Lenovo: Windows 8 is so good, everyone wants Windows 7 You don't notch up 15 consecutive quarters of growth in a declining market without doing something right - so what's PC maker Lenovo doing right? Well, many things. But it can't do any harm that Lenovo is protecting enterprises from the waterboarding torture of the Microsoft Windows 8 operating system. The majority of Lenovo's …
Most people I know have given up and decided not to get a new laptop, rather than suffer Windows 8.
Your best bet is trying non-traditional places. Debenhams (of all places) had some great deals on Windows 7 laptops a couple of weeks back. They are clearly out of touch and assumed that nobody would want them, and reduced the price...
Quite right! Which is why I decided to jump into a Win7 laptop several weeks ago before my only option was Win8.
While at the store I tried Win8. It isn't as bad as some of the media, and users, make it out to be. What it is, in a word, is "unintuitive". It does indeed do everything you want and need, but in many ways it simply does so in a method that is either not apparent or does not make (reasonable) sense. Hot corners that aren't marked? Popping in and out of TIFKAM as the default navigation metaphor? And bright, primary colors without shading? Really? That's the "future", 1970's Revisited?
>"Most people I know have given up and decided not to get a new laptop, rather than suffer Windows 8."
I'm no MS fan, but this is nuts. Win 8 on the couple of machines in my office is running circles around Win 7. All you need is the free, open source Classic Shell download - 30 seconds later you've got a very fast, powerful rig with the look and feel of Win 7.
>"I expect 95% of the rest of us are shying away from Windows 8 for now due to training and uniformity reasons, nothing to do with whether Windows 8 is good or bad on its own merits."
Well, I hope more people get a chance to poke around at it. So far, I've found it to be compatible with every piece of hardware and software I've thrown at it, and to be scorching fast at nearly all tasks. I don't recall any specific training problems - once I installed the Classic Shell start menu and adjusted the default programs, I haven't heard a word from any of the users. From my own use, I haven't had any adjustment period at all. Backwards compatibility with programs that were designed for Win XP seems better than ever.
One reason to consider using it - the Win 8 implementation of IE10 appears to be vastly superior security-wise. Auto updates and the ability of the browser to update flash and java in the same way as Chrome takes care of a lot of security vulnerabilities. I only use two browsers on the Win 8 machines - Chrome for about 95% of browsing, and IE10 for the other 5% that doesn't play nice with Chrome.
As far as stability, it's about the same as Win 7 - I can overpower it and freeze it up if I really try hard, but it does have some nice new tools for trying to recover from a jam. In particular, any system administrator will really fall in love with the new Task Manager - I wish I could back-port it to my Win 7 machines.
That seems to be the only post here that attempts to justify Windows 8 on an actual merit. Too bad I use Firefox whenever possible, eh?
The real problem is Microsoft's monopoly eliminates the need for real competition (which also block real freedom for the users). There was also some talk about improved performance, but I already know that it won't be fast enough to offset my lost time in the adapting to the latest Microsoft beta test.
In short, I've been looking at Windows 8 for a while, and I still don't see a single reason to switch. Actually I can barely see any advantages in Windows 7. I know of about three things that they moved into the OS that were less convenient as add-ons to Windows XP, but so far they have been features that I rarely use.
I, too, bought a new Windows 7 box as Windows 8 was released. In the past, I skipped Vista and Windows ME and a couple of other dogs from Microsoft...
I bought a Windows 8 laptop. And boy did it fuck me off for weeks. Eventually I found an open-source start button to add and now it is only half as shit as before.
One of the problems is that buttons on GUI applications frequently don't respond to mouse clicks and I have to resort to using the keyboard (space bar) to actually "push" the button.
Indeed, if he's using an external mouse, that's the most likely culprit. One would like to think that a Reg reader would have tried a different mouse and/or the trackpad before diving face-first onto the 'Win8 is shit' bandwagon, but then, it apparently it took him several weeks to find a Start button replacement so he's obviously not the sharpest tool in the box.
>"One of the problems is that buttons on GUI applications frequently don't respond to mouse clicks and I have to resort to using the keyboard (space bar) to actually "push" the button."
You need to fix that. I can tell you from experience, that's not a Win 8 thing. You've got the wrong mouse driver installed, probably. Or a bad graphics card driver.
that windows 8 has bombed, it will never seen any real corporate use - Lenovo knows it, everyone knows it.
I wonder how it feels at M$ not talking about the elephant in the room, when its trumpeting over the conversations, and shitting all over the computers there. Maybe they use macs :D
I've seen this so many times before and this is no exception. From businesses reluctant to move from Windows NT 4 to Windows 2000, from 2000 to XP, from XP to anything else. It's really just the continuation of a process that I have observed for more than a decade and a half and it actually bears no reflection on the quality of the OS.
You forgot to mention that businesses generally skipped Vista, in spite of Microsoft's claims that it was the bestest operating system they had ever produced (until they came out with Windows 7, of course). I think what you are actually seeing is a lot of cheerleading by Microsoft to try to drum up enthusiasm to their rather boring Operating System, when most regular Joe's couldn't give two shits about the Operating System, and businesses passing on operating systems that don't have any "gotta have it" features. Windows 8 doesn't seem to have any "gotta have it" features, at least not from what I've seen so far. In fact, it is a strange, alien, and possibly even hostile environment compared to the Windows versions we've had to put up with since 1995, so it's little wonder that business are voting with their feet by digging in their heels and sticking with XP or Win 7.
"I think what you are actually seeing is a lot of cheerleading by Microsoft"
MS is cheerleading for Windows 8 now.
It is level 2 and level 3 help desk people who are saying it is too early to judge, that companies have not even evaluated going on Windows 8 yet. And we're saying it because line managers on the business side are saying they need uniformity, as they always do.
Anyone here done a feasibility study on their company or a big client going to Windows 8 this year?
There might be one or two, mostly it will just be a few experimental machines in the IT area.
And you see the posts condemning Windows 8, they seem like consumers, students, recent graduates, etc.
If uniformity was not king, then why have Linux and Apple been so horribly unsuccessful in penetrating the business desktop and business laptop market year after year, decade after decade?
...Well, except that corporations tended to skip right over Vista, hanging on grimly to XP until Windows 7 was viable. Yes, companies tend to be very conservative in what OS they adopt, to the point where they're routinely a couple of major revisions behind. But in the case of Vista, corporations didn't adopt it because of the perception (largely true) that Vista was pants.
I think what the article is implying is that Win8 is going to be a similar situation -- that it's not a matter of being conservative, it's a matter of Win8 being considered broken.
@Longrod_von_Hugendong (Now there's a username that doth protest too much...)
I wouldn't go making bets on that just yet; if it's large corporates we're talking about, anything bar the Surface Pro won't even be getting a look at Win8 for 12-18 months at the earliest. That's just the speed at which corporates roll. To pretend otherwise is to admit you've never worked support in one and don't really know of which you speak.
Even if the UI does prove to be a serious point of contention regarding the adoption of 8 within the corporate environment, Server 2012 is proving very popular so far with those who're testing it, and from what I've seen myself the improvements made to Hyper-V alone make it worthwhile. So between that and things like Windows To Go, I don't think it's quite as straightforward as the "irrefutable turd in punchbowl" story you'd like to have us all believe. Of course, I say this as one who finds Win8 at the desktop straightforward to use (who'd have thought, you learn some new keyboard shortcuts and it's just fine, same as every other version of Windows at the desktop) so feel free to disregard everything I say...
HPs still come with W7p as does Fujitsu's.
I have to say that im shifting far more Lenovos than other brands. Reasonable quality at a good price.
At a previous comment, whats wrong with OEM in enterprise? If your defining an enterprise as 1000's of nodes I would agree, but I use enterprise software and servers in businesses with 10 or less PCs. OEM is not really that different to volume once its been rolled out.
This post has been deleted by its author
If any of you are trying to tell me that large enterprises purchase their OSs as preinstalled OEM versions rather than rolled-in-house images based on a volume-licenced Enterprise edition, I question the assertion that you've got even half the minimum required amount of clue concerning how enterprise IT operates to be participating in this conversation.
This entire article reads to me like an attempt to claim that Win8 has failed in the enterprise, when the reality is that only the tablet editions will even have a look-in at the enterprise level for the time being. It's going to be at least another couple of years before any sane enterprise considers migrating to Win8 at the desktop, just as it would have been at the same point in Win7's lifespan, or Vista's, or XP's, or 2K's.
"No, but I do tell you that small - medium enterprises use the preinstalled OS"
Yes, so they want pre-installed Windows 7, and they want it for the same reasons large companies want it -- uniformity to save on training and documentation costs.
But then the article goes on to claim that businesses large and small taking their time as usual means Windows 8 is a failure, which is absurd. Windows 8 might turn out to be a failure, but we haven't even evaluated it seriously yet.
Yep, and the last time I was involved in a largish purchase of systems from a major vendor, Dell put that image on the boxes before they left the factory so we wouldn't have to.
And even if they are rolling their own, they watch the cost of the machine including the "pre-installed" license as wells as the terms of the Enterprise license. Buy the wrong starter boxes and you'll owe them lots of money come audit time.
Try again.
Actually, Dell is doing the exact same thing as Lenovo; all of their biz class systems come pre-installed with Windows 7 Pro by default, systems such as their Latitude laptops and Optiplex desktops. Like Lenovo, Dell learned from the Vista fiasco and Dell too wishes to stay in business a bit longer. And the only way to do that is to sell customers what they want, well at least their enterprise customers, as Dell, like everyone else seems to be perfectly willing to throw their consumer customers under the Windows 8 bus.
SWMBO decreed that she had to have Win8 on her laptop because it was the newest release (This is the same mentality which has to have the latest Gucci handbag, etc)
About a week later she decided that LinuxMint/Xfce + Win7 weren't so bad after all, so I deleted the partition and rejigged grub to make 'em visible again.
I've been working with and for US Enterprise markets for most of my adult life. There is a three year life cycle (on average) for any Enterprise approved operating system. Most of the Enterprise markets have just recently (In the last year or so) started shifting from Vista to 7. There are usually tons of testing and specific security policies that go in effect. It's a LOT of work to get things approved, so once they do, they tend to be reluctant to change them right away. Most are probably already working on setting things up for Win8, but rest assured, it will be right around Fall of 2015 before they start deploying the OS within their respective departments.
"Corporate vehicle users will find our new pedal placements new and exciting, invoking synergies from cycling and hang-gliding into the road vehicular paradigm"
Actually, car manufacturers used to do that back in the early days of motoring. A model T Ford, for example, has a pedal layout quite unlike a contemporary Austin, and a world away from a modern hatchback.
Even if Windows 8 had some major improvements we'd be waiting on it.
Standardization of training and instruction necessitates standardization of OS.
IF, when the time comes to do bulk replacement of PCs and laptops, companies do not switch to Windows 8, then it will be time to say Windows 8 was a failure. That time is probably still 2 years away at most companies.
Most of my clients want to have all the staff computers on the same OS. Which means they don't upgrade the OS until they're ready to replace the 80 to 90% of the computers in the company that were all purchased at the same time with Windows 7.
So when they get one or two new computers, we keep them Windows 7. That way there is no need for two sets of procedures, two sets of instructions, people can swap machines, and it reduces jealousy.
When they junk the old computers we'll replace them with Windows 8 (or 9), and at that time we'll re-image any recently purchased Windows 7 computers to be the same.
I expect some/most of their IT guys will get Windows 8 a few months ahead of other staff.
Why did they hate it? Was it just TIFKAM as this is easily replaced/avoided with the right add-ons, or with some more time maybe they will learn to appreciate the benefits (and avoid some of the pitfalls) of the new interface. Despite this Windows 8 is a far better OS than Windows 7, just give it a chance.
Why should I HAVE to "easily replace/avoid" the interface on a new OS? Isn't the point of the new OS to add value? If the first thing I had to do with a new car was get a new paint job because the old one reeked, I wouldn't buy the car.
@Tom 13
You're missing the point, I think. Which is that people hate change, period. (I remember hating XP because 2K was fine. I remember hating Vista rather more so, because by then I was accustomed to XP and it was fine. I remember disliking 7 for a bit, too. And I remember hating 8. In computing "New interfaces" means "new pain in the arse stuff to learn your way around", regardless of platform - just look at all the Unity/GNOME3/KDE4 stuff doing the rounds for proof that the penguinistas don't necessarily have it any better. One of these days, someone'll fuck about with the look & feel of XFCE and then we're all screwed.) But anyway - in the absence of Windows 365, Microsoft depends on regularly changing the OS version (and UI) sold on new computers to make money. So the joy for us in the field is to navigate this crap as best we can.
You and I are in firm agreement that TIFKAM is a bit silly on non-touch devices. However, after forcing myself to get to grips with it, I can say with confidence that if you're willing to spend a little time at the start of the machine's life getting the Start UI into a configuration that's useful to you (because the default configuration is worse than friggin' useless, and God knows how it got approved as is) and learn a couple of keyboard shortcuts, it's very straightforward to use. Seriously. I mostly spend my time on the desktop forgetting that I'm using Win8 unless I need to get at the settings on the system - for running applications, it may as well be 7.
If you don't want to do that, well, it takes less time to install ClassicShell and force the appearance of Windows 7 onto the thing than to do just about any of the other stuff you still need to do on any new Windows install ever releases, and you get something you're happy with.
Yes, I know, ideally you'd have a "enable Classic UI" button instead, but we're talking about perhaps 150 seconds of your life. You and I have both spent longer than that writing individual posts on the subject around here. Perhaps it's time to agree that it just isn't that big a deal? Or, if you genuinely think it is that big a deal, communicate this to MS in a meaningful way. Because I guarantee that "What those tossers moan about on the El Reg forum" will never be incorporated as part of feedback or UAT at MS. Politely-worded emails, on the other hand...
Windows 8 is superior to Windows 7 in almost every way, however, of course enterprises at the moment still want Windows 7, that is what they have invested in and it makes no sense to roll out a new OS across the enterprise just a few months after its release. It takes time (sometimes years), and money to adapt the processes and support regime to cater for a new OS, especially if the current one is doing the job just nicely thank you.
Windows 8 (or 9, given the apparent trend for enterprises to skip OS versions) will eventually make its way into the enterprise but not for a while yet, this is not a failing of Windows 8 but of the corporate machine. As for small business/home use, there is nothing fundamentally wrong with Windows 8, other than a change to (part of) the UI paradigm. In fact performance wise 8 is better than 7 and brings better tools and functionality. Microsoft is (bravely in my opinion) trying to bridge the mobile, tablet and desktop experiences into a single UI paradigm, hence the move to a 'flatter, non transparent' UI on the desktop to make it consistent with the mobile and tablet experiences, where an 'Aero Glass' interface would not be suitable. TIFKAM on the desktop is a conundrum though, on the one hand it is great that you can use the same apps on the desktop that you do on your tablet and mobile, and for the next generation of tablet/notebooks this is great, however forcing this on the desktop is a mistake, it doesn't work as well with a mouse, and touchscreen monitors in the home are not yet commonplace.
The key thing is that Microsoft is trying to bring coherence across the phone/tablet/laptop/desktop experience for which I believe they should be applauded, they may not have got everything right first time (e.g. should not have dropped the Windows 7 start menu), but that is what 3rd party add-ons and service packs are for.
Louis Sullivan observed that "form follows function." This is as true with an OS as it is with a building.
I expect a different form for the OS on a phone than I do on a dual monitor desktop which is different yet again (albeit only slightly) from a presentation computer connected to a Jumbotron.
Right idea, wrong hole. Lenovo, formerly IBM pc business, probably has a corporate memory of MS bending them over the barrel and giving it to them good (by which i mean, monopoly power rogering). I would expect that they MUST supply win8 with new machines in order to keep selling the preferred win7 to their customer base; or risk being cut off by MS again.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2025
