Rumor - Microsoft to Release Windows Blue, the First Free Windows Ever

The thing is windows 8 doesn't give me enough of a reason to upgrade, very small changes and that's excluding the UI. Before anyone asked I used win 8 for about 4 months during beta. Not to impressed,only thing that was better was boot times and the time it took to transfer and copy files and liked how email was integrated into the os sort of like a microsoft outlook built in,was able to have my gmail account connected and see when I got emails. The UI I didn't care much for it,took me about 15 mins to understand how to use it after playing around with it and ended up getting a start menu for it.

In my opinion, it needs some more features and give a option on what type of UI I want it to default to. It's not horrible but not enough for me to say I need to upgrade. What they need to do is give some of the features from 7 back and they can leave the metro but give a option on what to default it to. Like I can choose to disable metro and just have a traditional layout. Also it doesn't bring something new like windows 7 did with direct x 11,heard it's going to have something like dx 11.1 which is probably going to be pretty gimmicky like direct x 10.1 was with vista.

Also most games don't even fully use dx11 yet,since i'm more of a pc gamer instead of just a regular user. Windows 8 isn't to attractive to my eyes because it doesn't bring anything new. I could also probably get faster boot speeds and copy/transfer just purchasing a ssd and would probably be continent with that. I will wait until they bring something big to the table,not these small changes that don't really interest me.

Anyways those are just my two cents on the ppl saying 8 is "worth" the upgrade.

SIW2 said:

Yes. MS want you to have everything online with them. Boot up the o/s online - store everything up there - pay storage fees, usage fees, rent all your programs/apps/services thru MS. All approved by MS of course. No side loading.

Win 8 is a big step in that direction.

That is why there are so many raising concerns - including game developers/distributors who can see the platform closing.

MS still have almost almost complete dominance of the consumer market for pc's. If you have $1200 or more, you can go Apple. Everybody else gets what they are given and puts up with it.

MS are using that dominance to push thru what they think is good for MS.
That is what metro/start screen/MS account is for.That is why they shove it at the user constantly.

Many will just go along with it. Sign up for MS account as exhorted,buy apps., sync devices, store stuff up there. A few bucks here and there. Another few bucks if you go over your 7gb limit.

Once the public is doing that - not difficult to persuade them to go subscription.

That is what win8 is about.

I think you are exactly right. MS did not produce their "one size fit's all" for us, they did it for THEM.
That's why they're trying to cram it down our throats.

If they were concerned with public satisfaction, they would've included the start button/start menu
as an option for desktops.

Dallas 7 said:

I think you are exactly right. MS did not produce their "one size fit's all" for us, they did it for THEM.
That's why they're trying to cram it down our throats.

Speaking as a person in charge of all technology in a company, I can say for sure, it was done for me. We use computers, tablets, smartphones, etc...all form factors in my company...and being able to have one OS for them all, that I know our apps and services works on makes my life much much easier.

bobafetthotmail said:

What's the point for that anyway? Bulk of computers in most companies are cheap terminal-like affairs bought by the ton, and just need office-like applications or (much more commonly) a custom-designed single application for entering-retrieving data from a database in the company's servers.
It's hard to find someone who actually wants to place Win7 on them, go figure Win 8.

What's the point? I'm a one-man I.T. department, so any simplification I can find is a plus. My company computers are not dumb terminals pointing to servers. I have a lot of mobile employees who are out with customers and potential partners on a daily basis. Windows 7 is the standard now...so I have no idea how to even address your comment about people not wanting to even put Windows 7 on office computers. If that's how IT is going to handle company assets, I'd be looking for a new job ASAP.

bobafetthotmail said:

Tablets are far too easy to steal and resell to be stocked in numbers high enough to be used for common grunts, so are smartphones (besides, for most tasks the screen of a smartphone is too small). Win 8 won't change that.

I have no idea how that relates to my topic, but here goes. Android tablets and iPads are good, but could never completely replace a computer. For many of my employees, a business laptop is too bulky to carry around all day. A tablet-type device, especially one that's fully functional, would fit their needs perfectly.

Again, I have no idea where you are going with your comments, but as the I.T. Manager, my job is to make sure my people have the tools they need to perform their jobs in the most effective manner. Some of these new form factors are going to be perfect fits for some of our needs.

Based on what you've posted, I'm going to say that the I.T. world in Italy is far different from what it is here in the States. I work for a small dairy promotion company (far from bleeding edge of tech) and consult for a medium size energy management company (bleeding edge), and my wife works in the I.T. department of a county-run nursing home complex. I also came form one of the largest computer manufacturer's in the world, and none of those environments are anywhere close to what you describe.

bobafetthotmail said:

The only computers that are going to be upgraded to 7 are servers, as they need the security, and even then it's something they aren't eager to do.

It seems to me, that the I.T. staffs you deal with aren't really up on anything current. They seem to fear tablets, still cling to a 12 year old OS, and plan on running a desktop OS on a server. I can easily see why they'd fear something new and unknown, such as Windows 8. If they needed added security on a server, why would they avoid a server OS?

I'm not directing any of this at you personally, but many of those I.T. staffs wouldn't cut it in the industries I've been involved in. The point of having a Windows tablet is that it can operate on a domain, with all of the same security a laptop computer would have, yet in a smaller, easier to carry around footprint. I also don't quite get their comments about needing to turn everything into an app. That would be true if RT was the only option, but it clearly shows they haven't done any research into the Windows 8 Pro tablets about to be released. Windows RT has little value in a business setting, to me personally. My comments above are about the Windows 8 Pro tablets. My company upgrades computers every three years. We're 25 people in total, and 20 of them are due this upcoming year. So, whatever I buy, I get cheap MAK licenses due to our non-profit status. My job as I.T. Manager is to find the solution that works best for each person, based on the role they fill and the work they do. My graphic designer has far different needs that our Office Manager, as an example. Someone who sits in a cubicle all day has far different needs than someone who's on the road 4-5 days a week.

If I closed my mind to new products and only looked backwards, I'd be failing myself and my company.

DeaconFrost: "My job as I.T. Manager is to find the solution that works best for each person, based on the role they fill and the work they do. My graphic designer has far different needs that our Office Manager, as an example. Someone who sits in a cubicle all day has far different needs than someone who's on the road 4-5 days a week."

Just maybe those of us who so intensely dislike Windows 8 for the desktop have many very valid reasons for doing so. Our PERSONAL and PROFESSIONAL needs, wants, requirements, and situations are seriously impacted by the many missing elements that were taken out by Microsoft. They wanted Windows 8 to work on the grossly limited environments of smart phones and touch tablets. Its desktop capabilities was all but totally sacrificed for that goal. It is not that we fear something new, we want the new actually to be better for us than the old for OUR purposes. At least enough better that it is worth the cost of changing.

As it stands, Windows 8 fails to reach as good as crappy for use on the desktop. This includes what has been done to Visual Studio 2012 and that total abomination of Microsoft Office. Yes, they can be used but only with constant frustration and seriously reduced productivity IN OUR HANDS. They are not worth the effort to use.

How about live and let live as a general rule of social and professional interaction? You use what works for you and I will use what works for me. We each get to decide what works for ourselves. You are not evil for embracing Windows 8 and I am not evil for rejecting it. We are simply different. Why isn't that simply OK? You seem to embrace part of that approach. Why not go all the way and accept that the I.T. world in Italy is simply different from yours but is still workable for them even though it won't work for you?