Windows 8 Consumer Preview - One word: fail

[Andy Burns]

Hopefully, most will be able to skip to Windows 9, assuming that
Microsoft have to come up with something better quite quickly when they
realise how big a mistake Windows 8 is (surely they must already know?).
In the meantime, for anyone stuck with 8, it is possible to hack it into
a usable form and get rid of Metro

There was a hack that disabled Metro in the Developer Preview, but it
doesn't work on the Consumer Preview ...

there will at least be a market for
third party "conversions" programs to do that

I presume so.

 

[ray]

"Bob Henson" wrote in message Although retired now (so it doesn't matter so much to me) I suspect
you're saying what most are thinking. Windows 8 is a joke for commercial
purposes, unless Metro can be easily and entirely removed in the final
version - no-one would touch it with a bargepole. The same applies to
Ubuntu's Unity and similar - these "Legoland" interfaces are OK for
"fondleslabs" and other kid's toy computers, but in a working
environment no-one will even consider them.

For the most part that may be true, yet once Win8 goes RTM the
availability of a prior o/s only lasts so long. Replacement and new pc's
(OEM, System builders) may also (if past history proves correct) offer a
downgrade to Win7 for a period of time. In either case a 'period of
time' does not mean 'in perpetuity'.

i.e. Many looking for replacement or new pcs won't have a choice.[/QUOTE]

There are a couple of other choices.

 

[Percival P. Cassidy]

"For the most part that may be true, yet once Win8 goes RTM the
availability of a prior o/s only lasts so long. Replacement and new pc's
(OEM, System builders) may also (if past history proves correct) offer a
downgrade to Win7 for a period of time. In either case a 'period of
time' does not mean 'in perpetuity'.

i.e. Many looking for replacement or new pcs won't have a choice."

Lenovo offered me an UPgrade to WinXP from the Vista with which my
ThinkPad came. At least, the support guy agreed with me when I called it
that.

Perce

 

[J. P. Gilliver (John)]

On 23/03/2012 12:08 PM, Zaphod Beeblebrox wrote: []

We are in the midst of an XP to Win7 migration, as are several other
companies I work with. All are expecting to skip Win8, and possibly
Win9, depending on timing and features (or lack thereof).

Although retired now (so it doesn't matter so much to me) I suspect
you're saying what most are thinking. Windows 8 is a joke for commercial
purposes, unless Metro can be easily and entirely removed in the final
version - no-one would touch it with a bargepole. The same applies to
Ubuntu's Unity and similar - these "Legoland" interfaces are OK for
"fondleslabs" and other kid's toy computers, but in a working
environment no-one will even consider them.

On the other hand, lots of visual gimmicks about every version of
Windows have been dismissed as eye candy and/or gimmicks, but go through
a phase of either becoming invisible, or in some cases actually used by
everybody. Even the whole GUI - at least, the WIMP aspects thereof -
were seen by many (including me) as a gimmick when they first appeared.
Why should anyone (apart, perhaps, from artists) want a pointer you move
around with a "mouse"? You can use the keyboard - alt-tab for
application switching, shift-arrows for highlighting text, and so on.
But now we use the mouse by second nature. And, although I still use the
keyboard more than most, I wouldn't want not to have the mouse option.
Similarly, right-click wasn't used by many when it first appeared. And
so on.

Having said that, I don't like what little I've seen of 8 (and am not
that taken with 7 either) - but I presume some aspects of the new way of
doing things will become second nature in time, and others will be
quietly dropped by the wayside. And, we won't know which is which!

 

[DanS]

Correct. As in HVAC, PABX telephone systems, physical
security/badge readers, and even NAS boxes. It's {amazing,
terrifying} how many places in a large organization one can
unexpectedly run into a Windows system where you least
expect it.

Well. I know for a fact, that Windows doesn't control traffic lights. I work with traffic
systems daily.

I can see a Windows system running badge readers.

However, Windows doesn't typically *run* critical realtime systems. It may be used to
monitor it, but, PLCs are the workhorse behind most automation.

 

[J. P. Gilliver (John)]

In message <[email protected]>, DanS

However, Windows doesn't typically *run* critical realtime systems. It
may be used to
monitor it, but, PLCs are the workhorse behind most automation.

[]
No, not that many critical ones (though even one could be too many of
course!). But have a look at these:
http://www.hardmac.com/blog/2008/02/10/the-shame-public-bsods
http://www.techmynd.com/50-plus-blue-screen-of-death-displays-in-public/

(found by just putting

public BSODs

into Google)

and you'll find it is used in lots of places. One would hope that, for
example, petrol (gasoline) dispensers have some failsafe hardware as
well ...
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G.5AL-IS-P--Ch++(p)Ar@T0H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

What's awful about weird views is not the views. It's the intolerance. If
someone wants to worship the Duke of Edinburgh or a pineapple, fine. But don't
kill me if I don't agree. - Tim Rice, Radio Times 15-21 October 2011.

 

[DanS]

In message
<[email protected]>, DanS

However, Windows doesn't typically *run* critical realtime
systems. It may be used to
monitor it, but, PLCs are the workhorse behind most
automation.

[]
No, not that many critical ones (though even one could be
too many of course!). But have a look at these:
http://www.hardmac.com/blog/2008/02/10/the-shame-public-bsod
s
http://www.techmynd.com/50-plus-blue-screen-of-death-display
s-in-public/

First, both links show many of the same images, and ....

Second, most of those are signs, I'd say, not critical, unless of course you think the
McDonalds on is. Some may be an inconvenience.

(found by just putting

public BSODs

into Google)

and you'll find it is used in lots of places. One would
hope that, for example, petrol (gasoline) dispensers have
some failsafe hardware as well ...

Again, for instance, the gas pump one shown isn't *run* by Windows....they are
*monitored* by Windows. I can be certain there isn't an electrical switch on the handle
that triggers an input, which in turn triggers an output that turns on a pump......

Now, not being one to jump to conclusions, you can't even say if any of those were
caused by Windows itself, or by bugs in the applications they were running.

 

[J. P. Gilliver (John)]

First, both links show many of the same images, and ....

Yes, I noticed that.

Second, most of those are signs, I'd say, not critical, unless of
course you think the
McDonalds on is. Some may be an inconvenience.
Indeed.
[]

and you'll find it is used in lots of places. One would
hope that, for example, petrol (gasoline) dispensers have
some failsafe hardware as well ...

Again, for instance, the gas pump one shown isn't *run* by Windows....they are
*monitored* by Windows. I can be certain there isn't an electrical
switch on the handle
that triggers an input, which in turn triggers an output that turns on
a pump......

Indeed. In UK at least, there's some sort of system that stops the flow
of fuel when the tank is full, and I'm pretty sure that's independent of
the control from the cashier that turns the pump on.

Now, not being one to jump to conclusions, you can't even say if any of
those were
caused by Windows itself, or by bugs in the applications they were running.

Indeed, though application bugs of course shouldn't crash the operating
system.(Wotta lotta lines!)
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G.5AL-IS-P--Ch++(p)Ar@T0H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

"When a distinguished but elderly scientist states that something is possible,
he is almost certainly right. When he states that something is impossible, he
is
very probably wrong." - Arthur C. Clarke

 

[DanS]

In message

Indeed. In UK at least, there's some sort of system that
stops the flow of fuel when the tank is full, and I'm
pretty sure that's independent of the control from the
cashier that turns the pump on.

And it's probably the same mechanism that has been turning off gas pumps since
auto-shutoff was invented however long ago.

....except now it's monitored by an electronic device.

Indeed, though application bugs of course shouldn't crash
the operating system.

They shouldn't. But they do at times. I've been developing code, and through my own
coding mistakes, have crashed the OS.

 

[...winston]

"Bob Henson" wrote in message

"Bob Henson" wrote in message Although retired now (so it doesn't matter so much to me) I suspect
you're saying what most are thinking. Windows 8 is a joke for commercial
purposes, unless Metro can be easily and entirely removed in the final
version - no-one would touch it with a bargepole. The same applies to
Ubuntu's Unity and similar - these "Legoland" interfaces are OK for
"fondleslabs" and other kid's toy computers, but in a working
environment no-one will even consider them.

Hopefully, most will be able to skip to Windows 9, assuming that
Microsoft have to come up with something better quite quickly when they
realise how big a mistake Windows 8 is (surely they must already know?).
In the meantime, for anyone stuck with 8, it is possible to hack it into
a usable form and get rid of Metro - there will at least be a market for
third party "conversions" programs to do that, for those that can't do
it themselves.
[/QUOTE]
Whether they 'know or not' not much evolution of a given o/s has occurred in
the past. For all practical purposes XP, Vista, Win7 (and all had their
naysayers <Vista deservedly more than other>) are pretty much unchanged UI's
since final beta/RC/RTM.

One piece of the Metro pie (and a substantial population for some time and
usually ignored in any discussion about Win8) is the existing user bases for
Hotmail type accounts (over 300 million) and Messenger (nearly 0.5 billion).
Even with overlap existing in that population (same Live ID using both
services) those two services in conjunction with their existing integration
to Microsoft SkyDrive may pretty much indicate the targeted user for
Win8....a little bit less than ten percent of that population is currently
responsible for uploading and sharing almost 400 million files per month and
that volume is dwarfed by the amount of sharing (but not stored on SkyDrive)
of photos/files via mail or instant messaging.

Metro's UI may not be for everyone but for the gadget type (fluent on pc,
smart device, tablet), photo enthusiasts, and nearly half billion people
already using MSFT's online services (Mail, Messaging, Contacts, Photos,
SkyDrive) it may very well be a welcome UI as that user base increases and
the o/s evolves (it is still a preview).....afaics that population is
increasing faster than the prior target - people like me, you and others
reading this newsgroup....i.e. our voice doesn't carry as much weight as it
used to. <g>

Some say Enterprise clients won't adopt Win8...well, Enterprise due to
economics and the usual 3-5 yr re-deployment (even longer since Vista scared
everyone) is still moving from W2K/2K3/XP (all of which cease security
support in about 2 yrs.) imo will favor Win7/Server 2K8 for quite some time.

But a few thing seems relatively certain (at least to me)
1. the desktop pc is declining as the device of choice
2. When the nurses have to feed me my pea soup through a straw, I won't care
one way or another on what o/s is available or being used....especially
since my 'in perpetuity' window diminishes each and every day.

 

[Gene E. Bloch]

First, both links show many of the same images, and ....

The two I like are labeled "Oh! Not This One" and "Upgraded Version",
on the techmynd site.

The first of those is also the last picture on the hardmac site.

 

[Gene Wirchenko]

On Mon, 26 Mar 2012 16:44:30 -0500, DanS

[snip]

However, Windows doesn't typically *run* critical realtime systems. It may be used to
monitor it, but, PLCs are the workhorse behind most automation.

Your trust is touching, but have a look at:
http://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/23.56.html#subj4
http://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/23.71.html#subj1
http://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/24.01.html#subj1
Those were from looking through my RISKS archive for an article with
the keyword "navy". The article I was looking for is *not* one of the
three above.

Sincerely,

Gene "In the Navy!" Wirchenko

 

[DanS]

On Mon, 26 Mar 2012 16:44:30 -0500, DanS

[snip]

However, Windows doesn't typically *run* critical realtime
systems. It may be used to monitor it, but, PLCs are the
workhorse behind most automation.

Your trust is touching, but have a look at:
http://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/23.56.html#subj4
http://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/23.71.html#subj1
http://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/24.01.html#subj1
Those were from looking through my RISKS archive for an
article with the keyword "navy". The article I was looking
for is *not* one of the three above.

Well, I did say *typically*.

Sometimes, bad decisions are made.

 

[charlie]

On Mon, 26 Mar 2012 16:44:30 -0500, DanS

[snip]

However, Windows doesn't typically *run* critical realtime
systems. It may be used to monitor it, but, PLCs are the
workhorse behind most automation.

Your trust is touching, but have a look at:
http://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/23.56.html#subj4
http://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/23.71.html#subj1
http://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/24.01.html#subj1
Those were from looking through my RISKS archive for an
article with the keyword "navy". The article I was looking
for is *not* one of the three above.

Well, I did say *typically*.

Sometimes, bad decisions are made.

I'd agree to that!

The windows issues with "real time" aside,
I remember a military program that involved real time software. The ops
system was responsive, but there were still very serious problems.
The customer had specified that a specific language be used to develop
the applications software. Unfortunately, the compiler output was not
suited to real time operations. The end result was that the system
hardware developers wrote and patched assembly and hand coded machine
language to replace the compiler output code.

Part of the problem was due to the hardware environment.
There was a system controller microprocessor, and additional
microprocessors for each significant part of the system, down to each
sub-assembly. Each "black box" in the system was structured as I
described, and within each box, the main system memory was partitioned
between common access memory, and specific address blocks available to
each sub-assembly. There were several "black boxes" in each system.

Compiler produced code had too many "never execute" code segments,
(eating memory like a real hog.) Next, the compiler expected more or
less sequential in line code, and did not readily generate code that was
suitable for "parallel processing".

Time frame? late 80's, early 90's, and 386 and Z80 microprocessors were
most common in P/Cs. The "Black Box" processors were descendents or
distant cousins of the 6502 and later 68000? processors.


Now that multi core processors are the norm, I'd expect that windows
will eventually be more "real time" capable, without such things as
"LabView"(TM)

 

[mechanic]

Lenovo offered me an UPgrade to WinXP from the Vista with which my
ThinkPad came. At least, the support guy agreed with me when I
called it that.

No doubt trained to present the view that the customer is always
right, even when he's clueless.

 

[Joerg Jaeger]

No doubt trained to present the view that the customer is always
right, even when he's clueless.

From what i read about Windows 8 i think i will stay with 7 and my
Linux Mint.
There is nothing that can convince me to use Windows 8. I really wished
that MS would headhunt for some Apple designers.

--
ACCESS DENIED...

/\_/\
____/ o o \
/~____ =ø= /
(______)__m_m) el cato

 

[milt]

From what i read about Windows 8 i think i will stay with 7 and my
Linux Mint.
There is nothing that can convince me to use Windows 8. I really wished
that MS would headhunt for some Apple designers.

Why bother with Apple developers when Apple is nothing more than an OS
(based on Linux) running on (overpriced) Intel hardware? Seems like that
would be the last thing they need!

 

[ray]

Why bother with Apple developers when Apple is nothing more than an OS
(based on Linux) running on (overpriced) Intel hardware? Seems like that
would be the last thing they need!

No, it is not based on Linux. It is based on BSD Unix.

 

[Joerg Jaeger]

Why bother with Apple developers when Apple is nothing more than an OS
(based on Linux) running on (overpriced) Intel hardware? Seems like that
would be the last thing they need!

No, i meant the appearance of the desktop. Why is Metro made out of
blocks. It may be efficient but it is ugly. It hurts the eye really.

--
ACCESS DENIED...

/\_/\
____/ o o \
/~____ =ø= /
(______)__m_m) el cato

 

[John Williamson]

No, i meant the appearance of the desktop. Why is Metro made out of
blocks. It may be efficient but it is ugly. It hurts the eye really.

It's a type of interface that works well on things like phone screens,
where you can't guarantee hitting any particular pixel on the
touchscreen with your finger.

What they've done is just scale that up to fit a proper monitor, without
looking at the ergonomics of actually using the thing.