UKC

I've just bought a new laptop sporting this.

It's just *astonishing* how utterly, utterly shite it is in every regard.

Does *anyone* like this or regard it as an improvement? It just amazes me how crap like this gets through the system. What's the matter with these people?

Trouble is, of course, they're all set to rule the world.

jcm

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

I actually really like it and think it's a huge improvement in just about every respect over Windows 7. It's just a bit of a shock at first, that's all!

It's definitely an OS that works better with a touchscreen, but then again most computers come with touchscreens these days.

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

Normally I jump onto every new update. I did get my fingers burnt with Vista and moved to Windows 7 with trepidation. However I am not letting Windows 8 anywhere near my computers because I haven't got a clue how to work it.

I've tried playing with it in the shops and I've had a punt with it on a relative's laptop but I was clueless on the most mundane of tasks such as printing documents.

Good luck with your painful learning curve.

In reply to Only a hill:

Its fine until you want to do something more than browse the web.... like have many windows open or turn it off!

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

Just click the Desktop button and you're sorted.

In reply to WJV0912:

There is a solution, for instance: http://www.kubuntu.org

In reply to Only a hill:

It's an adulterated bag of shite. Move everything, make the user interface less efficient and less intuitive, don't improve performance or stabilty.

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

I'm amazed you missed (or ignored) umpteen previous threads slagging it off...

In reply to WJV0912:


Not really.

To JCM : have a look at installing classic shell. Free and pretty good. Not only better desktop environment but changes internet explorer back to something vaguely useful again.

In reply to Only a hill:

but then again most computers come with touchscreens these days

Really?

In reply to Only a hill:


I agree. I updated from XP to 8 and as a long term linux user it is the first time I have been happy using windows for any length of time.

The complaints about windows 8 are bizarre if you take them at face value. I am sure the people posting them cope perfectly well with far more radical tech changes but claim to be flummoxed by a minor UI change to windows. My 79 year old father has no problems.

In reply to FactorXXX:



Just thinking that! Why couldn't they do a touch and non-touch version (perhaps the same version with two different skins)?

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

I'd have thought you would have seen all of the previous threads about WIndows 8 and steered well clear!

I now have a windows 8 laptop, but it has a touchscreen, so there are some advantages to running W8 over W7. My wife's laptop doesn't have a touchscreen and it was almost impossible to use at first. You do get used to it though. Not tried Classic Shell yet, but that might solve some of your issues.

When I was shopping for a laptop it was much more expensive to get one with Windows 7 on it. When I asked about buying a W8 laptop and downgrading it myself, all of the shops I went into said that it would invalidate the warranty (including John Lewis).

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

my new laptop has it as well and i hate it, but use a mouse instead of the mouse pad and it's a bit better. and on internet exploder 11, utter shite. i cant grab pics off photo bucket with it, had to install google chrome so i can do it. why do they change and fix things that dont need fixing or changing? used to love windows xp
jeff

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

Like Alex said - it's a shock at first. I'm 4 months in and love it.

E

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

Underneath the shite there are upgrades and it's a stable release with quite a few improvements over windows 7. Most people think the UI is shite though, including me. I reluctantly use windows for a reason and one of those is so that I can have a computer that does stuff without making me feel like I'm navigating through a kids game. That and I just hate change, bastards, I'm still rocking the '95 look, pastel blue background and grey taskbar, although the shade of blue has got darker over the years and I experimented with dark purple once, but that was too much, a darker shade of blue is a nice gentle step towards modernity and compliments the grey taskbar nicely. Maybe one day I'll go for a darker grey task bar, or even black, but one step at a time.

Laptops with windows 7 on are more expensive for a reason, especially high end laptops they'll mostly have 7 because if you're paying that much cash you want a suitable OS.

I'll be heading towards a new laptop shortly and one of the options is to get a windows 8 laptop then either put windows 7 on it or install a new shell. You can reset factory defaults on almost all commercial laptops so I can't see how it would invalidate the warranty (not that you'll need it). There are quite a few laptops around that ship with windows 8 plus a downgrade disc as well.

Laptops are dirt cheap these days, just treat windows 8 as another bit of bloatware to get rid of before you start using it, a couple of hours is all you'll need to get your lappy working as it should.

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

If you search for previous threads on the subject I put a link to a useful list of tips and shortcuts.

But even so I'd still look into the ways of installing Win 7

Although there is a certain irony in you using an OS that treats you like an idiot.....

In reply to Chris the Tall:

I love how moving the mouse into the top right corner to press the 'X' on a window also brings up that faux start menu bar on the right of the screen. Who's stupid idea was that?

Also, what is so great about touchscreens? My mouse works just fine.

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:


When you say "in every regard", what do you mean? All they have done is replace the start button with a start screen. Everything else is the same. If you ever get stuck trying to find your program, just hit the start button and type the name of your program. It will just magically appear. Certainly much easier than trying to find it via 4 columns of start menu and sub menus.

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

I feel your pain.

After several months of attempting to 'learn' Win 8 (WTF??), and then looking at the various options to 'fix' my new laptop, I found a proper solution; I went round electrical shops looking to see if anyone had a Win 7 laptop for sale, and thankfully one shop in Norway had one in their store cupboard!

I think the people who learn to use Win 8 and end up loving it, are a bit like those people who can effortlessly learn several foreign languages fluently, and can't fathom why others can't do the same.

The annoying thing about the Win 8 debacle is that there is no real alternative if you have software applications which run on windows, it's not like you can order a new laptop with an option of Win 8 or Win 7, it's Win 8 or nothing.
Also, it seems a bit like me, you don't really give the computer's operating system a second thought when you buy a new one, you just expect it to be workable, and that any new features won't take much figuring out.

In reply to TOS:

another really annoying thing is that all my games and other software that worked flawlessly with windows 7 on my old pc wont work at all on W8. got to be windows 8 sofware. bit of a git.
jeff

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

Upgrade to 8.1 which puts a start button back, albeit one that takes you to the tile screen. FWIW, the tile screen IMO works nicely with a touchscreen device, it's just crap with a mouse.

Neil

In reply to streetfighterjeff:

No, that isn't the case. What has happened is that you've got 64 bit Windows 8. 64 bit Win7 has the same issues of a lack of back compatibility. You could replace it with the 32 bit version, but if you've got more than 3GB RAM it can't address all of it.

One option I used to run some very old software (an ancient copy of GSP Family Tree on which my Dad has loads of data) is a VMware image. It's free for personal use, you just need a copy of Win95 or similar to run on it.

Neil

In reply to Chris the Tall:

Or put Classic Shell on it, which makes the look and feel pretty much identical to Win7.

Neil

In reply to Neil Williams:

How do you do that? Also does it sort out all the unusable email, browser problems as well (and make turning it off straightforward)?

In reply to MG:
Which one? 8.1 or Classic Shell?

You do 8.1 from the Windows App Store. It has security improvements etc and gives you back a start button to get you to the tile screen.

Classic Shell is a third party product (Google it) which essentially makes it look and work the same as 7, including shutdown, and can be set to completely hide the tile interface.

Personally I'd do both. Worth noting though that 8.1 broke the printer driver for my very old printer (HP PSC 1510) however it was about time I got a wifi printer so I didn't care that much.

Neil

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

I don't like the way Microsoft bring out a new version of Windows then stop supporting the previous one, which results in customers eventually having to upgrade when they don't need a newer version. There was a huge adverse reaction from business and industry when XP was discontinued and replaced by W7, the reason being that XP was more than adequate for the tasks that their employees do. Staff were familiar with XP but had to familiarise themselves with W7, a time when errors occur. Companies are unhappy when they are forced eventually to pay for upgrades that they don't want or need. Is it progress or a money making ploy?

In reply to armus:

Both, realistically. And MS need to spend a lot of money patching very old code if support is to remain - it's not like it used to be, when you could leave an old OS on a standalone PC and there'd be no actual risk to it.

Neil

In reply to Only a hill:


Is that a typo, or do you really think that?

In reply to Jonny2vests:

Ok, to be more precise, most new consumer computers now come with touchscreens. In a year or two I doubt you'll be able to get non-touch PCs, except for niche uses.

There really is no disadvantage in having a touchscreen. If you prefer to use a mouse the option is still there, and they certainly won't die out, but touch is very useful even on a desktop.

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

P.S. I don't get all the hate about the start screen. The old start menu was horrible and I never used it - a start screen which can display useful information as well as program shortcuts makes so much more sense.

It also multitasks just fine. You can snap up to three Metro windows next to each other, and the desktop works the same as it ever did. The next version will allow Metro apps to run on the desktop in conventional windows as well.

For those complaining about discoverability of functions, it takes all of five minutes to learn where the hot corners are (and simple swipes work just fine if you have a touchscreen). Are people really so set in their ways that they can't cope with the slightest change to how their computers work?

In reply to Neil Williams:

As I said in my ref to Classic Shell at the start, I think the biggest advantage is that it can also be set to make internet explorer work ok again. The version that ships with Win 8 is just rubbish.

In reply to Only a hill:



I have a couple of tablet's which are obviously tough screens. I also have a 4 year old laptop which is not yet I still catch myself tapping the laptop screen by mistake. doh!

Touch screens are the way forward. Windows 8 is probably not.

In reply to Skyfall:


In what way is it 'rubbish'?

In reply to The Lemming:

I really don't get the attraction of a touch screen. With a tablet in your hand, yes, but with a laptop/desktop I don't get it. And, yes, I have worked with a touchscreen desktop. Interestingly, no one in the business world seems to use them as they don't have any additional functionality for 99% of users.

In reply to Only a hill:
Are people really so set in their ways that they can't cope with the slightest change to how their computers work?

The thing is it is all much less intuitive (e.g. many functions invisible) and unnecessary -the windows 7/XP interface worked fine for desktop use, browsers with addresses at top are just as good as those with addresses at the bottom. Most people just want a computer that works and don't want to invest hours every few years learning how to do basics tasks. Computers are tools not games for most. As comparison, I am sure people *could* learn to drive cars if the pedals were swapped but it would be frustrating pain in the neck.

In reply to Skyfall:

It's a pretty poor way of interfacing if you are using a keyboard too as you keep having to move your arm. Each movement costs time. In fact a mouse has this problem to an extent too. Old unix style command lines are actually quicker for experienced users for many tasks, if much less intuitive.

In reply to MG:

The point is that Microsoft realises that the mobile and desktop world will inevitably merge, and they're trying to create an OS that will work comfortably with both. This is quite a difficult task hence their initial teething problems with Windows 8, but every new version makes improvements for both sets of users.

Windows 8.1 on a tablet PC is much better than on a desktop. The gestures make so much more sense and it feels a lot more fluid and powerful than either Android or iOS. The fact that it also works with desktop PCs will put Microsoft in a good position in the long run, if they play their cards right.

I think Microsoft are actually being very far-sighted about this, but it will take time to perfect.

In reply to Only a hill:

That may be true but for now and I would say for at least a decade most users will be those in offices doing tasks with Excel, Word and email, juggling many documents, opening files on network drives etc. Windows 8 is woefully bad for these users. My guess is Windows 8.2 will have to re-focus even more on this group or it simply won't be adopted

In reply to Only a hill:


I think you are making the mistake of assuming that people use mobiles and desktops for the same things; they don't except those who just play on desk/laptops. I rarely do a lot of typing on a mobile/tablet device, hence touchscreen works well. If you are doing a lot of typing, it actually disrupts your workflow to have to use a touchscreen.

I accept that "One day" we may be using desk/laptops (if they still exist) in a way that doesn't involve a lot of typing - in which case information will need to be reliably input in a different way - and when touchscreen will come into its own. It doesn't make sense now.

In reply to MG:

I still don't get why 8 is bad for those users when the desktop is virtually unchanged and runs the same software as 7. Nobody is being forced to use the full screen Metro apps. If anything, I'd say Microsoft has done an admirable job of keeping legacy support and catering to both 'worlds'.

Put it this way: if Microsoft hadn't innovated and released a new version of Windows that was exactly the same as 7, everyone would still have moaned. There really is no pleasing some people

In reply to Skyfall:

As a writer who mainly uses two touchscreen devices for my work (which involves a LOT of typing), I disagree. My desktop has a keyboard attached to it and works just fine. My tablet has a Bluetooth keyboard that I use when I need to.

Not every user is the same.

In reply to Only a hill:


It's totally different. Tiles may be great for a phone or if you are just using email and a browser. If you want quick access to many files and programs they are hopeless. The hidden "features" all over the screen mean you lose you thread as things jump up and disappear, apparently at random. Apparently this can all be turned off, which would be nice but again most users simply don't want the hassle of downloaded upgrades from unknown sources - they just want a computer that works.

In reply to MG:

But you still get the file explorer and taskbar. I really don't see the problem - or am I overestimating the abilities or average users?

In reply to Only a hill:


I'm not so sure. All the IT departments at the places I have worked hate changing software due to time involved and normally limited benefits. Work-wise, I don't think there is anything I can do on Window 7 that I couldn't on XP (thankfully Windows 8 is not being adopted by my employer).

In reply to Only a hill:
I use a Bluetooth keyboard on my tablet at home if I need to type. It's very good and gets rid of a lot of the need for, say, a laptop at home. However, when I use it in that "mode", I am not generally doing a lot of swiping of the screen. All that makes sense and I am sure we all get along fine with it.

With a desktop, I sit at a distance that I can't physically touch the screen when typing - which is most of the time I am using it - so why would I want to access functions by having to keep moving into the screen?

In reply to Only a hill:

You're certainly over-estimating people's willingness to relearn ways of doing basically the same task with no increase in speed.

In reply to Only a hill:

I've only used it as a virtual machine, but it seems that far too many of the in-built apps are full-screen. Now I'm used to that with an ipad, but that's not what I want with Windows. I want Windows! Lots of them, all over multiple screens. That's because I use windows with a mouse and keyboard for work, sat at a desk. And I use my ipad at home, sat on the sofa, or in bed. I have absolutely no wish to get a touch screen for work, and operating system that assumes I'm only going to play angry birds is an insult!

In reply to MG:

And the willingness of business to pay people to do that, both in terms of lost productivity and direct training cost.

Might also drive a switch to Mac? The MacOS UI is very traditional, much more so than any currently on-sale variety of Windows. I have wondered how long it'll be before there is convergence between that and iOS...

Neil

In reply to Skyfall:

I haven't had any issues with the version of IE that ships with Win8.1. You don't have to (and I don't) use it in tile mode.

Neil

In reply to MG:

It's weird how I've used everything from a ZX81 to a SGI Onyx2 over the last 32years without a problem, even at a couple of times in my career employed as a programmer, yet Win 8 has reduced me to a someone lacking in technology 'ability'.

I hope to god Alex doesn't sell Win 8 devices for a living, if a salesman suggested to me I lacked the ability to operate a PC or laptop, I'd be heading straight for the Apple shop...

In reply to TOS:

I wonder if Win8 is like iOS in that it makes people think like non-IT people?

I found iOS frustrating in a few ways. One example is that to attach a photo you go to the photo, share, by e-mail. Not open an email and select add attachment. The former flow is more logical to a non-IT person.

Neil

In reply to TOS:

Hey, I meant no offence - just stated things as I see them. Life's too short to get worked up about tech. Besides, I don't have my day job hat.on when posting on the forums

In reply to TOS:

Spot on, on all counts.

In reply to Neil Williams:

The one thing Microsoft could have done with Win 8, but didn't, was to put a 'Whats new' style window when you fire it up for the first time.

I always remember the first time I tried to use Internet Explorer with it (a place you can google for 'how to do x'), and with a stroke of the mouse pad, whoosh, the Explorer window flew off the side of the screen to god knows where.

When I was trying to get to grips with my Win 8 laptop, there was some irony in that I had to ask my girlfriend sat next to me, to google 'how to do x in Win 8' on her Macbook.

In reply to Only a hill:

The problem is systemic. Microsoft need to shift units, which they can only do by peiodically bringing out new versions of their product. Unfortunatley as computer use has approached maturity people are starting to realise that what they are doing now is pretty much the same as what they were doing 15 years ago on Win NT. There is no game changing shift with a new release any more.

It's like Tesco moving the stuff around in the store, it's bloody annoying, and it's done because it makes Tesco more money.

I use a lot of 'niche' software, boring stuff that starts pumps and opens valves in the right order, and I now use VMWare running XP so I know my software will work.

In reply to johncoxmysteriously and others:
I'm in the "load of old rubbish" camp. I upgraded to Windows 8.1, and I get BSOD every couple of days. Microsoft's help forums are absolutely useless...

In reply to Only a hill:


Really? Can I ask what your source is for that comment?

In reply to Fraser:

I'm looking for one at the moment and that's certainly my observation, at least within those aimed at the consumer market.

Neil

In reply to Fraser:

Most of the new Windows 8 PCs on the consumer market at the moment are touch enabled - laptops, hybrids, or all-in-ones. Just have a wander round your local PC world and you'll see what I mean.

In reply to Only a hill:

I was reading your comment of 'computers' as including just the base units too, in which case it seemed unlikely! I'd agree if you meant laptops and all-in-ones.

In reply to Only a hill:



No disadvantage? Apart from the smeared screen and reduced battery life. Admittedly it's not the worst trade off but as others have said it's a feature which most don't want so it's akin to me trying to sell you an usb device that does nothing apart from suck an hour's battery life away and periodically spray shit on your screen. Touch screens are very much here to stay...on phones and tablets. Useless on a laptop, next will be gestures and 3d screens so you'll have to look like a total nob every time you want to load up Photoshop and you have to mime an artist.


Tablets are eating into laptop sales and I reckon more and more pc and laptop users are going to be business use and people who want it for traditional applications. If that's niche then so be it but imo it's a large market that wants nothing to do with touch screens.

At first I thought 8 might buck the Windows trend of shit-good-shit-good...operating systems, the start menu has always been shit and the task bar could have been improved on. But they aren't being far sighted they're copying and bending to the cool, hip wind instead of focussing on people who want speed and minimalist utility instead of wacky graphics, huge icons and splashes of color. They should have taken the time to launch a pro version alongside a 'fun' version, like Windows 2k, pared down, no gimmicks, replaced the start menu with a command line and aimed their sights back at people who want computers to do stuff for them.

In reply to johncoxmysteriously: I grumbled about this when I bought a new PC late last year. Having upgraded to 8.1, it is now tolerable; just.

I think we're in a phase were software companies are trying to integrate their systems to make the tablet, phone, laptop and desktop appearance all the same. They'll come to their senses eventually and realise that one size doesn't fit all. In the meantime, it's a big bag of bollocks.

T.

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

Well, for a start it seems it won't play DVDs and you have to download some online freeware to do so. WTF??

Secondly, it doesn't properly play existing chess database programs or analysis engines.

Third, it doesn't have a ******* word processing capacity. Again, WTF?? Computers are for writing on, aren't they??

Fourth, of course I don't want it to operate with a touchscreen; what am I, some kind of ******* teenager?

Fifth, it comes with all sorts of ludicrous crap I can't imagine needing. AFAICS the home screen has a specific 'app' (whatever TF an 'app' is) to tell me the weather in Mumbai. Why the F*CK would I want that?? I believe the technical term for this is 'bloatware'.

Finally, the whole interface has changed for no purpose whatsoever as far as I can see, and far worse, it's now counterintuitive. I haven't yet even learned how to get back an application I've just minimised.

The purpose of computer design for the mass market is to ensure that people like me can pick up a computer and operate all its functions without needing any kind of training or learning process, and that the computer should actually have the basic functions people expect (or at least should warn people I doesn't have them). In seeking this goal the cretins who design this crap have failed by a massive margin and in addition have dishonestly failed to tell the buying public their machines no longer perform basic functions.

I dare say I'm not the first to have noticed and expressed these points.

jcm

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

How easy is it to get familiar with compared to Windows XP which I currently have. I need a not particularly high spec machine to run a specific application. I can get a DELL Inspiron 15 for £279, If I want it with Windows 7 it's nearly £500. Only Microsoft could come up with a system where it costs to downgrade.

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

At the risk of pulling the tiger's tail, did you not try it out before you paid good money for it?

In reply to 999thAndy:

No. I just assumed it would work.

Besides, what if I had? AFAIK Windows 8 is what all new laptops now have.

jcm

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:


That will the EU imposing their anti trust laws that stop Microsoft using their dominance by making you use their DVD players.


Can't comment, but in our experience many software companies haven't pulled their fingers out to make their products Windows 8 friendly. I don't know why. For us, we simply had to up the revision of our offering.


That will be the EU again. However, you can do a lot of word processing online these days if you haven't got office. Outlook.com or Google Drive might help you out or you can install Open Office. Or you could pay for a Word processing package shock horror!


If you don't want to use a touchscreen, don't. You are an adult, even though you seem to be coming over as a spoilt teenager right now.

Nothing new there. PCs bought from large department stores have been preloaded with crap since the beginning of time. What has that got to do with Windows 8?

Given the Windows 8 threads on here, why did you buy a Windows 8 PC? It isn't hard to obtain PCs and laptops with XP if that is what you want. I don't really understand the rantings. Windows 8 is what it is. Some like it, others don't but no one says you have to have one or the other.

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

Quite a lot of what you're complaining has nothing to do with Windows 8. Bloatware, for example, has everything to do with licensing deals struck by the PC manufacturer and nothing to do with Microsoft. It's quite probable that previous PCs you've owned have had bloatware but you haven't noticed it. Similarly, word processing require word processing software. Windows, of any kind, is an operating system, not word processing software.

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:


Its because MS were having to cough up money for the licenses to play DVDs. They decided against it.
The freeware takes a more liberal approach to licensing.


What problems are you getting? Unless you went from XP then wouldnt have thought many would die.


it does if you buy it (plus I think it has notepad and wordpad). Which has been the same for all windows versions.


well you do look rather young for your age.


Fair point. This is mostly due to taking the across all platforms too seriously in my eyes.


Apart from this isnt the case. The majority of the time you will need training and spend the time learning. Its just you did it several versions ago and hence dont remember.

In reply to dissonance:



He probably got home office bundles in with the last one.

In reply to dissonance:


^^ This!

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:




You could have saved some money?
or spent more on a mac?
or been advised what to buy in addition to your PC?
or got some free 'training'?

Customer service is generally 10x better before you've paid for anything.

In reply to 999thAndy:

Sure, I could have done all those things.

Alternatively, the store and manufacturer could make it clear that their bl**dy machines no longer perform half the functions that people expect computers to, and in fact in my case actually literally don’t perform a single one of them properly.

My point is that the latter solution would be preferable for society, what with shopping and training to use computers being the two most tedious occupations known to man.

jcm

In reply to 999thAndy:





Yeah.... but, I don't understand why MS have taken the approach they have, when so many customer just wanted a continuation of what was a very good OS (XP). They are meant to respond to customer demands, not the other way round.

The other thing is most work environments will be on 7 for the foreseeable future, using 2 OSs is annoying. I really don't see why they couldn't have kept both going in parallel at the same price.

In reply to Papillon:

'They are meant to respond to customer demands, not the other way round.'

That's not really true, is it? How many people needed an Ipad, before Apple created them? How many people needed Windows, before it was created?

Manufacturers have to say ahead of the curve, not behind it. But obviously, JCM would have been much better off if he'd remembered the golden rule: every OTHER MS Windows version is a dog.

In reply to Papillon:

They're meant to make money for their shareholders - that is the reason for the existence of a company. For most companies, most of the time, that involves responding to customer demands. But as people wouldn't pay for security updates on XP, that wouldn't make them any money.

Neil

In reply to Rob Exile Ward:


There, fixed that for you

In reply to Neil Williams & Rob:

Yes quite right, but I think on this occasion listening to customers would have made them more money in the long run. People are now experimenting with different OSs because of this.

In reply to Neil Williams: I was at the GPs the other day and they were using XP. There's no way they are going to get hardware or software updates anytime soon, and XP is due to go unsupported. What's going to happen?

In reply to Papillon:

In our field - optics - there's a huge number of machines that have embedded XP PCs in them. £15K instruments with an unsupported OS... hmmm.

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

What would be better for society would be if each copy of Windows shipped with a rubberized talking doll of Bill gates and a baseball bat. He could say things like "would you like Windows to search for printer drivers online?"...and then you could beat it.

In reply to Papillon:

As I said upthread, MS have to ship units, which they do by periodically dicking about with the operating system, then making sure they neither sell nor support their older ones.

The real urine boiler about the whole thing is computers aren't doing more of anything useful* now compared to 15 years ago. It is the very essence of consumerism.


*gaming isn't useful, and most pictures are better without HDR

In reply to Rob Exile Ward:

I think XP embedded is still supported until 2016.

Though it depends if the machines have:
(PCs with XP) embedded in them, or
PCs with (XP embedded) in them.

Though it's still pretty bad, 2016 isn't far away. We have literally hundreds of thousands of pound worth or kit controlled by XP machines here. We'll try upgrading to 7 soon, and if that doesn't work we'll probably roll back to XP and pull out all the network cables. On one hand XP is 12 years old, so stopping support isn't ridiculous, on the other hand a workable successor only appeared in 2009, so it sees a bit soon.

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

I'm very grateful for the introduction of windows 8, it was the product that made me finally decide to buy a mac.

I tried windows 8 in store and really disliked the look of it, found it counterintuitive and I struggled to work out how to perform basic tasks. The mac is a joy to use.

In reply to Jack B:

I read on one of the tech blogs that cash machines run XP (or a bolted down variant of it) - http://www.neowin.net/news/95-of-atm-machines-still-use-windows-xp-and-will...

(I wonder if they aren't exposed to vulnerabilities before 8th April as well)

In reply to 999thAndy:


Yeah but people have been upgrading hardware quite regularly, each time with a new 'unit' of OS.

In reply to Papillon:

They'll become more vulnerable to hacking over time.

What this does is highlights why software companies like the subscription model. Indeed, were Windows paid for that way, there's a good chance XP could be kept alive far longer. Indeed, chargeable patching might be a way MS could consider keeping it alive.

Neil

In reply to dissonance:


Ah, but the effort to learn something new has got to be worth the benefit of what's at the end. So far Windows 8.1 on our new home machine is significantly poorer than Windows 7 on my 5 year old work one in terms of speed, stability, usability, etc. This is why no business in their right mind would upgrade to Windows 8.

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

I rest my case.....