I moved to Win 8 from XP on 4 networked home computers because of XP end of support life. Win 8 is fast and stable but I still hate it. Why?
1. Metro interface just doesn't work a well on keyboard mouse setup. Classic shell really helped but every so often (for reasons I do not understand) the desktop reverts to Metro UI.
But the main reason I dislike Win 9/8.1 is:
2. I want control of my computer's interaction with the internet. I must have spent over 8 hours disengaging the Win 8 computers from Microsoft's version of the cloud. I do not want to be forced into a MS account to activate my legal OS. I do not want cloud storage (a 1.5 TB external drive works just fine thank you). I do not want or use MS store Apps. I do not want a social media account. POP 3 mail works just fine. I upgraded one of the computers to Win 8.1 and isolating it from the Microsoft environment was even more difficult than Win 8. I am certainly not going to apply upgrade 1.
I do understand that tying the OS and productivity apps to the MS cloud (Office 356 I am looking at you) is the way MS thinks they can enhance revenues. However if it comes down to MS vs. Apple vs. Google cloud based solution I will go with Google at this time. They certainly won/t treat my private data with any less concern than other web based solutions
For non corporate users who are looking for inexpensive computing solution the future probably will lie with mid level hardware running a Google OS or desktop flavor of Unix using Google docs, calendar and mail to substitute for Windows and Office.
I do keep an older XP computer isolated from the internet to run older legacy software.
Excellente write up, Paul!!
Microsoft has been rightly and wrongly accused of copying Apple, and it should have copied Apple and its two OS roadmap, one for touch (iOS) and one for mouse and keyboard (OS X).
Your question begs the question, "What took you so long to ask your question?"
What is happening with Microsoft Windows has been happening since Windows 3.1 through Windows 95 into Windows 98 and on through to Windows (8). The story has not changed, only the details, on and on and on...
The reason things are falling apart now is two-fold: 1) Microsoft failed to see the impact of the phone|tablet market until it was too late... and 2) Microsoft failed to understand that many want freedom in computing, and a real desktop with a full keyboard, track-marble pointer and large screen....
Microsoft Windows is being crushed under its own weight. No one can keep up that game of being everything to everybody... particularly when "everybody" is unhappy with them...
The entire discussion is irrelevant to me. I have been a happy exclusive user of Gnu/Linus since 1998, my family since 2004. We have not looked back... not even.
Windows (8) was a veritable gift to the FOSS movement. The only thing that's left now are the death throws.
I don't need touch for Photoshop and Lightroom.
I don't need touch for QuickBooks
I don't need touch for Visual Studio
I don't need touch for AutoCad
I don't need touch for 50 other misc. engineering applications I use.
I don't WANT touch for these applications either, and I don't want a phone with a 30" display. Round hole, square peg.
These applications don't get "better" when they are dumbed down to deal with the limitations of touch. I get these apps are more accessible to those with a limited skill set.
I don't want to learn an entire new API for the Metro interface because I don't trust MS will not just dump it like SilverLight, WPF, etc.
The applications are what matters. The OS is a glorified app launcher for most users. Are there any Metro apps that do something better than the Win7 desktop equivalent for a trained user? Any.at.all? I haven't found them, and the ones I tried were very disappointing. Please give me some recommendations.
I'm a power user, and work for a living. Win8 wasn't designed for me, I can tell you that. And who really pays Microsoft's bills? Metro users?
I appreciate that MS is trying to modernize their OS, but this was a huge swing and miss for their power user base. Zero point zero usefulness. I use 30" and 24" monitors. Try using Metro in this environment. We all know what Win-D does, don't we? Return-to-productivity.
I definitely feel abandoned by MS, 4 years after Win7 and billions of dollars later, I get what? A better task manager?
The last thing MS wants to do is abandon their content producer and power user base to Linux, and that is exactly what could happen.
Make high DPI displays work for the desktop better and Metro in a window and I will forgive you.....a little bit...but you are on probation...double secret probation.
"I don't need touch for Photoshop and Lightroom.
I don't WANT touch for these applications either, and I don't want a phone with a 30" display. Round hole, square peg."
And this is why you are among the masses arguing about nothing. What makes you think Windows 8 makes you use touch for these things?"
I use the same version of Photoshop I used on Windows XP, I've never owned a touch screen. Heck it's even the same keyboard and mouse.
This idea that Windows 8 somehow FORCES people to use touch is absurd. A "power user" would know that.
I strongly agree, thank you for that comment!
You know, the comment about Win 8 being two different OS's is very interesting. I've heard that same comment so many times, but even though I know where it's coming from, I've always found it odd. It's not two different OS's; it's two different UIs for the same underlying OS. As much as people have grumbled about Win8's split personality, I've always thought that's where its true potential lies.
Having a single OS that runs on different devices and form factors opens up a lot of possibilities. That said, I've never really understood why Microsoft didn't just have the OS present itself differently in different use cases. For example, I don't really have a lot of need for touch when I'm using my Surface Pro as a desktop. It can be helpful, but I don't use touch nearly as much. But when I don't have it plugged into its docking station, Metro is totally the way to go. So why not allow me to switch modes - or better yet, detect them automatically as much as possible? Then it really would be two devices for the price of one.
On a related note, I've also found it interestng that folks cling so vehemently to the desktop. I know its familiar and that floating windows are sometimes helpful. I definitely get that. But, if you really want to get rid of that 'split' personality, why not just ditch the desktop? So many folks seem to think that the desktop is actually required in order to have applications that support mouse and keyboard and all that entails. But, at the end of the day, the desktop is just a metaphor. It doesn't really exist. Excel would work equally well if launched from the start screen as a full screen app as it would maximized in the desktop. It might not fit that quintessential 'Metro' style, but that's not my point. It's that you don't really need a desktop per se for that style of app. Forcing it to launch inside a desktop is an artificial constraint imposed by Microsoft.
Now I realize, that's probably too big a leap for users who love their desktop - especially the less technically savvy, but it's definitely possible and could get rid of that dual personality that some folks seem to loathe.
This was a painful, but truthful and necessary post'; well don Paul! It's a shame what has been happening to Windows and even though I like many things about Window 8.1 I've gone pretty much back to using Windows 7 more often than not. Truly, it was the best Windows ever and Microsoft should have stuck with enhancing and making it all better as it was pretty much the equal to OS X, if not better in ways.
I note that Apple desktop and laptop sales have also suffered under the march of tablet and smartphone devices.
For many people tablets and smart-phones are their primary email and internet devices now.
For others, tablets and smart phones are their introduction to computers. For them, it will only seem natural to migrate to desktop and laptop devices that use the same operating systems.
Its easier to evolve a smartphone OS to a tablet, laptop or desktop than it is to go the other way, migrate a OS designed for a desktop to smartphones and tablets.
Having said that, its clear that many are Windows home users because of its success in the business environment.
It seems to me that there is a good case for an OS to rule them all.
I think the blame is mis-attributed.
Windows 8 is fine, actually is even better than XP and 7: more reliable, speedier, up-to-date in its handling of peripherals...
*Metro* is the problem, but that can be fixed easily by getting rid o fit via the free ClassicShell among others, which puts the XP/7/Vista UI (your choice) back in charge.
Now, indeed, the Metro debacle is very important. Metro is a bad UI (not "discoverable", not "consistent - no back key...), served by bad apps and Live Tiles, riddled with bugs (like billg, it took me 3 tries to install it), and riddled with holes (when I was still trying to make Metro work, I never ever stayed within it more then 15 minutes, it always ended up dumping me into the Desktop UI). That level of incompetence, lack of "touch", and disregard for customer feedback is a clear message that today's Microsoft is no longer strong enough to withstand the pressure of being in charge of so much of our computing experience. We can no longer trust MS to make the right choices, nor even to make the *comfortable* choices. They're a bad landlord willing to wreak our home to squeeze us into a trailer.
The saddest thing about this waste is that Metro is not a bad concept, it's just badly executed with a smörgåsbord of small details that went wrong.
I'm pushing Android desktops to anyone who can live with them (basic usage: email, Skype, games, Web...). They're cheaper, more reliable, easier to use...
"You can't please everybody, Microsoft. So stop trying. It's time to double down on the people who actually use your products, not some mythical group of consumers who will never stop using their simpler Android and iOS devices just because you wish they would."
Microsoft's problem is not in trying to please its customers (the customer is always right), unifying Windows across devices (one OS to rule them all), nor the Start screen (a big, fluid, beautiful Start menu).
Their problem was in bifurcating the user interface and trying to lock down Windows to their app store.
Unify the interfaces and allow the user to choose whether they want a Desktop- or touch-focused interface.
I think Paul has been spot on lately with his analysis of Windows 8. and it's not like any of us with half a brain couldn't see this train wreck coming. It was very obvious from beginning. The feedback MS was getting from beta testers early on were by and large negative, count me among them.
Did Sinofsky choose to ignore the user base and press on with his vision of how he thought Windows 8 "should be"?. By all accounts he did and it cost him his job, and possibly Ballmer's as well. They took a big risk and lost. Those mistakes has probably set MS back years at a time they can least afford it. Some of the thinking coming out of MS at the time was just silly. They really thought all of us desktop users would rush out and buy touch screen monitors just so we could use the metro UI.
I understand why MS doesn't want to abandon Windows it's their baby. but it's not suited as a tablet OS and shouldn't be. This is basically a case of putting lipstick on a pig. The metro UI is the lipstick on Windows. There's far too much legacy code and bloat in Windows to make it a great tablet OS that it needs to be in order compete with Apple and Google. Windows is not power efficient, it's way more complex and much more prone to malware and viruses than iOS and android. Millions of viruses are written for the Windows every year. AFAIK after 7 years and hundreds of millions of devices in the wild iOS still has zero viruses. That says a lot about both OSes and their app ecosystems. IMO MS needs to take this approach and completely dump the legacy baggage.
Zero Viruses. Not true at all. However, i will cede that IOS is more secure than Traditional windows. Though most of this is from all apps being distributed via the AppStore and Apple being good at vetting most of the Apps submitted to it.
I would say RT is just as secure and maybe more so.
As a Win8 user, I learned the use of Metro, it took quite a few days, until I became familar with the whole system. And: I feel it comfortable, useful. I like the simplicity of buying, installing apps through Metro. What I don't understand: why did Microsoft COMMUNICATE not better, HOW TO USE METRO simple? (i.e. it is a good, built-in app launcher !)
At Microsoft, they're working so hard, managing decisions, which results a basically good OS.. and despite the previous efforts, they did not introduce metro properly.. and I think at that point, costumers became a bit helpless with Win8.
USERS LIKE to BE treated as a PARTNER, more personally.
At this point, users need clear informations about Win8, what we can expect from it !
AND based on that, the community could respond to the plans or changes, on the dedicated forums.
After, Microsoft can see that if there are many complaints with a product, and change it unitl a better working version.
Please Microsoft, make Your company's working more simple! And, the communication about Your products more direct!
And, of course, hear the voice of users..
This could be a positive feedback circle, which leads to more acknowledged OS, programs.
And for us: more handy products.
p.s.: For lower price, please!
Give 25GB of free OneDrive space to current Win8.x users. Give a 25% discount to upgrade Win7 to Win8.1 and a 40% discount to upgrade WinXP and WinVista to Win8.1. Windows is saved.
I do not understand why people have a problem with the two OS's in one concept that Windows 8 has embraced.
I like the idea of a device (tablet or phone even) that I carry with me and use one way while on the move but that when I get to work i can drop the device in its dock or whatever and it is suddenly a desktop OS. It looks as if Update 1 is still pushing these ideas too. New features like the right click menus are not a bad thing for traditional users. In fact, i would argue that this feature and others like it are the key to make a dual OS that works. It needs to know what type of machine you are using and under what conditions and then always give you the experience best suited for that machine/interaction
Yeah, what about the "start button"?
Microsoft should hire Jay Machalani as UI consultant, I agree with most of his recommendations to fix Windows 8.1.
Otherwise: windows 8 and 8.1 are both excellent systems, Touch-wise and Destop wise. But just like Paul I don't like Update 1 and the path Microsoft is follwing by mixing Metro with Desktop elements.
Both should be integrated, but integration doesn't mean mixing up seperate UI-elements. Some suggestions:
- option to translate Metro groups to a desktop folder (like Fences by sardock) or Taskbar, e.g. my Office Group in Metro with one option click on the desktop taskbar or wallpaper (or vice versa, from desktop directly to Metro groups)
- why not set preferences to open a hybrid app (destop and metro version available) to open in the preferred UI
- why there is no "file explorer" app in the metro environment is one of the biggest flaws in what Microsoft wants to promote as a standalone UI.
How can you be a Steve Ballmer who totally failed at Vista and made a great comeback with Windows 7 only to fail yet again with Windows 8? The sole purpose of Windows 8 was Surface and tablets. That's the reason Windows 8 has failed. Every item that is at issue revolves around a interface trying to do duel tasks. One to satisfy the new tablet UI and the other to satisfy PC users. In the end both have been hurt by Windows 8. My Surface RT is dreadful at classic desktop apps just as much as my PC is not a good fit for Modern desktop. Their both equally broken on each format. I could care less about the blandness of Windows 8 vs the nice Aero UI I have grown to love. After using Mac's for a few years, I embraced the more bright and attractive Windows 7 Aero vs OS X drab grey. But Windows 8 problems go far beyond UI looks or lack of real functional improvements. Its just not a OS that makes you want to spend $120 or even $50 to upgrade from say Windows 7. I think Apple has also finally got it, that a OS value is only worth what the user feels its worth. Obviously, most Windows users are not feeling generous with Windows 8. I certainly am not and its clear from recent sales numbers that I am not alone in rejecting Windows 8 completely.
My experience with 8 and 8.1 has been overwhelmingly successful.
My business by the way maintains about 3,000 endpoints through a variety of businesses. This isn't my first rodeo.
My exposure to Microsoft goes back to the early 80's. With such product a their ROM based Basic on a TRS-80 Model One and later to PC's with DOS 1.
Bringing Windows 8/8.1 onto a 5 year old HP TX2000 has breathed new life into this laptop. It showed me that the core operating system is delivering an exemplary level of performance. This system now cold boots in 30 seconds. I don't have any system in my purvue running previous versions of Windows performing a boot this swift. This level of performance also extends to the Desktop and Metro.
The UI or presentation layer difficulties(learning curve) can be overcome with an investment of about 2 hours on some tutorials.
To sum it up, anytime something makes a computer run better, smoother, faster I would consider it a job well done.
Paul (or anyone else that cares to chime in for that matter) would you say that Windows RT has fallen into the clutches of 'the committee'?
I was very excited and hopeful when I first heard about RT, but I worry that Microsoft is now going back on this vision by either handing RT over to 'the committee' or scrapping it altogether.
Such a shame, because I have a Surface 2 and it's genuinely great.
My work involves modelling construction projects and I can honestly say the advent of Windows 8 has helped produce a revolution in computer usability and productivity for me. Why?
Because I now use a Surface Pro and it is the combination of Windows 8 with the Surface Pro which I’ve found so liberating and helpful to work with. My business solutions are based on Microsoft Project. Because the models have dynamic links to a pricing and profitability component built in Excel, etc. I need the industrial strength and reliability of good old Windows desktop to support these solutions which have been developed over several years. I use Office 365 constantly. I need to be mobile so I moved my data onto Google & Sky Drive and am using Skype more. Working at my home office desk I hook the Surface to a monitor, keyboard and mouse. In casual settings it’s great to be able to use touch on apps like IE and Kindle on this same device and even on Office if I just need to view something. The kickstand and type cover of the Surface are so simple, elegant and effective. Windows 8 and the Surface Pro combine to produce a platform which is way fast enough in start-up, runtime and shut down for my needs and it has run pretty well flawlessly for me for almost a year now. So, I find now I can and do want to use the one device in both desktop and touch modes.
Look, I agree it IS odd to have a system with – for example - two current, supported but slightly different versions of Skype – one modern and one desktop. Why are there three PDF readers: Adobe standard, Adobe touch and Microsoft’s Reader? Why is it impossible to find any information on how to handwrite mark ups to a PDF using Reader: you somehow just stumble over the fact that you can do this and it works! Why did it take me so long to tweak to using OneNote (a gem) which has now proven indispensible? But – you know what – I think it is precisely this quirkiness that gives Windows 8 some real personality as an OS. It IS different, even perplexing but so interesting, and ultimately quite attractive. You may have once met someone like this? There’s much to explore and entertain yourself with too if you have the time.
I for one am grateful to Microsoft for producing the Surface Pro / Windows 8 package – they deserve long applause for this. My only gripe so far is the lack of on-board docking for the stylus which I use for note taking, sketches, mark ups etc.. but have nowhere to store safely afterwards.
So, I’m arguing that Windows 8 does have a legitimate and coherent design principle because it is an essential factor in delivering the overall holistic experience of Surface Pro and similar tablet form devices. This package works wonderfully well for me but I can see from all these most interesting comments that it’s not going to suit everyone.
When someone says "not open for debate" I am reminded of politicians....total waste of time to debate haters.
For the record - 31 of my enterprise customers are adding Windows 8.x tablets (Pro 2) to remove the management headaches of iOS from their environment and their users have a choice. Hate-On if you need to.....
Problem with MS is they don't gamble where they should. The reason Google can jump out ahead because they are willing to lose money for marketshare the only way to claw customers away. Everything MS puts out cost too much on licensing and they put too much limits. By next year, all Android tablets will have quad-core CPU, 4GB RAM, and runs 64bit. While WinRT and Win8 on tablets and low powered devices still are limited to 2GB and 32bits and cost $100 more than similar Android device.
Jack of all trades, master on none. That's the way I describe Windows 8.
IMO the solution is rather simple.
1. Get rid of versions.
2. Windows 7 Renamed to 'Windows Classic' and supported for many many years with paid updates etc.
3. Windows 8 which i absolutely loved, and was IMO a better implementation of that vision than 8.1 should become 'Windows' and continue its life evolving to the modern future OS it was meant to be. Unify it, streamline it, and dominate with it it on modern desktops, tablets, phone etc.
Windows can be the response to all questions digital.
I stopped in a Buest Buy store last week in Richmond Indiana to buy a new laptop. I ask to see one with win 7. I was told that win 8 is all they had Microsoft had even recalled win 7 boxed software so you could only buy win 8. We don"t want it so they are trying to force it on us. Good luck with that microsoft. Time to buy a mac
All this hype about Microsoft and win 8/8.1 will probably be resolved in a short while! It won't be long until there will be nothing but apps on the cloud! The basic pc won't need to be as elaborate as it is now! Just a basic workhorse and use (paid for) apps from the cloud! They will make their money on apps! A new era is approaching, watch for it! If everyone gets disgusted with 8.1 update 1 etc., then a choice is presented. (possible free apps to get you started) You have the choice to choose a windows system for apps only or whatever is available at that time. Several users will switch to the total apps system! Then the fun begins! More and more apps are charged for and the free ones are dropped. Is it possible that this is what Microsoft is gearing up for? Its a thought to consider!
It may not be too long until we don't have to worry about win 8 or any updates for it! Could this happen? Windows is tooling up for a new way of attacking the users! Get rid of all the operating systems and start a new CLOUD system! All programs that can be used will be on the cloud! At first, they will be mostly free! Then a few will be charged for until EVERYTHING has to be bought! They will make their money selling apps instead of high prices on operating systems. Still have to have the basic system to use with the cloud! I may be totally wrong but I think its coming sooner than we think!
Am I missing something? I use Windows 8.1RT on my Surface 2 and I find it much better than iOS and Android for productivity. All Microsoft has to do is allow the option for Metro and full Desktop (with full Start button) depending on need. What's the big deal?
I agree completely with this article. I am not a Luddite. I am keen to use new tools that work better, but...
I use computing as a tool for work. I accept that some professional users are finding Win 8.1 step forward but from personal experience and observing professional users in a variety of contexts (including an SME I worked for) Win 8.x is simply not going to be adopted. Period.
Occasionally I switch back to using a Win 7 or XP machine and I must say it invariably feels like a much smoother desktop experience.
It also had occurred to me that Win 8.x could paradoxically damage MS in the tablet / smartphone world it is trying to reach since I suspect that most Win 8 desktop users will be very hesitant to try out a Win 8 tablet or smartphone where I expect it works well.
I really like Windows 8.1 but here's what I think they should do:
Call the "Metro" or "Modern UI" "One". It fits nicely with their other products and their advertising (one experience across all your devices). Call the desktop "Windows". They could sell Windows with or without One and have One as a stand alone as well (for free). They could make an inexpensive laptop that would compete (read: bury) with Chromebooks. And Windows Phone could be called Microsoft One Mobile and when they merge just be called MS One.
If they would have done this with Win8 they could have sold the Win8 os to enterprise but had One as the default on consumer devices with the option of turning it off. That would have deflected all the negativity that people had with the drastic change of One away from Windows. And would have given One a chance to mature on its own without all the pressure of carrying Windows.
Windows 8.x has sold 200,000,000 copies. No product that sells two hundred million units is a failure.
This is not open to debate, is not part of some cute imaginary world where everyone's opinion is equally valid or whatever. Windows 8 is a success. Period.
WAS a success! Windows loses its shine pretty quick when you can no longer trust auto-update.
The best thing Microsoft had going for it was an open market. For people that can't afford Apple and it's not options, Windows was great. You could do what ever you wanted with it(granted you have to be willing to deal with malware). But now that Microsoft went to an app store with worthless and expensive apps, I'm starting the switch to the cloud with Chromebook and have fell in love with Google and android. The only thing I can't do is run .exe programs, but more and more Windows 8.1 can't run them either.
I actually like having Metro and the Desktop in one OS; I find it very useful, actually. I have a touchscreen laptop with a trackpad too, and having the option to use either the Metro UI, which is, IMO, very intuitive and fun to use, or the full Desktop that was in Windows 7, with the exception of the Start menu, is very useful IMO. Hopefully the Start menu will be re-added soon.
Making the transition from WinXP to WIN7 went without any complaints from my side, I felt no need to relearn anything, and things just worked they way I expected them to.
Going from WIN7 to WIN8, i've been forced to use it for a year now, and I've hated every day I spend with it.
The mobile OS is a poor sister to Android. As a business we're compelled to use Windows but would prefer Linux. Indeed we use a hybrid. Only windows could come up with a way to interconnect computers that requires training courses to understand. We use a Linux server instead. There were to good versions of windows; Win 3.x and XP. All the rest were designed for play stations and people that crowd around a single computer to play games and visit x-rated picture sites. I don't understand the schizophrenia that lead to an OS for an inherently single user machine, a pad computer, that is designed for multiple users. In any case the whole multiple user thing trashed the OS completely by wasting resources and space and most disgustingly of all, tried to dictate how to use one's machine. For example as a business I have a file system. Having a windows layer to get around wastes time and space. It's a damned shame that so many Linux distros have emulated this stupid system to any extent. "Libraries" is for people who can't organize a set of files. I looked up how to remove it as soon as I loaded the OS.
The root problem with windows is it went beyond a GUI for an OS and became a program unto itself. The only reasons for preferring windows to mac were 2-fold: more and cheaper hardware choices and the ability to get inside and tweak the OS. What followed was the power of PC's went beyond the inherent weakness of DOS and this lead to the 'registry' system. It has to be there or DOS will lose track of the real programs in 32 and 64 bit architecture. That eliminated the single most important advantage of windows. Even so XP wasn't a bad system. It should continue to be a choice. It is the arrogance of windows management that has made it the favorite target of hackers. You don't hear about macs being hacked very often if ever. It is very hard to find a mac computer consultant; they aren't needed. Windows decided it could make everyone compute on pads using cloud based software. Then windows could rent the software. I think windows underestimated the commitment to individuality of its customers and their unwillingness to surrender ownership of their equipment. It's good to recall some history from time to time. Gates developed DOS on a government contract, claimed ownership and started selling it.
The mobile OS is a poor sister to Android. As a business we're compelled to use Windows but would prefer Linux. Indeed we use a hybrid. Only windows could come up with a way to interconnect computers that requires training courses to understand. We use a Linux server instead. There were two good versions of windows; Win 3.x and XP. All the rest were designed for play stations and people that crowd around a single computer to play games and visit x-rated picture sites. I don't understand the schizophrenia that lead to an OS for an inherently single user machine, a pad computer, that is designed for multiple users. In any case the whole multiple user thing trashed the OS completely by wasting resources and space and most disgustingly of all, tried to dictate how to use one's machine. For example as a business I have a file system. Having a windows layer to get around wastes time and space. It's a damned shame that so many Linux distros have emulated this stupid system to any extent. "Libraries" is for people who can't organize a set of files. I looked up how to remove it as soon as I loaded the OS.
Windows 8 -plan and simple-sucks
My letter to Microsoft:
**Just offer options for the user (only USER changes if they choose).
**When a user opts to change, it should be much easier and more automatic (that is the very point of computers anyway and rather easy to program but how often does Microsoft do it?) Most times, a user should be able to point, click and get the change, instead of huge time wasting step after step in trying to make the changes. Instead, we are searching endlessly and many users have used new OS's to replace ridiculous windows 8 (NOT good for MS).
**Remember, most users are NOT tech. experts!! They don't make in depth changes as often as techs. do.
**Never forget the huge failure of windows 8!! Who ever came up with that idea?? One of the dumbest changes I ever saw!! You need a person who is more like a typical computer user, to help with these changes and I doubt that's who was responsible for that mess.
**Look at the huge success of FACEBOOK and GOOGLE(from the start): Folks: KEEP IT SIMPLE AND MINIMALIST. What is it about this that you don't understand??
**Make your products COMPATIBLE. If you can't, you simply need better engineers folks. It's not that difficult.
**Consider this: WHY WHY WHY is the new email opening so slowly? How did you people NOT realize this and see too, that it would be a problem for you? Why did you change things? And WHY<<< do users open up an email thread, and as they look further down the page/thread, the typing goes to the RIGHT of the screen, until it's literally only about 4 words per line??? There is NO EXCUSE for this silliness on a Microsoft controlled product, which is being used on a computer running Microsoft windows. YET, I can open up Yahoo mail and NOT have the problem!!! << READ this again if needed.
^^^DO YOU REALIZE HOW SILLY THIS LOOKS TO A USER??^^^
**What will you do next? Blame one Microsoft problem on another, incompatible Microsoft product?
THINK, then TEST and RETEST products with TYPICAL USERS before you introduce new products folks.
You are making things too difficult on yourselves. You had winning products decades ago and you are turning them into losers.
**Try to consider how DUMB it is to spend over 20 years for users to keep learning more about computer use, then having the SAME product provider start changing things.
**Would you make a new car and decide to "try" putting the gas peddle in the middle and brake on the far right?? Do you realize the fundamental mistakes you are making?
SuperSite for Windows
Sponsored Introduction Continue on to (or wait seconds) ×