Windows 9 in 2015?

Maybe I'm behind the curve, but it seems MS Threshold will be called Windows 9, rather than Windows 8.2

Link1.
Link2.
Link3.

Some interesting stuff to be found in links included in the Link1 article.

It's nice to see a different (and more traditional) direction for Windows. I use windows 7 at work and have been wondering what the long term plan was given that windows 8 (lack of start menu, metro interface) was so different without any real need to be.

At home I've switched to OS X so don't need to worry there

If when it arrives it allows the Metro apps to run in resizable windows on the desktop, it will possibly become quite good. Assuming we have at least two Intel faster processor releases by that time .

In reply to a post by RobertoS:

If when it arrives it allows the Metro apps to run in resizable windows on the desktop, it will possibly become quite good. Assuming we have at least two Intel faster processor releases by that time .

....when my wife goes up the hill to generate Electricity on a modified bicycle ( she peddles very fast ) will it be enough to power Windows 9 and '' two Intel faster processors'' and a simple tanning lamp ???

......as we get very dreich weather !!!

They need to realise that mouse and keyboard will remain the primary interface for proper Windows and turn the Windows App Store into something similar to that in OS X. Basically a store to buy apps of varying levels of complexity, that run in a sandbox and are therefore more secure than standard apps.

Same ol', same ol'.

Every other version of OS that Microsoft produces is naff, the ones in between are good. Since Windows 7 was a good OS it was inevitable that 8.x would be naff and 9.x will be the best yet

It seems from the reports that nearly everyone associated with the decisions about W 8/RT have been ushered out of the door or moved out of harm's way, while their replacements sort out the mess.
_{Edit - typo.}

Edited by RobertoS (Wed 15-Jan-14 18:27:11)

And its a right mess it is some of us are "Lucky" to have W8 on the works laptop and i would say 90%+ hate it.God knows who thought it was a good move to buy a new OS from MS , would you do it with your own money ?

Surely you go straight to the Desktop?

Perhaps controversial, but I felt Vista was underrated. It's a bit slower than Windows 7, granted, but Windows 7 is little more than Vista with some performance tweaks.

Perhaps the main issue was that at the time of release of Vista, most PCs were sold with 1 GB RAM, and Vista needed 2 GB minimum to run comfortably. By Windows 7, 2 GB, 3 GB and 4 GB RAM was the norm.

The other issue was that due to the revised driver model in Vista, a lot of devices which worked on XP no longer worked on Vista, an issue which Windows 7 suffers from too of course, but Vista had already taken the heat for it.

Edited by Oliver341 (Wed 15-Jan-14 18:47:24)

The idea behind the Windows 8 start screen was to bring a unified desktop experience to PCs and tablets, it asked a little of users to adjust to the change but unfortunately the users decided to jump on the media/press bandwagon and immediately dislike it without giving it a proper try. It goes to show how easily people are influenced by what they read on websites and in articles rather than getting with the facts.

Microsoft may bring the Start Menu back in Windows 9... that's fine, but ultimately as a unified experience for Desktop and Tablets the Start Screen is superior in many ways, and the impact to people used to Windows 7 desktop is very minimal tbh.

In reply to a post by btbert:

And its a right mess it is some of us are "Lucky" to have W8 on the works laptop and i would say 90%+ hate it.God knows who thought it was a good move to buy a new OS from MS , would you do it with your own money ?

Why do you hate it? Did you receive any training? Have you bothered to invest 30 or so minutes into learning how to use it properly?

In reply to a post by Pipexer:

The idea behind the Windows 8 start screen was to bring a unified desktop experience to PCs and tablets, it asked a little of users to adjust to the change but unfortunately the users decided to jump on the media/press bandwagon and immediately dislike it without giving it a proper try.

That's quite dismissive of you. How do you know they didn't give it a proper try?

I must admit that I'm increasingly tempted to put W8 (.1) on either my desktop or laptop - not sure which yet, they both run W7 - to get some experience, and to be able to help friends and acquaintances who have, or will, upgrade in some way to W8.

Given that if all else fails I can install, e.g. Classic Shell (other such utilities are available) to give me a more W7 like interface, that may be enough to persuade me.

It is dismissive but I've come to that conclusion because there is no valid reason why Windows 7 is superior, even if you hate the start screen, that is just a single thing and isn't the be all and end all. There are so many improvements to it I struggle to see how someone could prefer Windows 7 to it, the improvements in multi-monitor support alone make it a superior OS, and as you can appreciate, that is just a minor thing! To name a few more: Hyper-V included, RDP greatly improved, much faster boot times, does almost everything faster, more reliable, etc, etc. You get the idea.

On the standard W8/8.1 startup screen is a tile called Desktop. Just tap/click that and you get pretty well what you are used to with W7. The major and perfectly acceptable difference being the restart/closedown procedure.

The one thing you do need to do is set the desktop mode to use the desktop version of IE, if that's what you use. If you aren't careful the intuitive "Quick start" button in the taskbar goes to the messy Metro version.

In reply to a post by RobertoS:

The one thing you do need to do is set the desktop mode to use the desktop version of IE, if that's what you use. If you aren't careful the intuitive "Quick start" button in the taskbar goes to the messy Metro version.

Yep, excellent advice. the first thing I do on a lot of installations.

In reply to a post by Pipexer:

Why do you hate it? Did you receive any training? Have you bothered to invest 30 or so minutes into learning how to use it properly?

The only way to use it for business purposes, which Bert is doing, is to go straight to the desktop and stay there. As it is for anyone who wants to multitask.

That is the drawback of the Metro interface. It is not an effective tool for human multitasking. It appears Win 9 will solve that problem by allowing Metro apps to run on the desktop in the sort of window we are used to. That might be rather good .

Thing is, you aren't forced to use the Metro interface though. The first thing someone should be doing when they switch on their computer is either open a file, or open an app. Unless the file resides on the desktop (BAD PRACTICE!), then actually the start screen is the perfect choice, because you pin your frequently used apps or folders to the Start Screen. The icons are bigger, coloured, and easier to see than icons on the start menu or taskbar, so for the people who use want to use it to get on with their job, it is actually a lot easier.

The charms can even be disabled if they really are getting in the way (I can't see how tbh unless someone has dexterity problems), and all the metro apps can be unpinned if not used/required, so there is no reason why people should be running into problems with Metro.

Not only this, the start screen can be customised via group policy so that an employee can be delivered a customised start screen containing the apps and file shares they need to access. Most people only use a handful of apps as part of their day job. This is perfect. Things could never be easier to run Windows 8 for a business, assuming you have competent Windows Administrators.......

Edited by Pipexer (Wed 15-Jan-14 20:51:40)

Hmmm. I think I see what you are getting at. But if I do, it amounts to using the Metro interface to launch applications on the desktop. That could have the advantages you state, but I'm not sure those could not have been easily incorporated into the desktop in the first place.

In reply to a post by RobertoS:

The one thing you do need to do is set the desktop mode to use the desktop version of IE, if that's what you use. If you aren't careful the intuitive "Quick start" button in the taskbar goes to the messy Metro version.

Obvious question to a non-W8 user... How do I do that?

In reply to a post by Pipexer:

I struggle to see how someone could prefer Windows 7 to it, the improvements in multi-monitor support alone make it a superior OS, and as you can appreciate, that is just a minor thing! To name a few more: Hyper-V included, RDP greatly improved, much faster boot times, does almost everything faster, more reliable, etc, etc. You get the idea.

But I'd surmise the majority of users are just that, ordinary users. They're not technical aware, those advantages, good though they are, are meaningless to ordinary users.

In reply to a post by cheshire_man:

Obvious question to a non-W8 user... How do I do that?

Can't remember LOL. But it's not difficult. I've done it twice, and could always pop round if you got stuck.

Is this about right?

In reply to a post by cheshire_man:

In reply to a post by Pipexer:

I struggle to see how someone could prefer Windows 7 to it, the improvements in multi-monitor support alone make it a superior OS, and as you can appreciate, that is just a minor thing! To name a few more: Hyper-V included, RDP greatly improved, much faster boot times, does almost everything faster, more reliable, etc, etc. You get the idea.

But I'd surmise the majority of users are just that, ordinary users. They're not technical aware, those advantages, good though they are, are meaningless to ordinary users.

You are misunderstanding my point though (or maybe, I did not explain properly), ordinary users should have even less things to complain about, it is the technical (or semi-technical what I would call them - those who think they know but actually don't) who may moan about things, the non-techie users should have even less to complain about side by side. As with anything the usual "its different to Windows 7" is not a fair reason as to why Windows 8 is poorer. If you take a computer newbie who has used neither before you should find they would prefer Windows 8 because once they are logged on they are presented right away with common apps etc, whereas on Windows 7 you would have to show them how to use the Start Menu etc etc......

Edited by Pipexer (Thu 16-Jan-14 00:10:45)

In reply to a post by Pipexer:

As with anything the usual "its different to Windows 7" is not a fair reason as to why Windows 8 is poorer. If you take a computer newbie who has used neither before you should find they would prefer Windows 8 because once they are logged on they are presented right away with common apps etc, whereas on Windows 7 you would have to show them how to use the Start Menu etc etc......

That's rot, and you know it.

There are many millions familiar with re-Win8 Windows. Millions of them in a business environment where the vital need is for rapid easy deployment and assimilation of OS changes. The change to the Metro system for them is a nightmare.

Big corporations can put a team of specialists onto sorting that. The typical medium to small business does not have that resource on tap.

As for newbies to computing, fine. Let them enjoy what is no better to them than a bigger-screened tablet, which happens also to be far clunkier than an iPad or an Android based one. The fact that this expensive toy will only provide them with 20% of what a Win 7 machine or a Mac does is not going to bother them. For the first 6 days.

For most of the rest of us, it's usable but far from inspiring. You made some good points and suggestions earlier. Not this time .

If Win 8/8.1 is so wonderful, why are MS going to make all the changes that are discussed in the links I gave? I've never seen a rollover and massive laundry bills from them since they realised Bill Gates's forecast that the internet would never catch on proved less than 100% accurate.

Edited by RobertoS (Thu 16-Jan-14 00:50:08)

Whilst on a touch screen, such as tablets and phones the windows 8 layout is ideal. For those with desktop and or laptop,, IMO, it appears daunting, and most of us are resistant to change.
I purchased windows 8 for a laptop however, the ease of use of 7 with a mouse disappeared. There were problems with some of the programs I use. I thus returned to windows 7
I have a windows phone, adverse reaction to google, the larger screen and ease of use, calls and text, make it a worthwhile investment.
The windows 8 update was not thought through and aimed at the Tablet / phone market without looking at how its traditional users would react.
Windows 8 was the right way forward but , like apple, it needs to cater for all types of user. To be able to remove windows 7 support it needs the windows 9 approach.

I don't have a problem with the desktop and using Win 8 with the touchpad. It acts 99.5% like Win 7. What's the issue?

In reply to a post by RobertoS:

I don't have a problem with the desktop and using Win 8 with the touchpad. It acts 99.5% like Win 7. What's the issue?

Under Win 8, various programs are now presented as Full-Screen "Metro-Apps", which prevent you from, apparently, working on anything else (no longer can easily access other windows, Task-Bar etc).

If Win 9 makes them "behave" as a proper window (i.e. Resizable, still access other windows & Task-Bar etc), then that has to be a sensible approach!

I assume that those programs act similarly to Internet Explorer. As I said earlier, there are two options- the normal one being what I use with its shortcut in the taskbar as usual. Along with Command Prompt; Thunderbird; Word (Metro version ); WordPad; Resource/Performance monitor and Firefox.

I don't think I've tried to install normal Word.

In reply to a post by RobertoS:

I assume that those programs act similarly to Internet Explorer. As I said earlier, there are two options- the normal one being what I use with its shortcut in the taskbar as usual. Along with Command Prompt; Thunderbird; Word (Metro version ); WordPad; Resource/Performance monitor and Firefox.

I don't think I've tried to install normal Word.

Most of the things I use are "conventional" Windows Programs, which cause no bother.

I have downloaded a game, which had to be a Metro-Apps, & I hate the problems it causes. I've looked at some of the available (i.e. those supplied with Win8) Metro-Apps & they give the same problems - hence I avoid them as being "too-much-like-hard-work"!

Certainly Win8 does appear to be faster (both in start-up & running) but the "Change-for-Change-sake" does not impress me & slows me down!

In reply to a post by RobertoS:

The one thing you do need to do is set the desktop mode to use the desktop version of IE, if that's what you use. If you aren't careful the intuitive "Quick start" button in the taskbar goes to the messy Metro version.

And do similar things for file associations. Last version I used switched to Metro for picture viewing which was ugly.

Windowed metro?

so it sounds like maybe instead of making the desktop a secondary feature alongside metro its going to be the other way round? If so this could possibly save their desktop market. As windows 8 was a disaster in my book.

The worrying thing now tho is the rapid releases, personally I dont think 1 year development time and major releases every 2 or so years is a good thing. The fact microsoft like a child tantrum cutoff various windows 7 web pages redirecting them to marketing windows 8 and stopped making service packs so short into it's life still has me deciding if I will buy another windows operating system again. Windows 8 owners the same will happen to you guys when windows 9 is released, microsoft will pretend windows 8 didnt exist, redirecting windows 8 pages to windows 9 and so on.

Sadly I think they will just try and fix the cosmetic stuff, the removal of the windows backup tool, dumbing down of the desktop etc. I think will all still be problems in windows 9, they will probably just make a windows 8.2 which has desktop as the focus again and market it as windows 9.

its not simply about it been different, its about it been harder to use with a mouse or touchpad. Most tasks in windows 8 require more mouse movements and clicks. Its simply less efficient. I dont care how pretty the start screen is, I care how efficent it is. Not to mention tools like task manager are dumbed down and not so useful as older variants.

In reply to a post by Chrysalis:

Windowed metro?

Well, ModernMix has been doing that for a while now - thanks Brad

he is in a world of his own

I have never heard of one single business who considers a UI change as a good thing. At the very least a certiantly employees would be disrupted temporarily whilst adapting.

I don't think you understand the reasons behind Win 8 tbh.

people are reistant for good reason.

Some people in the tech field, especially journalists tend to consider change as innovating, progression etc.

However the truth is change is often just a developer trying to justify his/her job. If they change nothing then they no longer have a job. I think interfaces for mouse control have peaked, and new software is regressing not improving in that regard, but changes happen as developers need to show they doing something and software companies need to say "look we changed this" so people will get excited and buy the software.

What apple showed with the iphone is that hype and novelty sells products.

also touch screen products seem to attract people who have never got on too well with pc's. My dad eg. although he owns a pc has never got used to using a mouse well, yet he loves swiping and so on with touch screens. Touch screens UI's have a lower technical entry level so more people can use such devices. This in turn increases potential market size.

Personally I think windows has had its peak, windows 9 might be an improvement over windows 8 but I would be surprised if its as good as XP and windows 7.

In reply to a post by Chrysalis:

Not to mention tools like task manager are dumbed down and not so useful as older variants.

You can get most of it in the Performance and Resource monitor that has a link to. In a way, better, as the analyses are grouped instead of being a long line across the page that you have to select in the View option.

You don't get the single all-embracing line, I agree, but processes not using the facility you are examining don't appear. Which is good.

One measure of the goodness of an operating system is how well it runs apps. In fact, to me this is the best measure. I've seen nothing to suggest Windows 8 runs apps any worse than Win 7. I've seen many indications that it runs apps better than Win 7. I expect this to continue with Win 9.

What I find odd is that most people on this forum who are windows users appeared to have updated to windows 8. So either they buying new pc/laptops every 1-2 years and hence got windows 8 via OEM or brought it retail (or pirated).

Yet on worldwide adoption windows 7 towers over windows 8.

In reply to a post by BatBoy:

I don't think you understand the reasons behind Win 8 tbh.

I don't know if Chrysalis does, but I certainly don't!

(NB:- I'm not including all of the "back-stage" techy stuff (which appears faster), but the "Front-of-house" "HMI"!

In reply to a post by BatBoy:

One measure of the goodness of an operating system is how well it runs apps. In fact, to me this is the best measure. I've seen nothing to suggest Windows 8 runs apps any worse than Win 7. I've seen many indications that it runs apps better than Win 7. I expect this to continue with Win 9.

Not trying to nit-pick, but I get confused by what is an "App", a "Program" and/or a "Charm"!

On the basis that I thought "Apps" were these Metro-style things that were basically introduced for Win-8, then your above comment is not surprising!

How is it rot? I can deploy and customise a Windows 8 machine so that the only time you get near "metro" is on the start screen, anything else you do is redirected to the Desktop.

As I always revert to asking please can you give a proper reason why Windows 8 is worse than Windows 7? You have not yet provided me with one tbh. I have told you you can disable charms and actually even Metro IE isn't bad in Windows 8.1 you know.

Also, have you ever used a Windows 7 tablet? Then you may see why Windows 8 came along. Not only this, you can dock a Windows 8 tablet onto a desktop setup and get an exactly identical seamless UI which works perfect across touch, keyboard, and mouse. Anyone who is a true power user (i.e., relies heavily on keyboard shortcuts) would soon discover Windows 8 is far superior in that regard too. So when I hear "I was good at such and such OS in the 80s but Windows 8 is terrible", then that makes me start wondering too.

Sorry, but all these criticisms are just silly......

App and Program is actually the same (but you may calls Apps metro Apps and programs stuff that runs on the desktop), charms are the bars that pop out from either sides when you move mouse into the corner, or swipe from edge if a tablet.

In reply to a post by Chrysalis:

I have never heard of one single business who considers a UI change as a good thing. At the very least a certiantly employees would be disrupted temporarily whilst adapting.

Yeah, because all businesses started out using Windows 95 didn't they? I mean like no business could have possibly any computers before 1995 because that would have meant they would have had to change UI at some point, and they don't like doing that, right?

Stop making silly comments.

In reply to a post by Chrysalis:

What I find odd is that most people on this forum who are windows users appeared to have updated to windows 8. So either they buying new pc/laptops every 1-2 years and hence got windows 8 via OEM or brought it retail (or pirated).

Yet on worldwide adoption windows 7 towers over windows 8.

In my case I was extremely unfortunate to have both my main PC & my Laptop fail within a couple of months of each other!

Since I work away a lot, I didn't have too much time chasing the faults - hence invested in new machines.

The PC I got both by CyberPower & had a choice between Win-8 & Win-7. On the basis that that I should try to keep up to date, I went for Win-8. Unfortunately I hadn't checked availability of Drivers & discovered that my All-in-One Printer didn't have Win-8 Drivers available - hence also a new Printer.

For my new Laptop I again didn't have much time & (reluctantly) simply bought one from PC World where I didn't get the choice.

In reply to a post by johnjburness:

Under Win 8, various programs are now presented as Full-Screen "Metro-Apps", which prevent you from, apparently, working on anything else (no longer can easily access other windows, Task-Bar etc).

If Win 9 makes them "behave" as a proper window (i.e. Resizable, still access other windows & Task-Bar etc), then that has to be a sensible approach!

You are gettin it all wrong my friend! (don't be offended, we'll work on this!)

These apps aren't supposed to be used interchangably, if you are multitasking - stay in the desktop. If you want to be immersed in a single app, then open a metro app.

NO IMPORTANT PROGRAMS HAVE BEEN REMOVED IN WINDOWS 8 - therefore you must be deliberately opening these Metro versions of whatever apps. Open the desktop versions of those apps, and you don't ever need to go into Metro (which as it happens is called Modern UI or Immersive UI) again.

Microsoft provides you with the ability to customise, so, for example, you can set IE to always open in the desktop, that should be the only real configuration change you need to make.

Please please please just try this concept out, do a few of those customizations, you should never need to be bothered by Metro in Windows 8 if you don't want to be, whilst still enjoying all the other benefits of Windows 8.

Edited by Pipexer (Thu 16-Jan-14 17:59:08)

In reply to a post by Pipexer:

NO IMPORTANT PROGRAMS HAVE BEEN REMOVED IN WINDOWS 8

But, but, but!!!!

I've really got to strongly disgree with you!

They removed the VERY IMPORTANT Freecell & Solitaire!!

The available substitutions (Metro-Style) are rubbish!!

In reply to a post by johnjburness:

They removed the VERY IMPORTANT Freecell & Solitaire!!

Oh no! I may have to reconsider my decision...

I'm glad I edited that post to add "important" in

I was always useless at those games... Though to be fair the Metro equivalents are pretty good actually, Microsoft Mahjong is quite good. I bet you could copy the .exe's over of the older Win32 programs and run them on Windows 8, not tried it though.

Anyhow I do hope you can start getting along with Win8 on your new laptop, just do that customisation to get it the way you want, and I am sure you won't look back.

Edited by Pipexer (Thu 16-Jan-14 18:21:56)

FreeCell is not included in the Windows 8 operating system. However, the Microsoft Solitaire Collection can be downloaded for free from the Windows Store, which includes FreeCell plus 4 other solitaire games. Unlike the original FreeCell, this version allows unlimited undo.

The Solitaire Collection isn't too bad. It can now be used without an Xbox login as well.

That reminds me of another thing people need to know - Win 8 by default wants an online login to get to the Start screen, but it is easy to change it to a local login.

In reply to a post by RobertoS:

That reminds me of another thing people need to know - Win 8 by default wants an online login to get to the Start screen, but it is easy to change it to a local login.

Some apps like Mail seem to require an online login even when it is not obvious why. For instance, the Mail app refuses to operate without a Microsoft account logged in, even if one just wants to use the Mail app with Gmail.

In reply to a post by RobertoS:

That reminds me of another thing people need to know - Win 8 by default wants an online login to get to the Start screen, but it is easy to change it to a local login.

Please Sir, how?

You keep catching me out .

I objected to it on my first machine, (that got taken back to that renowned store at Cheadle Royal), and changed it to local login within five minutes once I decided to find out if it was possible.

On this machine I couldn't be bothered for other reasons, and have stayed with the online login. You have to log into the "user" on the machine in either case. I haven't bothered either seeing if that can be avoided in the way it can on earlier Wins, as I decided perhaps after all I should have password protection, if nothing else.

In reply to a post by RobertoS:

I haven't bothered either seeing if that can be avoided in the way it can on earlier Wins, as I decided perhaps after all I should have password protection, if nothing else.

Yup, local accounts can still be password-less.

Thanks .

In reply to a post by RobertoS:

You keep catching me out .

I objected to it on my first machine, (that got taken back to that renowned store at Cheadle Royal), and changed it to local login within five minutes once I decided to find out if it was possible.

On this machine I couldn't be bothered for other reasons, and have stayed with the online login. You have to log into the "user" on the machine in either case. I haven't bothered either seeing if that can be avoided in the way it can on earlier Wins, as I decided perhaps after all I should have password protection, if nothing else.

Actually, in 8.1 you don't need to create an online account at first set up, you can click "create an account" and then click "ignore this step" (right at the bottom) and then it will let you create a local account from the word go, I will fully admit that this isn't necessarily clear on how to bypass creating an online account (I do get the feeling Microsoft want to encourage everyone to have a LiveID - so that they can start competing with Google and Apple with cloud services), but nevertheless the option is there and you should have been able to find it. In Windows 8 it is even clearer "Use a local account" (or something along those lines).

If you've already created a on-line account is it possible to change it either so it uses a local account or, perhaps better, needs no login at all?

The quick reply is that you can certainly change it to a local A/C & only using the on-line version as & when necessary (i.e. using it to log-in to the on-line facility ONLY for the duration needed) - because that is what I've done.

Off the top of my head, I can't remember how I did it, but I just googled for the details at the time!

Haven't tried the local A/C without a password, so can't answer that (although I think that you can).

To me, it would make sense if Windows 9, or whatever it gets called, offers a crucial choice at the point of installation, either a tablet / touchscreen installation or a mouse driven set up. This seems so obvious to me. Until a superior intuitive control method is developed then the current methods should continue to run alongside each other.

In reply to a post by Chrysalis:

What I find odd is that most people on this forum who are windows users appeared to have updated to windows 8. So either they buying new pc/laptops every 1-2 years and hence got windows 8 via OEM or brought it retail (or pirated).
Yet on worldwide adoption windows 7 towers over windows 8.

This forum like all forums is totally unrepresentative of the general public or in the case of product forums users of the product.

So for example you get ISP X being slated as being dire on a forum by 25 outraged individuals while the other 10 million satisfied customers have frankly better things to to with their lives than write about their satisfaction on a forum.

Forums by their nature are made up of self selecting individuals interested in the product - and even more so for individual threads within forums. Sadly people posting on forums tend to loose sight of this and think that 99% of the population shares their opinions.

So here we have a in world terms a truly microscopic number of people discussing Win8 who may indeed have upgraded to it. The rest of the world that actually uses an OS to DO something like 'work' rather than the OS be an end in itself for their amusement are still using Win7 - or in my case XP.

Edited by deleted (Fri 17-Jan-14 08:50:55)

like many things, there is room for improvements at the start and then they hit a peak. Windows 95 wasnt the peak of desktop UI, it was before the peak.

Most business's I know off are either using XP or NT4. Not many are using vista or newer, and I have yet to visit one that is using windows 8.

I wont disagree there will be reasons to use windows 8, but I dont think its UI is a selling point.

question? are you planning to update your business to windows 9 on its release?

In reply to a post by Pipexer:

NO IMPORTANT PROGRAMS HAVE BEEN REMOVED IN WINDOWS 8 - therefore you must be deliberately opening these Metro versions of whatever apps. Open the desktop versions of those apps, and you don't ever need to go into Metro (which as it happens is called Modern UI or Immersive UI) again.

making local image backups isnt important?

true.

In reply to a post by Chrysalis:

In reply to a post by Pipexer:

NO IMPORTANT PROGRAMS HAVE BEEN REMOVED IN WINDOWS 8 - therefore you must be deliberately opening these Metro versions of whatever apps. Open the desktop versions of those apps, and you don't ever need to go into Metro (which as it happens is called Modern UI or Immersive UI) again.

making local image backups isnt important?

For me they are a vital and that's why I bought win 7 pro so I could backup over the network.

Although recently I have found a new backup program call ReDo backup which runs from a linux live disc and does image backups of almost any format of drive, even mixed formats which I need as I now dual boot linux and win 7.

Also you can do local backups as well as network and FTP ones and it's completely free.

But I have noticed on other forums that win8 users are being overly aggressive in their defence of the OS as if they need to prove something.

In reply to a post by Chrysalis:

making local image backups isnt important?

In Windows 8.1:-
Control Panel> All Control Panel Items> File History> System Image Backup

In Windows 8:-
Control Panel> All Control Panel Items> Windows 7 File Recovery> Create System Image

Thanks zaggie I was looking all over for that system image backup in 8.1

Speaking of backups, it's very disappointing that Windows 8 cannot restore backups made from Windows XP.

Perhaps Microsoft are hoping that those folk still using XP will upgrade to W9 when it becomes available if they have missed out the other OSes since XP?

What do you think?

Not really tbh - the transition to Windows 7 (in most cases) by major organisations (that includes public and private) is already under way and the deadlines will already be set in stone. There won't be many organisations running XP machines in anywhere near the masses after April 2014 - there may be a few which can't be upgraded for whatever reasons, but for the most part....

everytime I visit a nhs premises they always using XP.