Hacker News Reader

Comment by adamors | Hacker News Reader

Windows 8 is noticeably faster, has nice improvements all around and it's probably the first Windows that looks aesthetic.

People are afraid of change, simple as that.

View on HN

Windows 8 is the most unusable collection of software I have ever had the misfortune of fighting. It is the worst experience I have ever had with an operating system, coming from experience with dos, windows 3.1-95-xp-vista-7, ubuntu, and arch.

The built in apps feel like MVPs. The interactions are unintuitive, and many things that should "just work" smack you in the face time and time again.

the whole thing feels like it's been slapped together without any thought for actual usability, and with zero polish.

edit: i should note that I have not yet tried the 8.1 update

I've been using Windows 8 on my desktop PC for some time now (primarily used for gaming and entertainment, not development) and for my purposes it's a clear upgrade over 7. Yes, the Metro apps are terrible but you don't ever need to use them. I spend almost all of my time in the desktop, and the few times I need to use the new Start interface, the workflow is exactly the same as Win7 (press Windows key, start typing program name, hit Enter).

This sounds like the same, unconvincing argument I always hear about Windows 8.

"It's a bit faster, there are some other minor obscure improvements, and if you just ignore all of the crappy new stuff it's not a big deal!"

If boot times are a big issue for you, then I get it. For me, they aren't, so I'm inclined to pass on the update. Perhaps it would work great with a Windows Phone or Surface (I'm tempted to try those at some point, so if anybody would like to share their experiences with theirs...), but it doesn't seem like it was designed for a desktop. So why should I put it on my desktop?

> if you just ignore all of the crappy new stuff it's not a big deal

It really isn't a big deal, because you're not being forced to use the Metro apps. You can populate the start menu with regular application shortcuts and you're on your way.

So why the hell am I upgrading?

Faster, nicer UI, better multi-monitor support, better touch support, improved tools. Basically the same reasons you've upgraded to Windows 7 before that.

I use it on a three monitor desktop. My favorite new features are file explorer and task manager.

Also the skydrive + settings sync is really nice. Whenever I install on a new device, everything's set up on first boot.

Lots of other features that don't make headlines but are genuinely useful: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Features_new_to_Windows_8

I spend almost all of my time in the desktop, and the few times I need to use the new Start interface, the workflow is exactly the same as Win7 (press Windows key, start typing program name, hit Enter).

I liked this workflow better when it was called DOS.

> I liked this workflow better when it was called DOS.

Knock it all you want, but it's obvious that people like working like this. OS X has Spotligh/Alfred, Linux has Gnome DO etc, it's basically on every OS.

"I spend almost all of my time in the desktop, and the few times I need to use the new Start interface, the workflow is exactly the same as Win7"

OK, then why is it a "clear upgrade"?

Everything feels faster and more responsive IMO. Dare I say the scheduler has been improved somewhat since 7 (that's a guess). Also there are a number of nice tweaks to the task manager and explorer, and some other things.

I very recently had to help someone who was using a new Win8 laptop, and it's amazing how much the little things matter - like the title bar's text being centred. I had several notepads open and it was difficult to see which one was which file, because with the text at the edge I would usually leave that edge of the window sticking out beneath the others, but with the title centred I can't see the filename from either side. That seriously annoyed me.

I've also helped a few people with Windows 8 and they are just lost, lost, lost - it is a very confusing interface to use. It catches me out all the time and I consider myself fairly adept at these things.

>"People are afraid of change, simple as that."

I'd counter that with "If it ain't broke, don't fix it."

I spent a few days with Win 8 and I've never seen a more unintuitive UI experience in my entire life. The frustration of having to re-learn simple computing tasks far outweighs any aesthetic improvements IMO.

> I'd counter that with "If it ain't broke, don't fix it."

But by that logic, every new version of a software is useless because the previous one was good enough to be released, therefore wasn't broken.

EDIT: also, the multi-monitor support in Windows 8 runs circles around the crappy implementation that was in Windows 7.

There's nothing wrong with adding features and improving software, but if you're going to obscure computing idioms that are in some cases decades-old (e.g. closing and minimizing windowed content), you had better be sure that is what users want.

In the consumer's mind, not all change is good change. New Coke wasn't good[0]. New Tropicana orange juice packaging wasn't good[1]. New GAP logo wasn't good[2]. Change for change's sake isn't always good. Microsoft took something that wasn't broken and didn't fix it. I blame Microsoft trying to be everything to everyone - that which is good for a touchscreen isn't necessarily good for a desktop/laptop without, and their desire (and hubris) to have a single UI amongst everything is biting them in the consumer market.

0. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Coke#Reversal

1. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/23/business/media/23adcol.htm...

2. http://www.vanityfair.com/online/daily/2010/10/new-gap-logo-...

Some people are afraid of change, but those of us who aren't don't like change that take things away. Windows 8.1 did not fix the start button for us desktop users. There's absolutely no reason to take that way except to force change, which is obnoxious.

While Windows 8 might not be as bad as some people would like you to think, it's definitely a schizophrenic monster when it comes to the jarring Metro/Aero divide. How you can call that "aesthetic" is beyond me.

The only thing I've been happy with since the move from Windows 7 has been the new Task Manager. Every other change has been met with a "why did that need to be changed?".

"People are afraid of change, simple as that."

There's one good thing about Windows 8: anyone who uses this phrase is now known to have absolutely no argument worthy of discussion.

People rejected an interface which offered them nothing new on their existing hardware and was going to force them to relearn their current daily tasks.

People will gladly accept change if there's a clear benefit. They'll often accept change even if the only benefit is aesthetic. However, there's no clear benefit to Windows 8 apparent to most end users and the aesthetic changes were not enough.

It's a failure of Microsoft in the marketplace, not a moral or intellectual failing of Microsoft's users.

> People are afraid of change, simple as that.

Some yeah. But it's a bit too easy to say that just because most people don't like the OS you like.

It's pretty known that you have to skip a version of Windows every other version and it seems like Microsoft is not changing the pattern right now. I love windows 7 but 8 is just unusable on desktop for me, I love windows 8 for phones though.

Well, you've certainly convinced me!

One of the Windows 8 improvements is with the default file copy/move, and I no longer use TerraCopy. There are a bunch of under-the-hood/utility improvements outside the aesthetic.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com