Coffeehouse Thread

177 posts

Windows 8 flops, and Microsoft are to blame

Back to Forum: Coffeehouse
  • User profile image
    evildictait​or

    , wastingtime​withforums wrote

    Would it have been optional (and windowed), people (and businesses) would be far more willing to upgrade to W8, giving MS a foothold with the metro apps.

    Look again at this chart:

    Generic Forum Image

    The projection of that graph is that tablets and netbooks outsell laptops and desktop PCs by roughly 2016.

    You're the CEO of Microsoft in 2010. You currently have a great OS that sells really well on laptops and PCs and you have five years to get your company ready for the waterfall that your company is rapidly about to be swept off as the laptop and PC market vanishes from under you.

    Do you

    A) Introduce a new framework (like you did with WPF and Silverlight, which both failed) and hope it catches on so rapidly in the next two years that your platform is a solid tablet player by the time 2016 comes along and your laptop market dies?

    B) Put it front and center (like you did with UAC) which will be really unpopular at first but will force developers to make the necessary changes to their applications so your platform can move off the sinking market of laptops and desktops and into the vast untapped wealth of tablets and phones?

    If you answered (A), try again, but this time you're the CEO after the shareholders dismissed you for failing to have a 10-year strategy for your company.

  • User profile image
    wastingtime​withforums

    , evildictait​or wrote

    *snip*

     

    A) Introduce a new framework (like you did with WPF and Silverlight, which both failed) and hope it catches on so rapidly in the next two years that your platform is a solid tablet player by the time 2016 comes along and your laptop market dies?

    Especially Silverlight was gaining traction in the LOB market before MS hobbled it.

    WPF? MS was not exactly making much to push that. Exactly like with Metro by the way: Maybe WinRT  just sucks or something, but not even MS seems to be able to create anything good with it. Their own metro programs are pathetic, far worse than their first round of win32 applications, or the first MFC applications.

    Not exactly setting a standard for other devs (the store reflects that).

    Except of their forcing of the start screen, Microsoft's actual product performance with metro and WinRT is EVEN WORSE than with SL and WPF.

    , evildictait​or wrote

    B) Put it front and center (like you did with UAC) which will be really unpopular at first but will force developers to make the necessary changes to their applications so your platform can move off the sinking market of laptops and desktops and into the vast untapped wealth of tablets and phones?

    Ahem, and the current strategy is working?! 

    And apart that the UAC/metro comparison doesn't really fit, UAC was entirely optional:

    http://www.petri.co.il/disable_uac_in_windows_vista.htm

    Generic Forum Image

  • User profile image
    cbae

    , wastingtime​withforums wrote

    *snip*

    I've written this dozens of times here already. Stop forcing metro down the throats. It needs to be optional. (include a dedicated switch-to-metro button and add the start menu back).

    *snip*

    It is optional. I've gone entire days without seeing any Metro app, because most of the software that I need are traditional Windows applications. I've gone days without seeing the start screen, because I pin my most frequently used applications to the task bar and I don't shutdown my PC. I just press the power button, and it goes to sleep. When it comes out of sleep, it goes back to the desktop.

    The only thing "Metro" I'm forced to see is the unlock screen and the login screen, and it's not like I absolutely have to have a multi-window paradigm in those cases.

    But Metro is there if I care to use Metro apps. It's called "choice". Just because you don't care for one of the choices does mean you're forced to take it.

  • User profile image
    DeathBy​VisualStudio

    Regardless of where you stand on this issue I think the glaring detail is how much rope do you give Ballmer and crew before you cut them loose? 6 months? A year? two years?

    It's pretty clear that with Windows Blue they are doubling down on the tablet, touch, et al but W8 tablets are not a huge success as of yet. There's no desktop story other than "compatibility". Is Microsoft willing to let the PC market die on the vine while they move to becoming a devices company? Is WinRT/ARM the end game they seek? As a devices company why does it seem it's so hard for Microsoft to see that the unification of tablet and phone APIs is so important to growing your app store? They make blunder after blunder after blunder and seem to shrug it off with the adopted Apple arrogance.

    And let's not forget the history of the Zune, Kin, etc... Their only "recent" big success in the consumer space is the XBox. Not only do they flush the creative and successful J Allard down the toilet they piss away the Courier tablet which could have kept them relevant while they worked on reinventing Windows in the process.

    I think it's too late to turn the Titanic that is Windows 8 around. IMO, The real focus should be on Microsoft's leadership.

    If we all believed in unicorns and fairies the world would be a better place.
    Last modified
  • User profile image
    DeathBy​VisualStudio

    , cbae wrote

    *snip*

    But Metro is there if I care to use Metro apps. It's called "choice". Just because you don't care for one of the choices does mean you're forced to take it.

    While to some degree that may be true today but with what we've seen to-date of the direction Microsoft is going with Blue and the lack of a desktop story both from a user and a developer's standpoint it isn't hard to see that the desktop isn't part of Microsoft future plans. IMO we'll continue to see the dismantling of the desktop and more of the Windows 8 store app environment (along with the lousy branding) as Windows "matures" into an OS for devices.

    If we all believed in unicorns and fairies the world would be a better place.
    Last modified
  • User profile image
    wastingtime​withforums

    , DeathBy​VisualStudio wrote

    It's pretty clear that with Windows Blue they are doubling down on the tablet, touch, et al but W8 tablets are not a huge success as of yet.

    Understatement of the century.

    Netapplications counts Metro-IE and Windows RT separate ("Windows 8 touch" and "Windows RT Touch") and those statistics are terrible:

    Windows 8 Touch       0.12%
    Windows 8 RT Touch 0.02%

    That shows that Windows 8's market performance on tablets is really bad, despite all the marketing dollars (and the created bad-will among customers). Rendering the whole point of Microsoft's W8 strategy pointless. Such pathetic numbers are not even considered as a beachhead.

    Arrogance and badwill towards the established user base doesn't pay off apparently. I am quite sure that the deliberate bad mood created around PC W8 reflected onto their tablet offering as well.

  • User profile image
    wastingtime​withforums

    , cbae wrote

    *snip*

    The only thing "Metro" I'm forced to see is the unlock screen and the login screen, and it's not like I absolutely have to have a multi-window paradigm in those cases.

    Oh that's not true. All the default image/video/audio players are metro, to search for files and programs you need metro, people who don't like to pin everything down are confronted with metro. The central hub nature of the start menu is gone, you were able to reach the control panel, help, printers and drivers etc. through it. Not now, you need to hunt around for those and usually get metro shoved in the face in the process.

  • User profile image
    Deactivated User

    Comment removed at user's request.

  • User profile image
    Bas

    , jinx101 wrote

    I can hear the marketing meetings now... "if we can do something innovative and bold, clean and new like UPPER CASE ALL THE MENUS... people will see the value in our product."

    I was taking your post seriously up to this hyperbole. Shame.

    Imagine if they offered a Start Menu replacement, they'd sell tons of them (case in point, look at Stardock, I went and forked over 5 additional dollars to get that functionality back and I'm totally happy with my purchase).  Sure, Start8 has only sold 3 million copies as of January, so that's a paltry 15 million dollars but if MS had an official sponsored add-on that was easy to purchase (key point, easy to purchase) they'd triple that. 

    I can't see a single way in which that stategy would have backfired for them.

  • User profile image
    Deactivated User

    Comment removed at user's request.

  • User profile image
    kettch

    @jinx101: My favorite store recently changed the font on their sign from a serif to a sans serif font. It was so horribly jarring that I'm never shopping there again. I got light headed and dizzy. I vomited on the sidewalk and had a headache for three days. Even typing this post, I threw up a bit in my mouth.

    EDIT: I forgot to mention that when I got home from that ordeal, my dog had died.

  • User profile image
    Bas

    , jinx101 wrote

    *snip*

    I'm sorry, but for me that's a perfect tongue in cheek metaphor for the products they've been putting out.  In that Google April fools video about Google Blue they had a line where a product manager said something like "How can we completely reinvent our interface without changing anything at all" and it made me chuckle because the upper case menus were the first thing that I thought of.  Even sarcastic, it resonated with people and made them laugh because it's true.

     

    So the complaint is that they changed too much, alienating their current userbase, and also didn't actually change anything. Noted.

  • User profile image
    Deactivated User

    Comment removed at user's request.

  • User profile image
    Deactivated User

    Comment removed at user's request.

  • User profile image
    wastingtime​withforums

    , Bas wrote

    *snip*

     

    So the complaint is that they changed too much, alienating their current userbase, and also didn't actually change anything. Noted.

    Well, with Office 2013 at least (Jinx' example) that's the truth. The "cosmetic" changes there (uppercase and Win 3.1 theme) seem to annoy everyone, while the actual functions are pretty much unchanged.

  • User profile image
    Ian2

    http://www.zdnet.com/meeting-in-the-middle-how-microsoft-will-enable-mini-surfaces-and-maxi-win-phones-7000013890/

    "Windows RT doesn't really scale well below eight inches, one of my contacts told me, because the buttons and the user interface get too small. Additionally, it's not well designed for portrait mode, which is how most mini tablets tend to be used. But with Windows RT 8.1 ( Windows RT Blue), there supposedly will be improved support for portrait mode and higher-pixel-density devices, which is what would make smaller screened devices -- such as a 7-inch or 8-inch Surface, for example -- truly usable".

     

    Sounds promising

  • User profile image
    cbae

    , wastingtime​withforums wrote

    *snip*

    Understatement of the century.

    Netapplications counts Metro-IE and Windows RT separate ("Windows 8 touch" and "Windows RT Touch") and those statistics are terrible:

    Windows 8 Touch       0.12%
    Windows 8 RT Touch 0.02%

    That shows that Windows 8's market performance on tablets is really bad,

    *snip*

    No, it shows that market performance of immersive IE on tablets is bad. I own a Surface RT, but I use desktop IE 99% of the time. The 1% of the time that I use immersive IE is when another Metro app launches it.

  • User profile image
    kettch

    , wastingtime​withforums wrote

    *snip*

    The central hub nature of the start menu is gone, you were able to reach the control panel, help, printers and drivers etc. through it. Not now, you need to hunt around for those and usually get metro shoved in the face in the process.

    The start menu was becoming a sad attempt at a central hub, but there was too much there in not enough real estate. Too many clicks to hunt around for what you needed. The start menu was originally a program launcher. Over the years they added more functionality to the point where it got unwieldy.

Comments closed

Comments have been closed since this content was published more than 30 days ago, but if you'd like to continue the conversation, please create a new thread in our Forums, or Contact Us and let us know.