Microsoft: YES Windows 8.1 is finished, but NO you can't have it Microsoft says it has already begun seeding the final code of Windows 8.1 to its manufacturing partners, but that doesn't mean you'll be able to get your hands on the update any sooner. In a blog post on Tuesday, Windows corporate VP Antoine Leblond said that while hardware makers are being given time to incorporate Windows 8. …
When we got Vista, we lived with the few copies we had. Win 8 is banned from our company. Outright, no one even thinks of bringing it through the door for fear of voodoo curses and fingernails yanked out. Incrementing it to 8.1 will not change that policy.
When we began assessing Linux again after the debacle of 8, we were amazed how far it had come. We are continuing to look at replacement of older XP machines with Linux workstations. Same box, different OS. Thanks for that motivation Microsoft.
Same here. We have a few 5+ year old 32 Bit systems with 512Mb ram which ran XP. As a test I installed Fedora 19 32Bit running XFCE, then Chrome seeing as most of the work was done in the browser anyway. It was so fast it was shocking! What a difference those years of optimizing rather than building in obsolescence made. I strongly urge anyone in the same position to give this a try.
Hi Bob, good plan but.... I started to see blank video on BBC iplayer and youtube when using the latest flash on Debian and Ubuntu based distros (gnash was not good enough) when instaling on older PC's.
Currently Adobe have screwed older Linux PC's that don't have SSE2 in the CPU and don't seem to care.
See below
https://bugbase.adobe.com/index.cfm?event=bug&id=3161034
And conversely, our company, which aims not to get stuck in the past are only installing Windows 8 now and buying new Windows 8 machines.
And I actually prefer it. It is not the same as Vista (or ME) which were real turkeys, it's just that some people find it more difficult than others to adapt, even if takes about 10 to 20 minutes to go through the main UI changes and understand them.
Ok I'll bite.
When my last machine died I bit the bullet and installed windows 8. I have tried really hard to like it, but as a desktop OS it just sucks in so many ways. Not in a Vista way, but just in the workflow.
Stupid things like installing shortcuts to your desktop, powering down the machine are more difficult than they should be. Then there is the tendency to move into full screen apps when you click on a PDF or a play some music. Full screen apps which have far less features than the desktop ones they replace and take effort to get out of.
Maybe I would feel different if I had a touch screen, but who generally updates there screen when they buy a new PC?
Maybe 8.1 will be better, but they would be better off producing 2 versions. Windows 8 for destop and windows 8 for tablets and let people who use their PC's to make a living get their productivity back.
Rant over....
Microsoft really needs to get out of the "one Windows for all" mentality. You don't take a cargo truck to go shopping, nor do you use a convertible to move houses. There are different types of computing platforms, they need different levels of OS (and UI) functionality.
That means that Microsoft should not try to bundle everything together all the time. That's how they screwed up the tablet market the first time.
At install time on a PC, I really don't see what the problem is in detecting whether or not the user has a touchscreen-capable screen, and if yes, asking the user (yes, you should still ask) if he wants to install touchscreen functionality. If the answer is no, don't bother the user with it again. On the other hand, put it in the list of Windows options that can be installed at any time.
If the user installs the OS without a touchscreen, then buys one and hooks it up, by all means ask him if he's interested in using touchscreen functionality once the OS has detected it, but don't force it.
This is not rocket science. Microsoft already did with disability aids, why should this be so different ?
If the user is installing on a tablet, by all means include the touchscreen stuff - it's needed there and is obviously useful. But Microsoft could still make it an option to uncheck, for the hardcore keyboard-mouse aficionados who would still prefer managing their tablet like a PC. Might not be smart, but there is no reason Microsoft should not allow it. After all, I can imagine very well someone buying a tablet for a specific purpose (say home automation) and bolting it to a wall in the cellar or something.
Yes, it might not be all that smart, but computing today is about letting the user find a solution to fit his needs, not ignoring them and imposing something a big company thinks is better.
I'm convinced that at least 50% of the angst around Windows 8 is because of that restriction to our available choices. We, as a user base, have grown accustomed to expecting things to work the way we want. Right or wrong, it is obvious that companies go against that at their peril.
And Microsoft has long since forgotten how to listen to its users.
@ hammarbtyp
Icon on desktop - why? It's "Win" key and there they are. Easier than digging out ye olde desktop from under the windows
Fullscreen apps - Change the "open with". Or have the admin do that company wide. Fixes the problem instantly
And gone are your complains. Win8 works very nicely on a productive (software development) system since Oktober here
Start8 from Stardock. I have a Win8 machine that works 99% like Win7. I tried 8 out of curiosity, and found that - after installing Start8 to circumvent all that Metro tabletty touch crap - I quite liked it and have stuck with it.
ModernMix from Stardock forces Metro apps to run in a window.
I agree 100% that MS' insistence on a single OS for touch and desktop is simply incomprehensible and, imho, an unbelievably stupid mistake.
I wil never understand the need for crutches like Start8 and company. Win8 is different sure. So was the switch from CP/M -> MS DOS -> Win 3.x -> WinNT4 ->.... Not to mention the various XWindow based UIs that more often than not was "take it or forget it" (Motif, OpenWindows, the various PenguBased UIs)
So this is just another switch. And once you get rid of "grandpa Xerox / auntie XP did it this way" actually a very easy one.
You're kidding right? The developer experience for Windows 8 is an absolute arse and it has very little of the purported interop with Windows Phone that was supposed to be the big selling point of Metro prior to release.
There are a great many voices within Microsoft who understand that the focus should be on developers, not internal politics or egos or empire-building by one division at the expense of another. I am personally hoping for someone like Scott Guthrie (probably not actually Scott as he's not high enough up the chain, but someone with his priorities), the developer and feature story for Azure has improved ten-fold since he took charge.
...have a Start-Menu? No, it has a Start-button, that when clicked, takes you to the Metro screen. Real fukcing funny Microsoft, so funny in fact, that I won't buy a PC with your crappy OS on it.
(yes, I know I can find and change a setting that will take me to that crappy fullscreen App window when I click on it, but it is not what we wanted and you know it).
...still frustrate users? Yes.
...get skipped by IT professionals for business upgrades? Yes.
It is definitely not done. But they dare not slip the launch to after Christmas. So they will ship now and issue a launch day patch for remaining issues. If they can. In the meantime they must not let developers leak the broken version.
This is going to be beautiful. Every needs to watch this train wreck as an example of what not to do..
I presume you haven't got access (or perhaps the inclination!) to have tried the preview then. It's really just a service pack for 8.0 and so it is probably already better than what current Win8 users are working with. You are, of course, entitled to your opinion on 8.0 (and I probably share much of it) but there's no way that 8.1 is going to be a train wreck by comparison. It just isn't different enough.
Ken, its all about Inclination, most people don't have it, unfortunately Microsoft's attitude of refusing to listen and trying to dictate to their user base has pissed a lot of people to the point, where they just cannot be bothered any more.
This has a direct impact on Windows 8.1 as many articles that review it say its a begrudgingly half-hearted attempt at appeasing the voices but without delivering much - So given this, its no wonder people don't have inclination!.
To put it another way - Windows 8 was a spectacular train wreck, and whilst 8.1 won't compare, its still going to be quite a sight, and I think Microsoft will be quite humbled by this..
You might be correct, I wonder if they are going to attempt to capture X-mas sales from some of those low-information buyers along the lines of " Windows 8.1 is different than Window 8, I heard it has a Start-Button. Remember, that was the reason people didn't like it, so I guess now we can buy it now, right?"
Yes... in fact it's "YES you can have it, but NO it isn't finished". Expect immediate updates that you have to load on a new Windows 8.1 device - not just security but fixing features that don't work right.
Having said that, that Isn't too bad, really. It just means that manufacturers get a buggy Technology Preview that has to be what they install on their product to sell, and that doesn't quite work.
I suppose that's pretty bad for you if you are a manufacturer.
I actually feel a little bit sorry for big old Redmond. It's like they're making a big deal over this and new updated version of Windows 8, but no-one is actually that bothered.
I'm certainly not, and this is the only version of Windows that I've not upgraded to straight away. I have no reason or need to move away from Win 7, and 8.1 hasn't changed my mind one bit.
Bye bye Ballmer, you've certainly stepped down at the right time. But it might just be too late for a proper Windows recovery. Linux has never had a better opportunity to stake a claim for itself.
About the only good thing left for them to do now is complete the utter humiliation of overtaking Apple in smartphone market share. With iOS tumbling to 13% whilst WP8 worms its way past 5% that might just be the greatest comedy gift this Christmas decent folk everywhere can cheer about.
> You feel sorry for them?
This made me actually check whether that old site still exists...
I'm sorry to say that but Linux will never get a chance. Not because it's bad, but because of the way MS does business. Their main customers are fat and lazy government offices and fat and lazy businesses who enjoy shelling out tons of mazuma for fat and lazy OS, supported by fat, lazy and greedy decades long "support" contracts.
This is a stinky business with lots of cash, 0 innovation (as we see), almost feels like those bugs and imperfections are there for purpose of extracting more cash through support.
Just think, what innovation has the MS contributed in the past decade to the world of computing? Yet, they still hold 95% of corporate business when it comes to workstations and even servers. No amount of bad quality will exterminate it, they are like rats, they feed on bad quality, bad conditions. The worse they are, the more they thrive.
Cute FUD but FUD.
Most of those "big companies" run a mixed environment and have done so since before most Pinguboys where born. OS/400, z-Series, Solaris, Windows - all in the mix. They make decisions based on "will I get support in x years" with x >> 3 and "will I get hardware that runs this in x years". And that is why they end up with "everything BUT Linux" in most situations. And IF they do Linux - RedHat with a support contract. Saves no money.
I am in the market for a new laptop, not interested in a fondle slab for what I want so I started looking online to see what is on offer.
Particularly as the advent of fondlies has led to piles of unsold laptops,the first thing I notice was how many that come with 8 already on board come with a 'downgrade option' personally I regard it as a retrogressive upgrade!
"However, it's clear that times have changed, with shifts to greater mobility and touch as well as the blurring of work and personal lives."
So that is supposed to have some influence on RTM and general availability timing how?
Do they really think manufacturers will shift more boxes because 8.1 is loaded?
Most likely it isn't fit for release and what's changed is the definition of RTM which now means a version where the first windows update session won't take more than an hour.
I got three updates at home for $15 each after a bit of magic. Two were to update Vista boxes, and one was to legitimize a machine running a pirated Windows 7. They work fine with classic shell installed. I don't use any of the metro stuff though. Boot straight to desktop with a proper start button and start menu. It definitely uses less resources than Vista did, and boots much quicker. Much less crash prone as well. I really don't know what 8.1 has to offer, other than bastardized start button functionality.
I've upgraded a desktop and a laptop to Win-8. One of them has already been upgraded again to 8.1 - I realize I'll have to re-install when the "real" 8.1 comes out, but that's OK. Unlike you, I went the $39 route each.
I've a 3rd PC that may be upgraded if MS does a another bargain-basement offer like this when the final 8.1 comes out.
I wonder what all these tedious eight-bashers here are gonna do 2 or 3 years from now, when their old XP and Linux systems become unfashionable, or perhaps a boss starts asking questions as to why his IT dept. is so out-of-date....
I would amusing to keep some of these comments here and repost them publicly a few years from now.
Alas, most of these folks are anonymous cowards.
How can you be you outta date when Linux gets refreshed every 6-12 Months. If anything the Corporates will demand longer LTS runs which are already good for Five Years! Given that these are the same operations that have been running Windows XP since time immemorial. I kinda fail to see your point!
5 years LTS (and that is rather new) is really "funny" for a server OS and borderline useable for a desktop IF you "buy in" at the start of the LTS cycle.
And the LTS only applies to "selected distributions" not the OS in general. Debian is what, less than two years for security patches? RedHat is useable on servers but the support contract costs are high so one might as well look at other, longer supported alternatives, including UNIX systems.
"I wonder what all these tedious eight-bashers here are gonna do 2 or 3 years from now, when their old XP and Linux systems become unfashionable, or perhaps a boss starts asking questions as to why his IT dept. is so out-of-date" -- We will be using Windows 7 until Windows 9 comes out, assuming that Microsoft's train wreck doesn't end with an implosion.
What's the point of paying lots of greens for MSDN Universal if devs & enterprise customers can't test new products anymore, adapt code, scripts or whatever. It is strange to take such a limiting decision for Windows 8, a product that needs every bit of love it can.
In addition one of the biggest weakness of Windows 8 was the absolute lack of tutorials on how it was supposed to be used. How will we get decent tutorials / training materials on time - eg at availability date .- if their producers cannot get their hand on the RTM?
Sometimes it's as if Microsoft wants to antagonize its biggest supporters.
In the same way, while I personally don't regret the start menu at all, many customers do. Why give them hope with a fake start menu? I can already see a huge backlash coming.
You are aware that it was Microsofts goal all along, since the development of Windows 8 to destroy their company, right? There are several pieces of evidence leading me to this conclusion: For one: Windows 8(.1) with its many disadvantages compared to pretty much all other Desktop OS. Sure, it can run x86 Applications and Games, which are pretty much the only reasons Windows is still used, but it makes these things inconvenient.
Then there's the XBOX 180, if you haven't heard the privacy outcries, you're probably deaf.
Let's look at Windows RT for a moment, it does nothing Users expect from an Operating System (Run Applications that were not necessarily distributed through Windows Store for example) and barely works as a fondleslab, if at all. You can browse the internet with it and have it show you the weather, oh gee.
Then there's of course Windows Phone 8, I can't go into detail on this one, because I personally do not own one and have no experience with its functionality, but complaints on various online forums suggest it's not the best pie in the oven.
Given how buggy I find Win8 I struggle to see how 8.1 could make things worse, especially since they didn't touch anything in desktop mode where I'm daily confronted by glitchy shit. A 'let's block Start Menu workrounds' button is insignificant.
The strong suspicion has to be another last minute hack is about to be perpetrated on 8.1 to further discourage use of desktop mode, just like they yanked the actual menu code out of 8 RTM days before release. If they can delay fixes and break Classic Start Menu/Startisback etc. for even a week, that's a couple of users that might fall in love with Metro.
Except of course users installed those work rounds because they already rejected Metro, so hardly likely to work.
It seems MS follows a pattern.
I started out with 3.0 and have upgraded based on this pattern. Each OS was tested before making a go/no-go decision on upgrades.
In some cases, "upgraded" means new computer (obviously)
3.0 (started with this)
95 (think everyone upgraded here)
98 (tested, was junk, did not upgrade)
98SE (tested, better, upgraded)
ME (Tested, wow, junk, did not upgrade)
XP (Tested, worked, used this for YEARS)
Vista (Tested, multiple times over years, but stayed with XP)
7 (Tested, switched and currently running on nearly every machine, have a few XP machines that cant run 7)
8 (have tested a few times, think this might be ok as a tablet OS, for every day comp, not my cup of tea)
So, anyone notice the pattern?
Think I will be waiting to see how 9 (or whatever they call it) will be.
I'm pretty far from a M$ defender, but I will say that most people's gripes with Windows 8 are minor details, like hitting the windows-D key on boot and you are in your desktop, which runs well and pretty quickly. I don;t use the Metro apps as I am an office worker without a touch-screen, but it doesn't affect my use of what seems to be a pretty reliable OS so far.
You do need to select how to launch certain files to prevent Metro tile versions, e.g. image previews or video player. You do need to realise that right clicking bottom left gives you context menus similar to Start. You do need to get over that Power Off is in a different location - seriously, if you are so non-technical that a change in a new OS is reason not to use it...
that said, there are some fantastic Linux versions out there. Mint is a cleaner alternative to Ubuntu (no ads), and as one poster said above, these days most productivity tools are hosted and served by browsers. I use the pivot functions of Excel a lot, but my company implemented a reporting portal which means linux users can get the same benefit with only some slight delay - there's really not that many apps that mandate Windows anymore, and for those few a Windows VM may get around it neatly
Windows 8? I upgraded immediately. Speed was the most important reason, it just works quicker than Windows 7 - especially with a little bit older hardware.
The UI mostly worked ok, with the occasional annoyance caused by the Modern world intruding on my workflow. So after six or seven months of trying to get to terms with the inconsistencies, I gave up and installed the Start8/ModernMix combo. Especially the windowed Modern apps allowed by ModernMix removed just about every annoyance I had, and suddenly, for me, Windows 8 became the best Windows version ever, fast, stable, and usable.
Now, based on what I have read about Windows 8.1, it seems I will still be using the Stardock add-ons. This is quite odd - after all, the UI clearly does not need major updates to improve the user experience in a dramatic fashion, and the Windows 8 UI could do with some old-fashioned evil empire embrace and extend.
I will give the UI tweaks in 8.1 a chance, but I'm worried that there is no one left in power at Microsoft that can actually look outside their Microsoft-centric bubble and copy someone with good taste. They clearly can't do it on their own...
"it just works quicker than Windows 7 - especially with a little bit older hardware."
I have a P4EE 3.4, the last and hottest (literally) of the P4 machines.
The lack of the NX instuction(?) means Win8 is out of the question. Just what is NX anyway and why the f* do we need it anyway?
I had an annoying problem with the Windows 8 on my work desktop yesterday. Returned from holiday to find someone had turned off the server room air conditioning and a couple of servers had hung. My windows 8 was playing up the music app Xbox Music was taking over the whole system replacing my desktop with an orange screen and a picture of headphones. ALT F4 or CTRL ALT Delete would not get rid of it. I tried moving it to my second screen but it was constantly grabbing window focus so I couldn't use the desktop. It still did it after logging out and back in and after a restart it started doing it after half an hour. If I killed the app in task manager it just started up again instantly lol. I ran windows update and it has not done it since but it happened just at the wrong time when I needed my desktop to remote in. :(
I've mentioned this before but it's such a big pointer to how confused and messed up the whole Notro / Desktop mess is and shows even MS don't know what they're doing.
I get update notifications for Windows Updates so I click to view them. It (un)helpfully takes me to Notro to view the updates and I can install from there. However, if I want to view optional updates or select which updates to install first it throws me instantly back to the Desktop Windows Update of old. Why was this ever allowed to happen? If Notro is so great why dump me straight back to the Desktop version? Why force me to even view the Notro version if it doesn't have the same, or better, functionality? What purpose does it serve other than to add more confusion and ".... why?" moments to your day?
For anyone that has unfortunately installed Win 8 to try and are now stuck with it through reluctance to reinstall and wanting a fast way to shut down you can easily make a shortcut to do so or the often forgotten clicking your desktop then using Alt-F4 of old. I'm not saying you're doing anything wrong by wanting these options as others have I'm just offering ways to do it that work.
I currently have to actively switch between Windows 8.0 (Hate point none) and another identical PC running 8.1 Preview (Hate point one).
The addition of the new start button in 8.1 means the standard Task Bar Icons (IE etc) appear slightly offset to the right, compared to 8.0, and stupidly, you can't align them across versions. This is basic ergonomics Microsoft! You'd think MS would have done a Windows Update on Windows 8.0 to also align all standard icon positions across Versions, to take account on the new start button in 8.1
Windows 8, there is just too much to hate.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
