Windows 8?

Would you guys consider Windows 8 to be a failure of an OS, when it comes to desktop computers and laptops?
   I understand that Win8 can work well on tablets and mobile device (although I'm not a phone guy), but what about desktops and laptops?
    I had it installed for about a month on my desktop to test it out, eventually got fed up and switched back to Win7. I also had used it on a friends laptop and it was absolutely atrocious. 
 
    I understand this topic may be quite dated, but what do you all think?
When should Windows start working on their next OS?
Do you think they will do a better job for PC functionality?
Should they have a separate OS for touch-screen platforms?
 

I hate Widnwos 8 but they have better 6+ Core performance so i might switch and just put a start menu on it.

I'm running Windows 8 on a new ASUS laptop. Personally, I don't think it is that bad. I used it stock for about a month and I really didn't mind it all too much. The track pad on my laptop supports gestures so closing programs, switching between them and opening up the Charms Bar wasn't that much of a problem. 

Now, I primarily use a mouse with my laptop and Windows 8 does become more annoying with one. That being said, I do like many of the features that Windows 8 brings to the table. I like the new Task Manager and I like the overall look of the OS. Performance wise it is, at least to me, much faster than Windows 7. My laptop only has a 5400 RPM drive. I can get to my desktop and open Chrome from a cold boot incredibly quickly (I'll time it after I post this). 

Right now I have Start is Back and that for me eliminated most of the annoyances I've had with Windows 8. I boot straight to desktop and never go to the Start Screen.  Now, I don't think you should be forced to install a program to get back functionality that should have been there from the beginning but really it isn't that much of an issue to me. I still prefer it to Mac OS. 

I believe that Microsoft is already working on the next iteration of Windows. They have to be. I do think that they will bring better functionality to those who use Windows primarily with a mouse and key board. I doubt they would like to repeat the criticism they got from Windows 8. 

If Microsoft is going to become a full on hardware manufacture (as it appears they want to be) then I think it is a good idea to have a similar OS over all their different platforms whether that be on the PC or a mobile device. I think one of the main issues people had with Windows 8 is learning a new GUI and system. That fear of learning something new is one of the factors keeping people away from Windows Phones (which I like actually). If they develop a system and apps that work across platforms then people will only have to learn one set of controls and one interface (for the most part). This would spur adaptation of the new OS. 

I use StartIsBack and it makes 8 work like 7, just with new appearance and a couple of interface changes.

I would like separate low power (Atom / ARM) and High power (i5, i7, A10, etc) flavor of windows. I.E. keep mobile on phones and tablets and full OS on Desktop. The stripped down windows 8 on the new tablets seems to indicate this. I hated the aesthetic of the UI formerly known as metro. It looked aweful. I hated the color scheme (correct me if you can change this). I hated the touch only gestures (I'm left handed so they are all on the wrong side anyway). I HATE touchscreens other than my phone because I HATE fingerprints.

I don't hate windows 8 out of "fear." I "fear" that the old useful windows has been lost due to a weak pathetic mobile fad. I HATE windows 8 because the design is ugly. I HATE that my i7 runs "APPS" like my low powered ARM android phone (OK, it is a 1.5ghz quad core Nexus 4 but still). "APPS" are for everyday low tech users. EXE's and applications are for power users and if not for gaming I would probably be a Linux user. 

My computer does not have an identity crisis. It is not half metro / tablet / touchscreen. It is 100% powerhouse for gaming and rendering. Also homework.

/rant

TMast, I couldn*t agree more with you! Thanks to the de-suck Win8 video of TekSyndicate I got rid of most of the annoying Win8 features. In fact, I can now use it just like my good old Win7 but still get the better performance and startup. One thing they didnt mention in the de-suck video is how to get rid of the useless lock screen. This one is just another thing that is nice on a phone but will cost you three seconds every time you want to log in or unlock the screen. As a power user I cant bear losing time for such a useless thing. Removing it is just a matter of registry entries. Google it :-) It's very simple

Oh and the whole app thing only applies to the metro surface. If you start on your desktop and if you only install programs you sownloaded from the internet (stay away from the app store) you don't even notice the whole app crap

 
 

There is, it's called Windows RT. This might sound like I'm going ad hom, but I have a hard time taking anyone serious that has a meltdown over Windows 8.The main issue that people have over Windows 8 is that it's a change, a very visible one.

The OS has not been compromised to accommodate tablets at all, it's perfectly fine to use with a mouse, 8.1 even more so.

There isn't anything particularly wrong with it. The start screen isn't particularly well implemented, though that's been improved loads with Windows 8.1. Outside of that, it's an improvement on Windows 7 in most ways for 99% of people who will use it.

The start screen in Windows 8.1 is much better than the old antiquated start menu ever was, and I'm happy to see it gone.

This is how my Windows 8 preview looks:

One of the largest improvements is that you can set the start screen's background to be the same as the desktop's, so it's a lot less of a jarring interruption (well it isn't a jarring interruption at all now) than before, as it just looks like a menu overlay.

As above, the biggest issue with Windows 8 is change. I have it on all my computers, and I find Windows 7 awkward to use in comparison. This doesn't mean that Windows 7 is awkward, it's just a change compared to the Windows 8 way of doing things that I'm used to, and if people weren't so resistant to change, a lot less people would be moaning about Windows 8.

 

In your case it's not about 8 being better, it's about it fitting your usage scenario better than 7.

I personally don't use any desktop/metro icons or all programs menu because I use search to launch software. There's no faster way to do it than that, 5-6 keystrokes (win + some letter from program name + enter) take around a second.

My problem with metro is that it covers the entire screen when I just need search bar and results, while start menu has it completely like it should be. The thing covering entire screen really distracts and annoys me and I also don't like that I have to use a separate hotkey to search control panel. Search algorithm in metro also gives results in some strange order compared to start menu.

And, well, charms and switcher are just atrocities that have to be turned off one way or another.

For most people it's not about being resistant to change, it's about Metro being horribly inconvenient to use in stock because of it being touchscreen-oriented while user holds a mouse in his hand, not to mention it being completely confusing at first. While most of users are not that demanding about convenience and could get used to it after some time, it brings no benefits whatsoever to them.

 
 

In your case it's not about 8 being better, it's about it fitting your usage scenario better than 7.

It really isn't, Windows 8 is generally and genuinely better than Windows 7 in a lot of aspects.

I personally don't use any desktop/metro icons or all programs menu because I use search to launch software. There's no faster way to do it than that, 5-6 keystrokes (win + some letter from program name + enter) take around a second.

This screenshot was from my media/HTPC under my TV, it's an example of the visual difference between 8 and 8.1.

On my main productivity PC, I don't use desktop icons or metro icons to launch stuff either.

The issue of the start screen covering the whole display is mitigated by the simple change of having the same image as the start screen background as your desktop background.

It's a very big change, and a very pleasant one at that. In contrast, the start screen with Windows 8.0 is atrocious, but not because it's a start screen. It's purely because of the stark difference between the two interfaces, it causes a break in your thought process until you get used to it.

And, well, charms and switcher are just atrocities that have to be turned off one way or another.

Charms can be completely disabled in Windows 8.1

For most people it's not about being resistant to change, it's about Metro being horribly inconvenient to use in stock because of it being touchscreen-oriented while user holds a mouse in his hand, not to mention it being completely confusing at first. While most of users are not that demanding about convenience and could get used to it after some time, it brings no benefits whatsoever to them.

The start screen is touch influenced, I don't think it is touch orientated though, that implies its interface is a compromise, which it isn't. 

That aside, you've actually brought the real issue to light. The biggest issue outside of people not liking change, is that Microsoft did not explain how to do things. So people had no idea what they were doing.

This is where the issues of people getting confused comes from. If they don't explain how they intend for their interface to be used then it's not a surprise at all that people struggle with it.

That's been the number one reason people have had issues with Windows 8 when I've asked around, not knowing how to do things.

As for benefits, of course it does. It is much more visually appealing than the legacy start menu which was just a mess of entries and small lines of text squished together.

 

 

You've kinda changed what I said to fit your agenda...

I have no problem with change. I change ROMs on my Samsung Galaxy S (the original, no 4g lol) rather often because I like to try new things. I was more than happy with the change from Android 2.2 to Android 4.2.2 when I got my Nexus 4 and was happier still when I went to 4.3 because the changes that were made were improvements.

The changes to Windows 8 and the UI formerly known as Metro were all indifferent or negative. When I need my start menu I usually just need a not often used program so Win + first 3 letters + enter. If I need control panel I don't need to load a full screen menu and then pick a window that has more menus. I don't find the metro to be useful or an improvement, I see it as an inconvenience and an ugly bloated interface.

Even if you ignore the Metro like someone (I forget who, sorry) said about the app store, that still bothers me. I know in my head that it is still there hiding in the background. The fact that it exists and I cannot get rid of it, only ignore it really bothers me.

I like some of the improvements for Win8. Boot speed etc. is great. I even like the lock screen as my computer is usually on and having it as a clock and a decoration is actually kind of nice. I still run Win7 because I don't want the interruptions to my workflow.

I was mad when the parent folder button disappear in WinVista and am still annoyed that it is not in Win7. The tabs at the top are really annoying so I tend to alt tab and use multiple windows and using a hotkey on my mouse open all folders in new windows.

Microsoft did explain how to use Windows8 it's called the surface. Not many people like it or windows 8 not because it is different but because it is inconvenient to use. If it was really nice to use and looked cool it would be like the new iPhone for mac people. This is more like the mac people who have actually told me that they don't like iOS 7. Mac people NEVER bashed mac*

*before iOS 7 

The issue of the start screen covering the whole display is mitigated by the simple change of having the same image as the start screen background as your desktop background.

It's not about the difference in interfaces, I don't want it to cover currently opened windows. I also don't like spacing of the elements in metro search, as in search field and results are too far apart on the screen for no apparent reason.

It's purely because of the stark difference between the two interfaces, it causes a break in your thought process until you get used to it.

There's no reason to use two interfaces when you can use one. If they wanted to improve desktop experience using something like start screen, they could improve desktop screen instead of adding another interface.

Charms can be completely disabled in Windows 8.1

Well, there are registry hacks for both of them anyway. What about switcher?

As for benefits, of course it does. It is much more visually appealing than the legacy start menu which was just a mess of entries and small lines of text squished together.

Legacy start menu, unlike, metro, has elements appropriately sized for navigation with mouse. The problem lies with the whole folders-of-shortcuts start menu system that should be completely reworked and standards should be imposed on software developers so that all shortcuts could be neatly arranged in different ways.

For ordinary users (as in those who don't know anything about computers) ease of use is the first priority, and legacy start menu is way easier for them to understand compared to metro. They don't care about how it looks or how efficient it is as long as they can do what they intended to do.

If such a person buys a laptop with W8 pre-installed, he will just get extremely confused and will just go to nearest "computer guy" to install him a 7 while hating 8. Those people are not to blame for it because 8 goes does the opposite of what hey want from their computers. Microsoft is to blame for making an interface that is way harder to understand compared to old one. It's not about teaching or explaining, those people just want something simple and self-evident, that's why iPads and other tablets are popular.