Multiple big OEMs have cancelled/halted their RT devices instead.

If there are lots of "waa waa I don't want it" voices, maybe there is some truth to it. W8 defenders are like the "Year Of The Linux Desktop" people of the past - "greatest OS ever! It's only that the users are far too dumb and stuck!"

And if the only reason (...) W8 isn't selling is because of the PC decline: Wasn't W8 supposed to tackle this? Windows 8's commercial performance on tablets is even worse than on PCs apparently. It's not like they are cancelling RT devices because OEMs are about damaging MS first, profits second.

Anyway guys, since you dislike it so much, I will slowdown the W8 output.

32 seconds ago, wastingtime​withforums wrote

*snip*

I wonder why you guys have such a fragile mood over anything W8 related. I mean it's not like me or the other critics are spamming this forum without end. 

Seriously? That's exactly what you're doing.

Look at my recent posting profile:

http://channel9.msdn.com/Niners/wastingtimewithforums

Not exactly mass-output.

Like how it's easy to find comments on the interweb that support your perspective, it's easy to carve out a posting timeframe to prove you're not a troll/spammer. Stretch that window to early mid 2012 (around page 26 of your discussions) and then you start to see Win8 related rants on almost every page. And this is at the post level - the spamming would be even clearer at the thread level if we could make that distinction.

I have to ask...who exactly are you trying to help with your endless rants?

1 minute ago, MasterPie wrote

Stretch that window to early mid 2012..

Well, I have obviously reduced the output by now. I was also far from alone in mid 2012, this place was brimming with W8 discussions.

49 minutes ago, wastingtime​withforums wrote

*snip*

Well, I have obviously reduced the output by now. I was also far from alone in mid 2012, this place was brimming with W8 discussions.

Most other people stopped demanding that Windows8 change their core set of features within a few weeks of Windows8 being launched and it being clear that those features were either there in RTM or weren't and weren't going to be magicced into RTM by complaining about it on C9.

You on the other hand don't seem to have picked up on the fact that Windows8 has already shipped. If you don't like it, don't buy it. But anything you write here won't change RTM. That boat has sailed.

1 hour ago, evildictait​or wrote

*snip*

You on the other hand don't seem to have picked up on the fact that Windows8 has already shipped. If you don't like it, don't buy it. But anything you write here won't change RTM. That boat has sailed.

Yep - unfortunately that's the only 'feedback' MS are going to pay attention to. While they may be able to fudge the figures in the short term (shipments vs purchases vs usage) eventually the reality of W8's success or failure is something that will reflect in the revenue, and (if bad) must be explained to the shareholders. If it's a success, expect to see more of the same. If it's bad, expect to see change.

http://www.microsoft.com/investor/EarningsAndFinancials/Earnings/PressReleaseAndWebcast/FY13/Q2/default.aspx

7 hours ago, BitFlipper wrote

@wkempf: I don't know about that. While I agree starting endless threads about how much Windows 8 sucks probably doesn't help, telling people to stop complaining about Windows 8 isn't the right approach either. If everyone followed that advice then MS would start thinking Windows 8 was actually a good idea.

My personal reason for complaining is that to me Windows 8 is a clear step backwards, and it does affect me since I spend a lot of time doing real work in Windows. I've given it quite a bit of time now and it annoys me more and more each day. MS is going out of their way to destroy 20 years of UI refinement, I think complaining about it is to be expected. And saying "we get it" misses the point completely.

If it annoys you guys so much, why do you take the time to consciously click, read and comment on threads that are clearly marked with an accurate title? It's an honest question.

The problem is that the regular person ISN'T complaining and not because they don't have anything to complain about, it's just that increasingly they don't care. Can't the high up people at MS see that this is a dangerous step towards the company becoming irrelevant at least in the regular every day consumer market?

MS is well aware that people are caring less about Windows and PCs lately - that's why they decided a radical change like Win8 was necessary in the first place.

4 hours ago, PaoloM wrote

And it appears that Win8 is pulling its weight. So much for the doom and gloom...

Yeah and WPF/SL isn't dead either. Time to break out the rainbows and fairies...oh wait

3 hours ago, contextfree` wrote

*snip*

MS is well aware that people are caring less about Windows and PCs lately - that's why they decided a radical change like Win8 was necessary in the first place.

This is all just IMO...

I agree they needed a radical change but it's too little too late. They needed something incredible to attract the consumer market and to gain trust and acceptance in the corporate market. Instead they put out what looks like an unfinished beta of some OS that doesn't know what it is. They did themselves no favors by putting out the experiments that were the Kin and WP7 (beta for WP8). They severely strained a legacy of great developer relationships with how they handled WPF/SL and the lack of a future for the desktop (or at least some story). Radical? Yes. Successful? Not looking like it... And that frustrates the hell out of me. 

14 hours ago, contextfree` wrote

*snip*

MS is well aware that people are caring less about Windows and PCs lately - that's why they decided a radical change like Win8 was necessary in the first place.

19 hours ago, dentaku wrote

*snip*

When us geeks complain it probably doesn't make much of a difference. Microsoft has grown immune to such things over the years unfortunately.

This is why I tell people to stop complaining. If you pick your battles, Microsoft will listen. If your complaints turn into a constant drone of negativity, Microsoft won't listen even when they should.

It's the boy who cried wolf, right? When WTWF complains about everything from ClearType to Start-menus to metro apps in general to even Vista's sidebar gadgets (that noone used) being deprecated in Windows8, it's hard to take any of his complaints seriously - even if the complaint is valid (statistically some of his complaints must be valid, just based on the sheer number of them). On the other hand, when Sven Groot complains about ClearType, his lack of general complaining means that people actually take notice.

This is why you need to be careful what you complain about. Be quiet and positive and people will sit up and pay attention when you speak loudly or are critical. If you're loud and negative all the time, people will tune you out and you'll never be heard, no matter how hard you stamp your feet.

42 minutes ago, evildictait​or wrote

This is why you need to be careful what you complain about. Be quiet and positive and people will sit up and pay attention when you speak loudly or are critical. If you're loud and negative all the time, people will tune you out and you'll never be heard, no matter how hard you stamp your feet.

1 hour ago, evildictait​or wrote

*snip*

This is why you need to be careful what you complain about. Be quiet and positive and people will sit up and pay attention when you speak loudly or are critical. If you're loud and negative all the time, people will tune you out and you'll never be heard, no matter how hard you stamp your feet.

So how is it that the outcry on SOPA through blogs, forums, and social media channels helped get that bill tabled? While I agree that you can drown out any message with too much volume I don't believe its that simple.

In toning down the negativity here I think part of the answer lies in being the bigger person. Instead of throwing rocks back at the complainer simple acknowledge what you believe is true about the complaint or say nothing at all. Eventually those who are looking for remediation will be satisfied or look elsewhere. I'm not suggesting that will create a perfect panacea here but it certainly would be better than fanning the flames.

It sad that the noise causes Microsoft to write off the issues. It may be their loss but in the end it's my loss too; I loose a nice homogeneous environment to develop in and to recommend to my customers. Maybe they are just to big anymore to care. Sounds like Apple is having the same problem. I wonder how Google has seemed to stayed so nimble? I'm sure their day is coming too...

1 hour ago, DeathBy​VisualStudio wrote

*snip*

So how is it that the outcry on SOPA through blogs, forums, and social media channels helped get that bill tabled? 

SOPA wasn't stopped by the same old voices complaining. It was stopped by people who had previously been quiet raising their voices for the first time. Like Wikipedia and Google and Reddit and so on blacking out their home pages. It wasn't the angry bloggers that senators had long since stopped listening to. It was the quiet reasonable folk who made their objections known that senators suddenly had to sit up and listen to.

[either] acknowledge what you believe is true about the complaint or say nothing at all. 

I wouldn't want you to be under the mistaken impression that everyone agrees with you all of the time. Just because you have an opinion doesn't mean that everyone else shares that opinion. When I disagree with you, it's often not because I hold the opposite viewpoint to you, just that I want the other viewpoint to be there to counterbalance your assertions.

It sad that the noise causes Microsoft to write off the issues.

It's not just Microsoft that tunes out constant background noise. It's everyone.

16 minutes ago, magicalclick wrote

@evildictaitor: are you suggesting people seeking gay marriage should stop complaining? Because I cannot see how this would help government to care more.

That's one hell of a strawman you got there.

I think it's fair to make these complaints regarding what one dislikes about what Microsoft is doing, and the way that Microsoft handles it.

I also think it's better to be constructive.  Don't just say I hate X without first explaining your reasoning for hating X, and also offer an alternative solution.  Saying I hate X because it's X doesn't do a thing to solve the issue. Without explain why you dislike something, it does come off as whining.

I think one of the reasons why the echo chamber has gotten so loud concerning Win 8, was that the normal feedback channels that have existed have suddenly "vanished".  MSConnect for all the good things that it does, has ultimately failed when people file feedback only to have the issue closed as design.  It often feels that the issue raised, has been dismissed out of hand without proper explanation.  After filing numerous issues to help the team work on usability items and bugs only to have them "dismissed" by design.  One stops filing the feedback when one feels that it will be ignored.  It's work to leave feedback, and when you are working for nothing you will soon stop.

If a bug is closed for design reasons, make a post about the design, the reasons why, and the decision making process, then link to that post every time that "bug" or "ui feature" or suggestion is closed, so that someone has more to go on then just "closed".  They may not agree with the decision, but at least they understand.  I understand the building windows blogs were supposed to handle some of this, I just think that in the end it wasn't a two way conversation.  I believe the blog alienated a bunch of Microsoft users, instead of reassuring them.

I have been one to complain in these forums before, but I always tried to be somewhat clear in what my complaints were and why I complained, and what I thought Ms should do.

I will say that overall, Windows 8 is a step in the right direction.  I think the Surface is an awesome product, that could use just a couple of "tweaks" to be perfect.

Channel 9 was developed and designed for the two way communication between the mothership in Redmond and the end developers and professionals.  A way to understand.  I think the company getting back to those roots will be the cornerstone of success.

1 day ago, PaoloM wrote

And it appears that Win8 is pulling its weight. So much for the doom and gloom...

Perhaps it is, but I would wait for the next quarter's figures before declaring it a success or failure, as the first quarter's figures after a new release are always misleading. MS claim they are shipping in volume, OEM's claim they are not selling at all... they can't both be right.

4 hours ago, elmer wrote

*snip*

Perhaps it is, but I would wait for the next quarter's figures before declaring it a success or failure, as the first quarter's figures after a new release are always misleading. MS claim they are shipping in volume, OEM's claim they are not selling at all... they can't both be right.

Easy: MS did sell indeed 60 Million licences to OEMs, but the OEMs have sold apparently far less than 60 Million W8 PCs (their expected number, and license order volume).

All the available data hints to just that:

http://money.cnn.com/2013/01/24/technology/enterprise/microsoft-earnings/index.html

"Windows sales rose 24% to $5.8 billion in the quarter that ended Dec. 31. Microsoft unveiled its years-in-the-making Windows overhaul on Oct. 26. But [the Windows 8 launch] pales in comparison to prior launches of the operating system: Windows sales soared 76% during the quarter that Windows 7 launched, and rose by 65% when Windows Vista debuted."

And:

http://www.pcworld.com/article/2026165/does-windows-8s-three-month-report-card-read-pass-or-fail-.html

Computer sales have actually dropped precipitously since Windows 8 hit the streets. NPD reports that holiday sales of Windows notebooks dropped a whopping 11 percent in 2012, while both Gartner and IDC say that overall PC sales dipped in the fourth quarter by an estimated 4.9 and 6.4 percent, respectively. Net Applications says Windows 8's user adoption lags behind Windows Vista's. All that corresponds with talk from executives at HP, Acer, Asus, Fujitsu, Newegg, and others, who have universally said that Windows 8 is off to a slower-than-expected start.

13 hours ago, evildictait​or wrote

WTWF complains [..] Vista's sidebar gadgets (that noone used) being deprecated in Windows8

No. I complained that the service was being discontinued on Windows 7, while still being in mainstream support.

Herbie

20 minutes ago, Dr Herbie wrote

@wastingtimewithforums: Ok, you've been very critical so far, but if you were given charge of MS, what would you do right now?  Win8 has launched, Win Blue is not ready yet.  What would do do with MS now?

Herbie

I've said it multiple times on this forum. But ok:

The tragedy is, that Windows 8 could be a true "No compromise" OS which would make EVERYONE happy with just four very simple fixes:

1. Include the start menu and the start button back. Add an option for what happens when you press on the start button (start menu or start screen). If you have chosen start menu, there should be a dedicated switch-to-metro button either in the start menu or in the task bar in the near of the clock.

2. Let the Desktop programs be the default for files you open in the Desktop. Shouldn't be hard, since WMP and friends are still shipping with Win 8. (Just playing a darn audio file or viewing a picture means switching through completely different GUI environments multiple times and playing a mini-adventure in W8 right now)

3. Add a Boot-to-desktop option in the control panel.

4. Start8 and others proved that links to metro apps can be placed into a start menu. There could be a dedicated metro programs group for the occasional need for a metro app without switching to the start screen first.

I am no Metro hater on ideology. But what we got currently is a mess. Even with Surface, if you want to create content, you want the desktop. And the classical Win 7 desktop beats the tangled Frankenstein mess that is in Windows 8 today.

These changes are trivial to implement (freeware does it) and with Microsoft's man power, they could be included within weeks. Announce it right now that these changes are coming with a free update. This will surely increase sales of W8 licenses - so lengthen the W8 upgrade offer until the end of February for those who would buy W8 because of the promised uncripple-desktop update. This way, ALL the PC/laptop users would be happy again. And the metro lovers would still have metro if they want it. With the above simple fixes you would have the unharmed power of the Desktop and the Metro world for content consumption within one OS, - switch between them at ease just with a touch/click on dedicated button without both worlds fighting each other constantly. A true no-compromise hybrid.

So, that's the immediate fixes for the desktop side. In the next version the appstore should be opened up for Desktop programs as well, this would solve finally the age-old problem of holey Java and Flash versions too - list them in the appstore and let them update through the appstore. Problem solved. I understand there could be a new package format needed for that.

On the tablet side the needed changes are more longterm: All the needs for the desktop should be removed there. It's stupid to have the need to navigate to the desktop control panel for additional settings. The Desktop CP should get again the full power of the W7 CP (right now you can add users only through the metro version.. yuck) and the metro version should be vastly expanded so that you can change all settings within just one version without shuffling between them constantly.

Sideloading of the metro apps needs to be possible, this would calm down developers quite a bit. The prices for the Windows Store for developers need to go down too. 20$ one-time fee for registration and a 20% standard fee and a 15% fee once the app reaches a certain download count. Stop with the senseless Apple-envy here and get real.

Expand the metro apps in ability to make them a bit more attractive for non-tablets as well. Right now they are an utter joke in this area. Many fixes can be included without breaking the sandbox one iota (multi-tasking, windowing etc.). Seriously, freeware like Bluestacks and Pokki offer a far more sane "appy" experience for the traditional Windows form factors than Windows itself does! Pokki's start menu is a far better blend of "apps" and programs for PC users than the start screen as well. The whole handling of the metro apps for multiple users needs to be fixed too, there should be a "global install" function. Right now you need to install them per user and update them per user.

Vastly expand the default apps; they are just embarrassing. Some of them look as if they consist of two code-lines. The whole metro-ideology needs to get a lot less anal too. The "design first, convenience second" thing serves no one. Stop with the obsession of hiding buttons and functions.

Start de-uglifying Office 2013 and Visual Studio 2012 immediately (colors aren't bad, M'kay) and promise free updates for the GUIs in these products. All this could roll-in with a huge "We have listened!" - campaign.

1 hour ago, wastingtime​withforums wrote

*snip*

All this could roll-in with a huge "We have listened!" - campaign.

The problem is, of course that they may have already finalised the next release and to add to it would push back the planned release date and this has costs.  I think MS should just take the hit and make the commitment anyway.

Herbie

There are a few points where you do run into the principle of least surprise, though. While being shunted back to metro Photos when you click a JPEG on the desktop can be jarring, would it really be less confusing if Windows now had two separate sets of file associations for each environment? And at least Windows 8 does provide you with a very easy way to change the default the first time you open such a file (or any time you open them after new programs capable of opening them have been added, which is something I greatly appreciate and lessens the impact of association stealing).

But other things are things I've pointed out myself too, like the apparently coin-toss way the split between the metro Settings app and the desktop Control Panel was decided. I whole-heartedly agree that anyone using a tablet should be able to make all relevant changes from the metro settings. It does have one problem, though: requiring metro users to use the desktop CP is bad. Requiring desktop users to use the metro Settings is bad. Duplicating all configuration UI in both places is also bad. Ultimately if the metro UI was a bit more integrated into the desktop experience I don't think people would mind if the Settings app gradually replaced the old control panel.

If more of your feedback was like this (and also less repetitive), people wouldn't have as much of a problem with your conduct on this forum.

1 hour ago, Sven Groot wrote

 like the apparently coin-toss way the split between the metro Settings app and the desktop Control Panel was decided.

In general, I want there to be some sort of connection between an app on the metro side and its associated desktop application. It's silly having a completely different set of tabs open across both IE apps,. If the intent for a lot of these dockables/convertibles is to shift between being mobile and sitting at your desk, then what I should be able to access instantly what I was looking at while I was sitting down in desktop mode in metro IE.

35 minutes ago, MasterPie wrote

*snip*

In general, I want there to be some sort of connection between an app on the metro side and its associated desktop application.

I couldn't agree more.  I develop applications for mobile computers that integrate with a variety of hardware.  Creating a Modern app would seem to be a natural step in the evolution of our product.  But we cannot access much of that hardware from a Modern app, and what's worse, we cannot communicate with a desktop application or Windows service that does have access to that hardware.

By "cannot", I mean without the sideloading and loopback exemption hacks that would create a nightmare for the thousands of disparate IT groups we support.

My message to Microsoft:  Give developers the power of desktop applications in the Modern world.  This MUST happen if your vision of reducing and finally removing the desktop from existence can ever come true.

More:

• My Modern apps need to communicate with each other without user interaction.
• My Modern apps need to be extensible (pluggable).
• We need to be able to sideload our Modern apps on tablets/computers that are NOT part of a domain.  Our LOB customers do not have big IT departments.  In many cases, the IT department is the guy who figured out how to set a password on the wireless router.

I can see Visual Studio having a metro app that is basically a frontend to TFS where I could view all my projects, work items, team discussions, nightly builds. Looks like I need to fix something...tap the relevant source file...Visual Studio opens up in desktop mode with the project/file open for me. I dock my tablet so that I can work on the file.

Having thought of your situation (as a subset of my own), there are possibilities in the current landscape of Modern app development.  You can communicate between your Modern app and your desktop app by connecting them both to an Internet-facing server.

Unfortunately, this is far from ideal for our apps.  We have the restriction of users often being located in areas for extended periods of time where connectivity is an issue.

6 hours ago, wastingtime​withforums wrote

All this could roll-in with a huge "We have listened!" - campaign.

+1 - Excellent statement!

5 hours ago, wastingtime​withforums wrote

*snip*

I've said it multiple times on this forum. But ok:

The tragedy is, that Windows 8 could be a true "No compromise" OS which would make EVERYONE happy with just four very simple fixes:

1. Include the start menu and the start button back. Add an option for what happens when you press on the start button (start menu or start screen). If you have chosen start menu, there should be a dedicated switch-to-metro button either in the start menu or in the task bar in the near of the clock.

3. Add a Boot-to-desktop option in the control panel.

4. Start8 and others proved that links to metro apps can be placed into a start menu. There could be a dedicated metro programs group for the occasional need for a metro app without switching to the start screen first.

That's already possible in Windows8. You just go here: http://www.stardock.com/products/start8/ and click install.

In many respects, Stardock actually solved this whole problem for Microsoft. Instead of Microsoft having to build a supported dual-start-menu to help people transition, Stardock have done it for them. This alleviates Microsoft of the need to test, localize, support, maintain and configure the app for the next decade, just in order to help people with the transition from a start menu to a start screen.

The default for Windows8 is great for "normal" users, but for the folks where losing the start menu is non-negotiable, they can upgrade to Windows8 and get Stardock. From Microsoft's perspective this is great!

Even with Surface, if you want to create content, you want the desktop. 

The vast majority of home user don't create content. Most people use them for browsing sites like facebook and gmail, possibly doing stuff in Office and to consume media like Hulu and angry birds. The rare few who do create content outside of office will presumably continue to do so via their desktop applications. But they weren't going to do that on a surface anyway, because content creation is hard on a small screen anyway, as anyone who has tried to type an email into an iPad will know.

Metro is not about content creation. It never has been. It is entirely and unashamedly optimised for consumption.

These changes are trivial to implement (freeware does it) and with Microsoft's man power, they could be included within weeks. Announce it right now that these changes are coming with a free update. This will surely increase sales of W8 licenses

Sure, maybe some extra sales to some geeks. But those geeks can already jailbreak their Surface to put desktop apps on it if they really care that much. (Here's an insider secret for you: Microsoft doesn't care if geeks jailbreak their surface and subsequently get pwned by installing dodgy internet software on it - they'd just prefer if joe average doesn't fall into that trap).

And besides, adding loads of extra dials and config options and so on - particularly if they are hidden is bad for the user experience and leads to fragility in apps (remember how people used to hack the registry to change stuff, or had to trawl through loads of menus to turn on file extensions?)

So, that's the immediate fixes for the desktop side. In the next version the appstore should be opened up for Desktop programs as well, this would solve finally the age-old problem of holey Java and Flash versions too - list them in the appstore and let them update through the appstore. Problem solved. I understand there could be a new package format needed for that.

Users should be able to safely install apps without it damaging their machine in a way that people installing fun EXEs from the web really aren't safe. Determining if software is malicious is equivalent to the halting problem, so the only way to do this is to sandbox them. And most desktop apps don't support being run with hyper-low privileges (for instance, LoadLibrary will normally fail from AppContainer because of the lowbox).

That (and the fact that Desktop isn't available for all Windows8 devices) is why the AppStore isn't used for pushing Desktop apps.

This way the invariant is preserved: any app you install from the AppStore is safe to run (even if it was intentionally coded to be malicious) and will work on any Windows8 device.

Sideloading of the metro apps needs to be possible

It already is.

Vastly expand the default apps; they are just embarrassing. Some of them look as if they consist of two code-lines. The whole metro-ideology needs to get a lot less anal too. The "design first, convenience second" thing serves no one. Stop with the obsession of hiding buttons and functions.

1. When you get bored of the default apps, try the "Store" app; it'll allow you download new ones, and not just by Microsoft (many of them are free).

2. The fewer buttons and dials and configuration options the user has to press and tweak, the less likely the app will break, the more likely it will work on a tablet and the more likely the user will get to spend their time enjoying the content of the app and not the mechanics of your config files.

It kind of baffles me to hear someone complaining that the UI isn't complex enough. Come on. This is progress. We don't want to have to navigate stupid menus or find hidden settings in order to consume content. Let your users get the content without having to think about it. Every second they are wasting navigating your menus or clicking your buttons is a second they are pissed off at your app for not letting them do what they wanted to do, i.e. consume the media your app exposes.

Start de-uglifying Office 2013 and Visual Studio 2012 immediately (colors aren't bad, M'kay) and promise free updates for the GUIs in these products. All this could roll-in with a huge "We have listened!" - campaign.

Office and VS are not Windows.

1 hour ago, bondsbw wrote

@MasterPie:

*snip*

I couldn't agree more.  I develop applications for mobile computers that integrate with a variety of hardware.  Creating a Modern app would seem to be a natural step in the evolution of our product.  But we cannot access much of that hardware from a Modern app, and what's worse, we cannot communicate with a desktop application or Windows service that does have access to that hardware.

If your app is to be installed from the appstore, it shouldn't be able to do bad things to the machine it is running on.

That should explain why Metro apps don't get to talk directly to your hardware, your desktop apps or to other metro apps by default.

If you need to mess with hardware or with other people's apps, you need to be a desktop application, albeit with a Metro frontend doing the "driving". Your desktop application can be invisible and expose itself as a server to the Metro application over a loopback socket.

• We need to be able to sideload our Modern apps on tablets/computers that are NOT part of a domain.  Our LOB customers do not have big IT departments.  In many cases, the IT department is the guy who figured out how to set a password on the wireless router.

Your wish is my command.

You can use Intune to configure non-domain joined WinRT/iPad/iPhone/Android/AndroidTab/Windows devices centrally. If you have several small clients, you can also be the administrator of several entirely distinct "groups". Each group gets a "company store" of side-loadable apps that the user can choose to install from.

1 hour ago, evildictait​or wrote

*snip*

That's already possible in Windows8. You just go here: http://www.stardock.com/products/start8/ and click install.

So, in other words, MS could solve it all in one step - Buy Stardock.

8 minutes ago, elmer wrote

*snip*

So, in other words, MS could solve it all in one step - Buy Stardock.

If they did that they lose all of the benefit of Stardock. If Start8 was in in Windows8 it would need to localized, made accessible for users with disabilities, maintained, continuously upgraded and supported for enterprise for 10 years, all for the tiny numbers of Windows8 users who actually want it. It would also either be on by default, effectively defeating the entire point of apps-front-and-centre philosophy of Win8, or it would be off by default, and we'd be right back here. And let's not forget that start8 is in total contrast to MS UX guidelines, so if MS did buy it it would be impossible to rectify MS policy with having stardock, and ultimately that would mean dismantling stardock and moving their staff to work on UX for other teams at MS, i.e. killing start8 stone dead.

Also, what's the scenario that users want that they don't currently have? If you want a start menu you can get one. From Microsoft's POV that means that there is now nobody who can't upgrade to Win8 for lack of a start menu since everyone either doesn't care or can get one from StarDock.

From Microsoft's POV the best possible thing is for someone else to make the apps for transition between UXes. Microsoft wants to support the old one and the new one. It doesn't want to support the infinite different possibilities between the two, and as time and time again they've found out, adding configuration options and extra knobs and dials and buttons in the interface leads to extra confusion and extra problems.

No, the best possible solution for Microsoft is that someone else sells the apps that help smooth the transition between Microsoft's own products. Microsoft seriously frikken loves Start8 because it destroys the argument that people can't upgrade to Win8 because Win8 is too unusable without a start menu; because Windows8 has a start menu for the tiny numbers of Win8 users who really want it, without needing to support it for everyone else.

Mousing over to the corner is not consistent from machine to machine.  Sometimes if I hover the mouse just correct, the start option and the multi-task will come up, sometimes it won't.

My suggestion would be to bring back the start button, but let it launch the start screen instead.  We don't have to have the old menu, but we do need to some improvement in this interaction.  A button guarantees feedback for the location and activation to the user. 

Second, the start screen should have a better search system.  Instead of having to dig into results to find what you are looking for, it would be better to present all results, and then allow the user to filter by type.  The current implementation is search, change filter, find.  It would be better to search, find, filter if not found.

Third, even though the start screen does react in a similar fashion to the old xp start menu, fly out on mouse position, it's not consistent either.  Now whether this is a performance issue due to my machine, or code, I can't be sure.  It's very jerky on my system and not as smooth.

Although with this release, they have added the demo on startup, I truly believe that it's not fully fleshed out.  Maybe a step by step demo for those that want to use it comparing the old way to the new way would help a lot of people out.  Show pressing the start button, then show mousing the start area.  A look at the old menu, transition to the new "menu"/screen. Etc. If this type of demo is done, make sure that people have the option to skip out of it easily, but accessible from the desktop and start screen should people want to spend more time training later.

1 hour ago, MasterPie wrote

@bondsbw: Can you list the specific access you need that WinRT doesn't provide currently?

• Communication with applications via loopback
• Runtime extensibility (loading and executing code that was not originally part of the app package)
• Serial port communication (this is a big one; our clients have a lot of money invested in hardware that communicates over serial)

49 minutes ago, evildictait​or wrote

*snip*

If your app is to be installed from the appstore, it shouldn't be able to do bad things to the machine it is running on.

Totally understandable, but I don't give a hoot about the Windows store.  I want to sideload our apps.

If you need to mess with hardware or with other people's apps, you need to be a desktop application, albeit with a Metro frontend doing the "driving". Your desktop application can be invisible and expose itself as a server to the Metro application over a loopback socket.

Which requires a loopback exemption to be set.  Doing this appears to be a hassle at best.

You can use Intune to configure non-domain joined WinRT/iPad/iPhone/Android/AndroidTab/Windows devices centrally. If you have several small clients, you can also be the administrator of several entirely distinct "groups". Each group gets a "company store" of side-loadable apps that the user can choose to install from.

So if I understand this correctly (and this is for some reason the first time I've heard of Intune), our users will have the option to have their IT staff use Intune, or we will become the administrators for their devices.

If so, I don't like the implications of that last statement.  We are software vendors, not IT.  We would be willing to administer the deployment of our software only.  Those users must be able to administer their devices without us*.  Also, this solution does not sound like it would work well for multiple vendors in our situation.  (Which one takes control, and why should some vendors have to rely on another potentially competing vendor to install and manage their software?)

Also, my cursory look over the details of Intune licensing suggests that it requires a sideloading product key.  Are those available for purchase yet?  Who would be responsible for purchasing those keys?  I am under the impression that they must be bought in bulk, and therefore our customers would not purchase them.  (And if we purchase the keys for our customers, would we be back in the multiple vendor situation I described in the last paragraph?)

I seriously want an answer, but it feels like every solution I find uncovers more new problems.  How far down is the rabbit hole?

EDIT:

*Again, reading back to my original problem description, the assumption here is that some of our customers are individual non-IT users who just want to "set it and forget it" (if I may steal a Ronco reference).  We come in one day and install our software and train them, and then we occasionally send out updates and new software extensions to everyone with as little direct interference as possible.

49 minutes ago, evildictait​or wrote

If you need to mess with hardware or with other people's apps, you need to be a desktop application, albeit with a Metro frontend doing the "driving".

In fact, this is exactly what I wanted to begin with:  The ability to create a Modern-style, chromeless window with a live tile for a desktop application.  Bonus points for running in the same process.

(Sure, you could simulate the window by making it full screen, but then it wouldn't interact with the Metro world so well.  It wouldn't have access to contracts like sharing, toast and badge notifications, live tiles or secondary tiles.  It wouldn't work with snap view, and its touchscreen keyboard integration wouldn't automatically pan and zoom the application as needed.)

How much easier would it be than all that mess we've been talking about sideloading and loopback exemptions and Intune deployments and product keys?

46 minutes ago, bondsbw wrote

Totally understandable, but I don't give a hoot about the Windows store.  I want to sideload our apps.

Cool. That makes it easier.

Which requires a loopback exemption to be set.  Doing this appears to be a hassle at best.

It's not too much of a hastle if you're installing the Metro app outside of the Windows Store. This gives guidelines of how to do it as part of your installer:

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/apps/Hh780593.aspx#enable_loopback_for_network_access

Note that the warnings are targetted at "normal" metro app developers who intend to write their app for the Windows Store (enabling loopback is explicitly forbidden for WS apps), but since you don't want to use that anyway, this is still a valid thing to do.

So if I understand this correctly (and this is for some reason the first time I've heard of Intune), our users will have the option to have their IT staff use Intune, or we will become the administrators for their devices.

Intune has two types of account; normal users and IT administrators. The IT administrator user type is analogous to someone running as the domain admin in a domain, so whoever is the Intune administrator has a lot of control.

If you're simply writing software that is to be side-loaded separately, then you just write your app as normal. The Intune side of things is handled by the IT administrators, not by the developers. Your customers (who are the IT department for the company) use Intune to add your app to the "Company Store" for sideloading.

So for example, let's suppose your company makes some enterprise app like, say, a remote-help piece of software for which you want a metro interface but needs to interact with weird and wonderful stuff on the desktop. This is how it goes:

1. You write your metro app as normal, but loops back to a desktop service to do the heavy lifting. Your metro app won't qualify for the Windows store, but you don't care.

2. You write an installer which plonks the metro app and the service on the machine and registers the metro app for the loopback exemption. Since this is an installer, it'll need admin privs to install, but we'll get to that later.

3. You deliver this installer to your customer's IT department who use Intune. They add it to their company store.

4. One of the customer's of that company enrolls their device to Intune. She now has the company store available either via a URL in the browser or via the Windows8 start menu. Suddenly there's a new app (yours) in there that she can see, and if she wants it she can click it.

5. This click routes a call all the way through Intune which then picks up your app from the company store and sends it to a service on the device and auto-installs it. It drops the metro app, the service and exempts the metro app from the loopback restriction. The installer automagically gets admin permissions for the installer because Intune handles all of that for you.

6. The user now sees the metro app in their Start screen and can click it. They are now using your app.

7 ...

8. Profit!

The cool bit about this is that developers just write code as normal, apart from you need to separate the metro app from the high permissions app (which is good for security anyway). Managing devices is left to the IT administrators who just add your app to the company store, and users don't have to think about stuff, they just click the thing in the store and it'll all magically work.

1 hour ago, evildictait​or wrote

Intune has two types of account; normal users and IT administrators.

You described in very good detail the scenario for the IT administrator account type.  Can you point me to any information about the normal user type?

A large number of our users are not set up with any IT staff... I may not have been clear on that.  Some of them are one-man shops.  Those users bring their Windows 8 device to us, and we install our software, train them to use it, and they go on their way.  For our desktop apps, they don't have to interact with us ever again unless they need app support.

So, with or without Intune, can we sideload our applications in such a way that we don't have to administer their computers at all after installation (keeping in mind that they do not have access to IT specialists)?

Also, with Intune, if the user stops paying the monthly fee to Microsoft, does our applications stop working on his device?  Or can he continue using the applications he has already downloaded?

Sorry for continuing with all the questions.  I tend to do as much research as possible instead of asking questions on forums, but I'm having trouble immediately finding these answers at the Intune website, and you seem to have a clear understanding of the technology.

5 minutes ago, bondsbw wrote

You described in very good detail the scenario for the IT administrator account type.  Can you point me to any information about the normal user type?

It depends what you mean by normal users. Intune is really geared towards SMOs managing a number of "company owned" but not domain joined devices (or at a push BYODs). Intune "normal users" therefore are just average folk in the company, and the administrator is the IT admin for the company.

In the case where the machines are domain joined, you don't need Intune to push out stuff to domain joined devices; but you do need all of the machines to be Enterprise licenced. You can then push out Metro apps directly.

In the event that your customers are essentially outsourcing their IT to you (example: you are providing IT to a selection of local coffee shops where you essentially act as an admin on their behalf, cleaning up viruses, installing software and managing their Windows Updates). In this case, Intune is an ideal solution as it will take most of the pain out of your day-to-day job as well as enabling side-loading of apps.

In the event that your customers don't have enterprise licences, you aren't managing their IT, and they don't have Intune, the Windows Store is definitely the best option, but in the exceptionally rare cases where you have an app that can't be in the WinStore on a consumer edition of Windows where you don't manage their IT and they don't have Intune, you need to do the following:

1. Package your app as an app-x project.

2. Run the Windows Store validation (try and be as compliant as possible - it makes your app safer and more secure, and makes it easier to migrate into the general user sphere later if you want to) http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/apps/hh694081.aspx.

3. Sign your app-x project using a trusted certificate from any trusted CA. DO NOT mess with the CAs on the target device.

4. On the target machine, set the following (requires elevation)

HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Policies\Microsoft\Windows\Appx\AllowAllTrustedApps = 1

5. You should now be able to run the app.

More info:

http://blogs.msdn.com/b/b8/archive/2012/04/19/managing-quot-byo-quot-pcs-in-the-enterprise-including-woa.aspx

http://blogs.msdn.com/b/windowsstore/archive/2012/04/25/deploying-metro-style-apps-to-businesses.aspx

From what I understand, the only way to sideload in my "exceptionally rare" case is to purchase a sideloading product key for each device.  I worry about $30 per device, which for say 1000 machines, comes to $30,000.

Using a regular desktop app, it comes to $0 extra and not a bit of the hassle.

My case is not exceptionally rare.  Seriously, our software just uses a barcode scanner that communicates over a serial-to-USB interface (non-HID).  But that's a major component... take it away, the usefulness of our solution goes down quickly.

If it comes down to these choices:

1. $200 extra per user to get new barcode hardware that works with Modern apps in some way (if this even exists)
2. $30 extra per user to sideload a Modern app
3. $0 extra to continue without some of the nice features available to Modern apps

... our clients will choose option 3.  And based on that option, they will probably not choose to upgrade to Windows 8 any time soon.

Option 4:  upload our app to the Windows Store.  When our users come in for training, we download the app on their device, install our desktop component, and set the loopback exemption.

Thoughts?  Would this work, or am I missing something?

36 minutes ago, bondsbw wrote

My case is not exceptionally rare.  Seriously, our software just uses a barcode scanner that communicates over a serial-to-USB interface (non-HID).  But that's a major component... take it away, the usefulness of our solution goes down quickly.

Sounds like you need to watch this: http://channel9.msdn.com/Events/BUILD/BUILD2011/HW-747T

It seems to be almost entirely talking about your situation.

It might be possible for you to use the stuff from that talk to do away with the whole desktop service requirement and be able to create an app that can actually go in the store.

Actually... I just had another thought.

Option 4:  upload our app to the Windows Store.  When our users come in for training, we download the app on their device, install our desktop component, and set the loopback exemption.

Thoughts?  Would this work, or am I missing something?

Metro apps (in the store) are not allowed to talk to desktop components.

3.1 You must use only the Windows Runtime APIs to implement the features of your Windows Store app

We describe these APIs in the Windows Store apps API reference. Your app may only depend on software listed in the Windows Store.

Windows Store apps must not communicate with local desktop applications or services via local mechanisms, including via files and registry keys.

1 hour ago, evildictait​or wrote

*snip*

Sounds like you need to watch this: http://channel9.msdn.com/Events/BUILD/BUILD2011/HW-747T

It seems to be almost entirely talking about your situation.

Good info, but we don't provide the hardware or the drivers.  The hardware vendor, FTDI, supplies a serial-over-USB interface, but serial access is not a supported scenario for Modern apps.  They also supply a DLL interface that can't be loaded by Modern apps.

Our only option seems to be to write our own driver for another company's undocumented hardware.  I hope Microsoft doesn't seriously think that this is a workable option for most developers.

It might be possible for you to use the stuff from that talk to do away with the whole desktop service requirement and be able to create an app that can actually go in the store.

Even if the hardware issue is resolved, it only provides the third of the three scenarios I listed above.  The other two, loading runtime extensions and communicating with desktop apps, are unsupported outside of expensive sideloading.  (Communication with a desktop app has always been my "plan B".  It could be used/abused to simulate runtime extensibility, and it could be used to allow communication with external devices that do not support Modern apps.)

52 minutes ago, bondsbw wrote

Good info, but we don't provide the hardware or the drivers.  The hardware vendor, FTDI, supplies a serial-over-USB interface, but serial access is not a supported scenario for Modern apps.  They also supply a DLL interface that can't be loaded by Modern apps.

Is the device exposed via a class driver or a device driver? If it's exposed by a class driver there's a chance there'll be a Metro api for it, otherwise we're starting to get into complicated territory.

The easiest thing would be if the barcode scanner presents as a generic image scanner. If that's the case, you might be able to avoid playing shenanigans with their driver at all by taking a picture via the generic device and then pulling the data out using a scanner library.

Unfortunately lots of device companies are epically lame, and so there's a chance that it won't expose itself as anything useful and just expect you to use the DLL they shipped with the device. In this case there's really not a whole lot you can do but badger them to get their house in order, but you can tell them the following:

Store apps aren't allowed to just grab a handle to a driver and start poking it for obvious security / consistency reasons. If you want to talk to a device, the device needs to "inform" Windows that it's available for being poked by apps by adding a device manifest (http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/hardware/hh454247).

The documentation is a bit confusing because the manifest allows a variety of things to happen. In essence, the manifest provides an icon for the device (for the popin dialog), a link to the Windows Store to autoinstall the device vendor's "flagship" app (e.g. a Nikon app when you plug in a Nikon camera), but it also exposes a list of API collections.

One of these collections is the "public" collection that everyone can use, and the others are locked to particular apps. This allows for instance any app to tell the Kaspersky driver to initiate a scan, but only the Kaspersky app to quarantine a particular file.

Your device vendor needs to construct one of these manifests detailing what their API is and who can call it. They can push it out without a code-change via WinQual here: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/hardware/hh801890.aspx.

Once this is done, any store app can poke the interfaces exposed to them by the driver.

Even if the hardware issue is resolved, it only provides the third of the three scenarios I listed above.  The other two, loading runtime extensions and communicating with desktop apps, are unsupported outside of expensive sideloading.  (Communication with a desktop app has always been my "plan B".  It could be used/abused to simulate runtime extensibility, and it could be used to allow communication with external devices that do not support Modern apps.)

Also, runtime extensions and communicating with desktop apps are means to an end, not an end in itself.

If no-one outside of your company writes extensions for your app (or if a small number of external people do), just compile them all in and selectively enable them. You can always add new features later by updating via the store.

And if your metro app is the only interface to your software, why does it need to mess with other apps on the desktop? (This is explicitly verboten in the security model of metro apps).

Also, barcodes aren't a particularly common device category; certainly not like USB drives or harddrives or graphics cards or printers or the bajillion HIDs that Windows has to support; although that's cold comfort when you need to make use of one.

Anyway, it might be that the only solution to this problem is to badger the device manufacturer to sort their drivers out for Windows8.

1 day ago, evildictait​or wrote

*snip*

The default for Windows8 is great for "normal" users, but for the folks where losing the start menu is non-negotiable, they can upgrade to Windows8 and get Stardock. From Microsoft's perspective this is great!

Somehow this greatness eludes most people. Metrophones (Windows Phone) are a complete niche compared to Android and IOS (who look more WIMP-like)  And the "success" of W8 is nothing to write home about.

Acer's boss Jim Wong recently accused W8 of being too complicated and one of the reasons for bad notebook sales. They want now to establish "Experience Centers" to get customers accustomed to it.

Wong: "I think Windows 8 is too complicated. People do not understand the system. We must help them now".

The OEMs are ALL crying (was there a single OEM praising 8's performance?) of all Windows sales in the past decade, W8 is the most lack luster, it gets slammed by usability experts, even science magazines join the slam.. how's that in any way great?

Most OEMs cancelled or postponed their RT devices ("entirely and unashamedly optimised for consumption") because of lack of demand. So much for the love "normal" users have for it.

1 day ago, evildictait​or wrote

The vast majority of home user don't create content. Most people use them for browsing sites like facebook and gmail, possibly doing stuff in Office and to consume media like Hulu and angry birds. The rare few who do create content outside of office will presumably continue to do so via their desktop applications. But they weren't going to do that on a surface anyway, because content creation is hard on a small screen anyway, as anyone who has tried to type an email into an iPad will know.

Metro is not about content creation. It never has been. It is entirely and unashamedly optimised for consumption.

I fail to see what it has to with my points at all? I am not for the abandonment of metro, but for the full classical interface as an option. It took the more work to remove it then letting it in. The first beta had the start screen AND a fully-working start menu onboard, switchable through a registry tweak (so they put effort INTO annoying users). And no, Start8 is no viable solution. That one needs to pay additional money to a third party to make Windows competitive with older versions of it again for anything beyond Angry Birds is not a solution!

Sure, maybe some extra sales to some geeks.

What? Windows 8 scares "normal" people the most. Not everyone is just on Angry Birds, PCs are still used a lot. And Windows 8 makes exactly those things harder, that most Windows PCs are used for - it actually eliminates the point of buying new computers (if your old W7 PC is more optimized for PC-tasks than the new W8 PC - what's point of the W8 computer?)  No wonder there are complaints. Radically altering Windows and expecting everyone will swallow it without problems is fantasy. Geeks have the knowledge about Classic Shell and Start8; it's the normal Windows user who is bound for frustrations with no reasonable escape. Let's not forget that the metro interface and its design philosophy is foreign even to most tablet and smartphone users. Almost everyone of the normal people has Windows and/or Mac experience, but who has metro experience? Metro is a total alien for pretty much everyone.

Users should be able to safely install apps without it damaging their machine in a way that people installing fun EXEs from the web really aren't safe. Determining if software is malicious is equivalent to the halting problem, so the only way to do this is to sandbox them. And most desktop apps don't support being run with hyper-low privileges (for instance, LoadLibrary will normally fail from AppContainer because of the lowbox).

Since Mac does it, it's possible. END.

Expand the appstore mechanism and create a different sandbox (or none at all) for desktop applications. Make the additonal risks of desktop applications aware to the customers, but the option should still be there (I am not asking this for W8 by the way, but for one of the next versions)

Screening of the submitted programs and the registration of developers should elimate most malware.

It already is.

Intune as a solution for sideloading? That's a joke, right? That's like saying "money is no problem, just go rob banks".

2. The fewer buttons and dials and configuration options the user has to press and tweak, the less likely the app will break, the more likely it will work on a tablet and the more likely the user will get to spend their time enjoying the content of the app and not the mechanics of your config files.

It kind of baffles me to hear someone complaining that the UI isn't complex enough. Come on. This is progress. We don't want to have to navigate stupid menus or find hidden settings in order to consume content. Let your users get the content without having to think about it. Every second they are wasting navigating your menus or clicking your buttons is a second they are pissed off at your app for not letting them do what they wanted to do, i.e. consume the media your app exposes.

So, something like this is progress? If showing buttons makes something less aesthetically pleasing but more helpful than you go for the buttons. It's that simple.

Just saying, it may not be as dire as you think.

1 day ago, contextfree` wrote

I don't quite get why in this situation I wouldn't just keep it as a desktop app at least until the API and/or hardware situation improves. I mean, where is the requirement to make a "metro" app actually coming from?

Our software is mobile in nature.  Our clients are, thusly, salivating over the iPads and Android devices, and now Windows 8/RT devices.

Now, our mobile apps are designed to use a keyboard and mouse.  If they want a tablet, we'll have to start over on the UI front.  That's a big step... so I'm looking at the future.  Is WinRT the future for developing on the Microsoft stack?  I go back to my original post:

My message to Microsoft:  Give developers the power of desktop applications in the Modern world.  This MUST happen if your vision of reducing and finally removing the desktop from existence can ever come true.

I need to develop on a stable platform.  The Windows platform appears to be a moving target right now.  If I am to invest my software development in this platform, I need to know:

1. Will Microsoft build out WinRT as the ultimate replacement for Win32 and desktop applications?
2. If so, will the WinRT platform incorporate these use cases I have described?

My assumption for question 1 is "yes".  I have to assume that, since Microsoft may have put their entire company on the line with this new platform.  My current answer to 2 seems to still be "no", or at least, "not without hassle".  If that is going to change in the next couple of years, I'll start porting my application to WinRT.  Otherwise, I may need to look into another mobile platform.

14 minutes ago, bondsbw wrote

1. Will Microsoft build out WinRT as the ultimate replacement for Win32 and desktop applications?

No. WindowsRT will not demolish support for desktop any more than Android phones will. They are different devices aimed at different audiences.

The Windows team at Microsoft still considers Desktop to be the main focus for development, although obviously the marketing focuses on the "new" areas such as metro.

Also Microsoft has an explicit policy for application compatibility; applications should (in the absence of clear abuses of APIs) have a ~10 year life cycle.

If you're an early adopter of the Surface, then you'll have to wait for device manufacturers to catch up. Let's remember that Surface not only runs a different device driver model, it's also a different architecture, so you're just going to have to wait for the drivers to catch up.

@WTWF: tl;dr.

1 hour ago, evildictait​or wrote

No. WindowsRT will not demolish support for desktop any more than Android phones will.

In case you thought otherwise, I meant WinRT as in Modern apps, not as in the ARM OS.

They are different devices aimed at different audiences.

This doesn't make sense to me:

• If you are talking about Windows RT (ARM), desktop applications are not supported and I have no reason to believe they ever will be.  Modern is the only future here.
• If you are talking about Windows 8 (Intel), then you seem to be claiming that Microsoft has purposely chosen to target one OS at two different audiences, the desktop audience and the tablet audience, with no intention to bring them together for a cohesive user experience.

I can't believe that you, after all this time of arguing with WTWF, actually believe that last statement.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-01-27/acer-sees-success-in-chrome-pcs-as-windows-fails-to-drive-sales.html

I find it hard to ever give much credence to anything this guy says, as he is so full of it, but nevertheless, as the saying goes... where there's smoke...

and in other news... Apple seem to have a similar (if less alarming) problem looming.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/01/27/us-apple-asia-idUSBRE90Q0IV20130127?irpc=932

2 hours ago, bondsbw wrote

In case you thought otherwise, I meant WinRT as in Modern apps, not as in the ARM OS.

If you are talking about Windows 8 (Intel), then you seem to be claiming that Microsoft has purposely chosen to target one OS at two different audiences, the desktop audience and the tablet audience, with no intention to bring them together for a cohesive user experience.

That's exactly what I'm saying. Windows8 Metro apps are not aimed at content creators, and according to most of the people I've met at MS, is explicitly not designed to remove desktop applications from the equation.

Metro apps are just a new way of doing things for the post-app world we live in. Users want to be able to download crappy apps without fear of pwnage and to be able to use them in a swishy way with centralized ownership, content controls and design cohesiveness; to put it another way, people do actually want iPhone/Android apps on a PC, and that's what Metro apps give them.

But Microsoft isn't stupid. They fully realize that some applications are never a good fit for that model. Visual Studio (which is used by at least 50% of the employees of Microsoft) is a clear example of an app that would never really fit into Metro. Microsoft also realize that their entire business is founded on binary compatibility with older versions of the OS. That's why most applications just work on Windows8 despite having been written and compiled on machines before Windows8 even existed.

Perhaps it's not obvious to people who've never been to Redmond and seen the work they put into app-compat, but the simple fact of life is that the desktop isn't going away, and it never was going to. Metro might be front-and-centre in the adverts and in the mind of content-consumers (which let's face it, is most home users), but to content-creators, the Desktop is still critical, and will continue to remain and evolve with Windows for the foreseeable future.

3 hours ago, evildictait​or wrote

*snip*

Metro apps are just a new way of doing things for the post-app world we live in.

Post-app world? This talk of post-this and post-that is ridiculous. All these devices are still personal computers of different sizes. They are designed with the same principles. But now we have a post-app world?? What does that even mean?

people do actually want iPhone/Android apps on a PC

We've had that for years. They are called widgets and gadgets. Simple, single focus apps designed to consume content. They were never popular on PC's before, but now that they run full screen they will become popular? I thought we all decided long ago that full screen apps didn't make sense for productivity on a PC.

20 hours ago, evildictait​or wrote

@cheong: I see 16 ones compatible with Windows8 (although only one is certified).

Also, barcodes aren't a particularly common device category; certainly not like USB drives or harddrives or graphics cards or printers or the bajillion HIDs that Windows has to support; although that's cold comfort when you need to make use of one.

Anyway, it might be that the only solution to this problem is to badger the device manufacturer to sort their drivers out for Windows8.

I really mean WinRT...

ARM based system have advantage over x86/x64 based system as POS machine on remote site. They're immune from attack of x86 instruction based virus, and lots of dancing bunnies people commonly see won't work there.

Now just if Microsoft made serial/parallel ports more accessible there... (Those cash drawers require serial/parallel interface to work)

1 hour ago, Visible = False wrote

Post-app world? This talk of post-this and post-that is ridiculous. All these devices are still personal computers of different sizes. They are designed with the same principles. But now we have a post-app world?? What does that even mean?

In the pre-app world applications could do real damage to your machine. They ran as your user, and they did actions on the machine on your behalf.

Apps are different. They aren't trusted to do actions on your behalf, and they must be sandboxed to prevent damage to your machine.

Apps are not new - not on PCs or elsewhere. We've had flash games for forever on PCs and apps have always been the main way of interacting with smartphones.

The difference is that on PCs you've never been able to install native programs that genuinely can't do damage to your machine. They can't install other software, they can be installed and uninstalled without litterring your machine, and they must declare upfront manifests of how they intend to operate.

iOS, Android and Windows8 are good examples of post-app OSes. Windows7 and to a lesser degree, Linux and MacOSX are a pre-app OSes because native code you found on the Internet for them is dangerous, unattributable, non-selfdescribing, non-centralized and does not necessarily cleanly uninstall.

45 minutes ago, cheong wrote

ARM based system have advantage over x86/x64 based system as POS machine on remote site. They're immune from attack of x86 instruction based virus, and lots of dancing bunnies people commonly see won't work there.

Not if you write your virus in Java (which is the most common way of attacking Internet Explorer in 2011 and 2012). All of the logic bugs in x86 are still there when you cross compile it for ARM.

Case in point: look at all the viruses for Android which runs on ARM.

1 day ago, elmer wrote

Returning to the OP for a second... as the saying goes... where there's smoke...

and in other news... Apple seem to have a similar (if less alarming) problem looming.

What would one expect out of a culture programmed to be consumers and not creators?

Consumption devices rule the day.

I think this is what is a bit disappointing about the whole Devices + Services revolution.

Computing power used to be about empowerment, now it's about consuming, and like any other consumption paradigm, it all leads to obesity.

At what point is one service/subscription more is too many?

At what point do we push the chair back, and say enough is enough.

The PC/Computer was the great equalizer, (and still is at this moment.)  At what point in human history could we create so much so easily.  The idea of becoming a world class film maker in the Pre-PC world was impossible, now it's so easily achievable, that any person with a computer, a decent camcorder, and software can rival the great directors of yesterday.  When in time could a person write a novel, illustrate, and publish with a fraction of cost?

The race towards the consumer app model will never bring us to that level but instead is a race to dumb down things.  I won't say it's not necessary, because for the vast majority of individuals the "it just works" model is sufficient.  My worry is what we lose in the meantime.  The whole Google apps vs. Office debate is a prime example.  Yes, Google apps does meet most people's needs.  Unfortunately, if I have to do a research paper or a professional publication, I WANT WORD at my side.  Then it comes to a business decision for the software maker, more features or cut features to compete.  Make less complex, for more accessibility. In the meantime, for those that are used to these "power tools" we find our power saw exchanged for a hacksaw. Outlook vs. Mail app for example.

And for all this doom and gloom, there's still a bright future.  The future of Windows with Azure has unbelievable potential.  The pricing just needs to be tweaked a little lower to make the "future is now" achievable.

Computing as a utility has unbelievable potential, it just has to be priced differently.

Imagine a world where you paid 20 dollars a month for your computing needs.  Not 300 to 1000 every 3 to 5 years.  You pay a lease for a thin client that attaches automatically to your Azure Virtual Machine, unlimited bandwidth and storage.  Every MS Software product available included. Complete computing power, and the only thing your bandwidth uses is the bandwidth for RemoteFX.  No longer are you limited by your processor, your ram, your storage or your bandwidth, you will only be limited by your datacenter.

(A smart businessman would tell you that 12 * 20 is 240 dollars and by 3 years is 720 dollars, more than you would pay for an outright buy of a cheap computer.  But that fact is only for those that can do math.)

More importantly, I've not seen any announcement from Oracle that they're going to release JRE for WinRT. So this would be non-issue at least for now.

5 minutes ago, cheong wrote

@evildictaitor:Unless your POS is written in Java, how many POS client would have Java installed?

More importantly, I've not seen any announcement from Oracle that they're going to release JRE for WinRT. So this would be non-issue at least for now.

@cheong: The WindowsRT restrictions have nothing to do with ARM being inherently more secure than x86. They are due to the OS having a more restrictive policy. It is entirely possible to run Java on ARM. It's also possible to buffer overflow ARM devices, and to exploit sandbox logic bugs such as those in Java and .NET.

Running on ARM doesn't afford you protection. Running on RT does.

23 minutes ago, RLO wrote

Unfortunately, if I have to do a research paper or a professional publication, I WANT WORD at my side.

Meanwhile, most actual research papers (at least in the field of Computer Science) are written in LaTeX.

58 minutes ago, evildictait​or wrote

*snip*

@cheong: The WindowsRT restrictions have nothing to do with ARM being inherently more secure than x86. They are due to the OS having a more restrictive policy. It is entirely possible to run Java on ARM. It's also possible to buffer overflow ARM devices, and to exploit sandbox logic bugs such as those in Java and .NET.

Running on ARM doesn't afford you protection. Running on RT does.

I'm not saying it's more secure. I'm saying it's not actively targeted (yet).

At least we can ignore the already swamping x86 targeted virus/trojans in the wild.

While it's possible to run Java on ARM, Oracle still has no plan to release JRE for WinRT yet.

It's possible to buffer overflow ARM devices, but as long as their shell code won't run on ARM, all you can have is Denial Of Service type of damage and your machine is not pwned.

This makes WinRT machines desirable for loosely monitored remote site environment.

Of course the other option would be to run the business on webserver, and install diskless workstation with DVDROM only, and use a LiveCD to browse the business web applications. In that way whenever the machine is "infected", a single reboot can get rid of them. Yet I don't see a lot of these chainstore I.T. comfortable with Linux systems.

Herbie

I actually wrote my dissertation in TeX. Not because there's a requirement, but because it's much easier to do than Word. Of course, part of it is because I was using content from papers I've written that were written in LaTeX, but it's also just because I have ~150 references that are much easier to manage with Bibtex than with Word. Also, although you sometimes have to struggle with LaTeX's stubbornness when it comes to laying out images (it does like creating pages of floats even when that wastes tons of space), it's nothing compared to fighting with Word when it refuses to place an image where you want it in a large, complex document (we've all been there).

44 minutes ago, cheong wrote

At least we can ignore the already swamping x86 targeted virus/trojans in the wild.

Not really. Compiling most viruses for ARM is just a case of changing the compiler setting to "ARM".

While it's possible to run Java on ARM, Oracle still has no plan to release JRE for WinRT yet.

Might not run in WindowsRT mode, but it runs on ARM. (I actually have Burp Professional which is a Java app on a Windows RT device, so I know it works )

It's possible to buffer overflow ARM devices, but as long as their shell code won't run on ARM, all you can have is Denial Of Service type of damage and your machine is not pwned.

?? Writing ARM shellcode is not hard. There's a lot of knowledge in this field because iPhones and Android devices (of which there are many) run on ARM. Hell, all of the iPhone jailbreaks are buffer overflows on ARM.

Of course the other option would be to run the business on webserver, and install diskless workstation with DVDROM only, and use a LiveCD to browse the business web applications. In that way whenever the machine is "infected", a single reboot can get rid of them. Yet I don't see a lot of these chainstore I.T. comfortable with Linux systems.

Unless the virus writes uses a PXE boot attack. Or jumps around on computers on the same LAN. Or infects the firewall to DNS redirect you. Or infects the firmware on the network card or any other device.

ARM isn't magic. You're not magically safer for running it. Windows RT's clever policy that all apps must be checked by the Microsoft store, must run in a super-unprivileged sandbox and that all drivers must be signed makes you safer; but none of that is to do with ARM being an inherently better platform, it's all to do with RT making the platform safer through policies.

11 seconds ago, Sven Groot wrote

@Dr Herbie: How did you manage citations? Word didn't have built-in support for that until Office 2007, and doing it manually... *shudders*

Also inserting formulas was a PITA until Office 2007.

1 minute ago, cheong wrote

@evildictaitor:Whatever. All I wanted to say is all these things makes WinRT devices desirable for running POS clients, so it's pity that Microsoft don't make serial/parallel port access easier on WinRT.

It's easy to do in Windows RT. You just need compatible drivers.

I did think about writing something myself and marketing it, but didn't have the time in the end.

@evildictaitor: I only had two simple formulas in the entire thesis, so the old formula editor was fine .

Herbie

19 minutes ago, Dr Herbie wrote

In the end it wasn't that bad.

We should all consider ourselves lucky. I have a friend in London who did a Ph.D. in anatomy back in the 70s, and she had to write her dissertation on a typewriter, and the (many) images she used had to be glued to the pages by hand.

Even now when we open her thesis, gel photos still drop out at random.

Herbie

13 hours ago, evildictait​or wrote

*snip*

It's easy to do in Windows RT. You just need compatible drivers.

That's the problem.  Microsoft explicitly does not provide support for serial port access in WinRT.  (I'm not making this up... it's a well known issue, search the Internet if you don't believe me.)

The reason these vendors supplied serial port access in the first place is because all desktop applications can access the serial port.  This reduced the need to use proprietary drivers.  Not true anymore.

I guess Microsoft thought hardware vendors would go back and write new driver code for devices they already sold.  The reality is that support for older devices is limited to what came with the device.  Need a new driver, throw $200 or whatever at a new device (even though your old one works perfectly and will work perfectly for years, and you don't need the new features in the new hardware).

Otherwise, Microsoft assumed that application developers would write the hardware drivers.  Frankly, this is absurd, particularly for hardware supplied by third-party vendors.

7 minutes ago, bondsbw wrote

*snip*

That's the problem.  Microsoft explicitly does not provide support for serial port access in WinRT.  (I'm not making this up... it's a well known issue, search the Internet if you don't believe me.)

The reason these vendors supplied serial port access in the first place is because all desktop applications can access the serial port.  This reduced the need to use proprietary drivers.  Not true anymore.

I guess Microsoft thought hardware vendors would go back and write new driver code for devices they already sold.  The reality is that support for older devices is limited to what came with the device.  Need a new driver, throw $200 or whatever at a new device (even though your old one works perfectly and will work perfectly for years, and you don't need the new features in the new hardware).

Otherwise, Microsoft assumed that application developers would write the hardware drivers.  Frankly, this is absurd, particularly for hardware supplied by third-party vendors.

Sadly this isn't a new problem for Windows8. Every version of Windows has had problems when old devices don't have compatible device drivers.

Microsoft might be big, but compared with the hardware market, it's tiny. Unfortunately if hardware manufacturers aren't able to keep up and provide drivers for new versions of Windows that are compatible with the new application/driver models that Microsoft release, there's not a whole lot application developers can do about it.

Your best bet is to phone up the hardware company and ask if/when they intend to release WindowsRT compatible drivers for their hardware.

Lenovo report[ed] a gross profit of $205 million on $9.4 billion in revenue. Not bad for a company that conventional wisdom says should be floundering.

Lenovo's sparkling results stand in contrast to the resentment-soaked PC shipment numbers that Acer reported this week. While Windows 8 is working out pretty well for Lenovo, Acer can't say the same. And it's pretty bitter about it.

"The whole market didn't come back to growth after the Windows 8 launch. That's a simple way to judge if it is successful or not," Acer president Jim Wong told Bloomberg yesterday.

So how do you explain Lenovo's success? Pretty simply, really: Its devices don't stink.

5 hours ago, evildictait​or wrote

*snip*

Sadly this isn't a new problem for Windows8. Every version of Windows has had problems when old devices don't have compatible device drivers.

I don't think this is true of serial port access.  AFAIK, you could talk to a serial port in every version of DOS and Windows with no problem up until Windows 8.  Now suddenly, with Modern apps, it doesn't work at all.

Microsoft should have created an app capability for serial port access.  Microsoft allows my app to become a network server, to impersonate me using my network credentials, and to access random removable storage.  I would say all of those could be more insecure than accessing a serial port, which hooks up to hardware I have physical access to.

I think Microsoft may want to drop serial port access to favour migration to newer USB standard, while neglecting many device in the world still needs it.

2 hours ago, bondsbw wrote

*snip*

I don't think this is true of serial port access.  AFAIK, you could talk to a serial port in every version of DOS and Windows with no problem up until Windows 8.  Now suddenly, with Modern apps, it doesn't work at all.

Microsoft should have created an app capability for serial port access.  Microsoft allows my app to become a network server, to impersonate me using my network credentials, and to access random removable storage.  I would say all of those could be more insecure than accessing a serial port, which hooks up to hardware I have physical access to.

Hang on; since serial ports are handled by the Microsoft class driver, rather than by individual device drivers, are you sure you can't just ask for permission to talk to the class driver and open it as a character device for in/out access? Maybe we're overthinking this and the capability is already in there via the serial driver's class interface. Screw talking to the device driver, you only need to talk to the serial class driver.

8 hours ago, cheong wrote

*snip*

I think Microsoft may want to drop serial port access to favour migration to newer USB standard, while neglecting many device in the world still needs it.

That is a given.  We saw the same thing with .NET.  It didn't initially have RS232 support without using P/Invoke.

Jan 24, 2013 at 4:02 PM, BitFlipper wrote

Metro can co-exists alongside a full functional desktop that should be a refinement/evolution of what we had in Windows 7, not some Frankenstein monster that most desktop users seem to hate.

Yes. Should of been presented as a separate tablet/phone touchscreen OS and not a replacement or upgrade. And yes we all know we are still kicking the dead horse but like to hear from the inside experts here since allot of you guys work for MS and like to hear what you have to say, unless your under gag orders to not provide insight into the BLUE release or Re-Launch. 

4 hours ago, rodneyMc wrote

*snip*

provide insight into the BLUE release or Re-Launch. 

I don't think change is due in either. At the risk of laboring a point I made earlier, MS will only change direction if sales figures dictate the need, and at the moment they seem to be happy with those.

$70 student upgrades, starting Feb-1... that will continue to blur the underlying sales strength or weakness of the product, but eventually it will either prove to be a true sales success, fully justifying MS's choices, or a sales flop, demanding product changes. I believe that the jury is still out on this one.

19 hours ago, evildictait​or wrote

Hang on; since serial ports are handled by the Microsoft class driver, rather than by individual device drivers, are you sure you can't just ask for permission to talk to the class driver and open it as a character device for in/out access?

Not that I can tell.  Now, I am not an expert on the subject by any means, but I have given it the ol' college try and searched extensively with no luck.  Particularly, the following MSDN article suggests that serial drivers are not supported:  http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/apps/hh464945.aspx.

http://channel9.msdn.com/Shows/The-Defrag-Show/Defrag-High-CPU-Usage-Audio-Interrupt-Sharing-Printers-and-Files

Will try our luck and see if MS will add serial port access back when we complain enough.

Actually I think USB is not a full replacement for serial port access even if someone say so, lots of companies have policy to cut the wires for onboard USB before they're moved to datacentre because it can be anything and can launch programs. (This argument is not applicable to most portable device of course).

1 hour ago, cheong wrote

Actually I think USB is not a full replacement for serial port access even if someone say so

And the majority (all?) of USB/Serial adapters, are too unreliable for many applications.

The support and development folks have been at odds for several years now over this.  Support still encourages users to install the converter instead of using USB/(Activesync/WMDM) because it is an instant usable connection and simplifies user life.

3 hours ago, davewill wrote

@elmer: Not "all?". When finding a USB/Serial adapter it is important to see what chipset it uses and if it handles both hardware and software handshaking.  Once you find one that meets those criteria then you have found a rock solid adapter.  USBG-232 has been rock solid for years.  http://www.usbgear.com/usbg-232.html

The support and development folks have been at odds for several years now over this.  Support still encourages users to install the converter instead of using USB/(Activesync/WMDM) because it is an instant usable connection and simplifies user life.

Even with perfectly good USB/Serial adapters, there's still the chance that the thing may fail spectacularly. I've seen some devices (no names here, to protect the guilty) that draw small amounts of current off the control signals; no big deal with a real serial port, but enough to make the chip in the adapter go bananas. For extra fun, make sure that the device doesn't draw current continuously and that the peak is borderline.

44 minutes ago, bondsbw wrote

@evildictaitor:  I appreciate your help with all of this, especially requesting that the question be forwarded to the teams at MS.

No problem. Can you give an example of a specific product that doesn't work so they can triage it?

Te main issue you are going to have is the lack of Windows RT drivers - as only a select few vendors are allowed to write them.  If the hardware is usable via an in-box keyboard driver (a HID driver), you'll be OK, otherwise, you'll be out of luck.

Jan 30, 2013 at 12:43 AM, RLO wrote

...  No longer are you limited by your processor, your ram, your storage or your bandwidth, you will only be limited by your datacenter.

... and the unlit "online" light on your modem.