 |
 |
I don't know that anyone's blindly criticizing Win 8. I know I for one have spent a little time with it, and quite frankly, I'm not real thrilled with the direction that they're going (and for that matter, I'm somewhat concerned about the direction OSX is going too). I feel there's far too much interest in "tabletizing" desktop OSs. While that *may* work for a certain percentage of home users, it's far less likely to be useful in a business setting. I feel the OS manufacturers are making a decision that everyone can do everything they need with a tablet, and you're out of luck if that's not true. Win 8 may be "ok" with a touch screen interface (and I'm not all that convinced of that, but I don't really have a test platform around that I can use with a touch screen). Ever try installing a bunch of apps that install lots of things in a start menu, where it'd be neatly organized in folders on the win 7 start menu? That turns the Metro interface into a mess. Not having a hierarchical interface there means everything is there on the desktop, so you either have to clean up after you install things, or deal with cluttered pages of applications that really have no use to be there (which quite frankly, is one of the drawbacks to "tabletizing" things, flipping through pages of icons is not my idea of a good way to find things). Now, how many touch screens do you folks have? I've got 2 in my department. And I'm not really expecting a whole lot more any time soon, simply because all it does is add cost to a machine (and quite frankly, I've seen very few touch screen desktop monitors that I've felt were any good, they generally sacrifice visual quality, generally by putting a very shiny layer on them). I have problems getting people to give up on machines that are 8 years old, and fully expect that I'll still be installing XP on some machines for a little while now (although mercifully that's generally only older machines that I ever need to do that now). Speaking of installing computers, I'm pretty concerned with the direction things are taking with this reliance on app stores (for both Windows and OS X). We're already at the point on the Mac that you can't run out and buy a disc for certain programs (I think iWork is the one I was looking for the other day). Instead, now you have to buy it through the app store. And oops, sorry, right now there's not really a mechanism for doing that without tax (although I suspect they'll eventually fix that, since they do have a system in place for the itunes app store, I'm kinda surprised they don't have one in place for volume licensing through the Mac app store). Right now I've got a set of media to let me build a machine with all the applications that are needed real quick. If it needs to go through the app store in the future, that's going to make things a real pain. And I guarantee you, both MS and Apple are going to do everything they can to get to the point where you *have* to do that. Apple will probably get there first, based on the steps I can see in Mountain Lion. And people have talked about windows 3.1 and how people hated moving away from that? Well guess what, we're headed right back there. The lack of real multitasking on the metro side of things basically brings us back to where we were with Win 3.1. Great to see progress there. And this is probably what really bothers me the most about Win 8. I wouldn't necessarily be all that bothered by the idea that the Metro interface is there, with it's reduction of windows to tablet capabilities, except that other than creating a bunch of icons to the desktop, or adding a bunch of things pinned to the task bar, that metro interface is the way you basically have to start applications. The insistence on MS's part to get rid of the start menu on the desktop side of things really is one of the dumbest moves I can see. There's going to be a significant percentage of people that simply *have* to use the desktop side of things, and MS is basically brushing those people aside. I know, it's ranting. But I think there's a big difference between being a technophobe and genuinely feeling that things a broken. Just because a company does something, doesn't mean that it's a good decision. But it definitely means that it's going to increase a lot of our workloads. I'm one of those that does have to support end users. And I forsee a large number of issues in the future, all in the name of "progress". Gary On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 7:43 AM, Tim Heckaman <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > I agree with Josh, we have gotten in the habit of criticizing something > before we even get a look at it just because Vista wasn't what most of us > would run (probably because of the media always painting Microsoft as the > bad guy and apple as the heroes of the computer world). I personally dislike > the Metro look but I'm excited for Win 8 overall. I've never run into an > issue with Windows 7 that I wouldn't expect to happen on any other OS. > Computers are by nature going to have issues, weather it is software, > hardware or the user. We need to learn what those common problems are and > remember how to fix it, that is why we are the experts. > > With all that said will I be deploying Win 8? No not right away, no business > should (unless extensive testing has been done). But I will be taking a look > at it and see what it has to offer and go from there. I do NOT play on > running Win 7 till the end of its life cycle. I guarantee you I'll be going > to Win 8, or 9 or whatever is out there in the future. Like it was said > earlier, we are the Tech people, we need to be ahead of the curve and the > ones learning the new stuff. > > /rant off > Tim Heckaman > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Wortz, Joshua [mailto:[log in to unmask]] > Sent: Monday, August 06, 2012 8:45 PM > To: [log in to unmask] > Subject: Re: [MSUNAG] Windows 8 Reaches RTM Milestone > > "Weird problems" is a phrase that I hear regularly from users. I agree that > Vista was different from XP, but it was a move in the right direction. I > personally deployed over 1200 dells on windows Vista. It took time to learn > the nuances and understand how it worked in comparison to XP (ie User > Account Control). Because it's not intuitive doesn't mean it's broken. > > I agree blind belief isn't good. That's why you should take advantage of the > public RC's that Microsoft does to see what the in work product is going to > be like and, as I said, test it before deploying it. > > > ________________________________________ > From: STeve Andre' [[log in to unmask]] > Sent: Monday, August 06, 2012 5:29 PM > To: [log in to unmask] > Subject: Re: [MSUNAG] Windows 8 Reaches RTM Milestone > > Um, Vista *was* something to avoid. I had many friend who abandoned it in > favor of XP after experiencing really weird problems. Vista reeked for many > people. One friend was brought to tears when of three Vista crate- mate > Dell's, one was perfect, one slightly broken and the last a disaster. > This was three identical machines using the same set of software. I helped > out on this debacle, and it convinced me that Vista wasn't useful. MS > agreed with that, too--they repeatedly said that 7 would be better, and it > is. > > Blind belief in MS isn't good. They have had ups and downs with their line > of OS's. Windows 2000 *was* more stable than XP in machine control > circumstances. I know a company that uses 8 of them on a private net. > One machine was converted to XP and died, needing a reboot about two weeks > into service. The 2k machines go for 9 months between reboots, and only > then because of shop retooling which moves them physically. > > It is not technophobia--it's experience. Win 7 does seem to be a better OS, > but it still acts weirdly--I bought three identical machines, put the same > software on them and had to rebuild one of them because it had problems with > EBS and Acrobat (for a few documents, only) with the > other two being fine. Great. > > You might be surprised at how many companies don't jump on the current OS > bandwagon... > > --STeve Andre' > > > On 08/06/12 17:01, Wortz, Joshua wrote: >> I'm really amazed at the amount of technophobes among the Network > Administrators Group. It's still Windows, it still uses sysprep, and newer > computers are going to be coming out with touch screens to work with the new > interface. Why remove key hardware features from your users? >> >> I understand that there is going to be a testing phase to make sure that > necessary software is functioning correctly but that shouldn't take more > than a few weeks to test and verify. Otherwise you could choose to believe > the PC vs Mac adds and think that Vista and Windows 7 where something to > avoid. >> >> Most of us on this list are IT professionals, yet we there are a lot of us > who are complacent with still using XP which is 11 years old now. If you are > on an 11 year cycle then that means the last prior OS was probably Windows > 3.0 released in 1990. Unless, somewhere in the last 11 years either your > technical prowess plateaued or you've grown lazy. >> >> Sorry but the rest of the world is still moving and we don't get the > luxury of camping out in this field. >> >> Josh >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Kwiatkowski, Nicholas [mailto:[log in to unmask]] >> Sent: Monday, August 06, 2012 4:30 PM >> To: [log in to unmask] >> Subject: Re: [MSUNAG] Windows 8 Reaches RTM Milestone >> >> Dave, >> >> Microsoft offered a "downgrade" license for Vista to XP for a long time. > They offered a downgrade license for W7 initially too (they may still do > it). >> >> If you ordered a PC from Dell or HP you could order it with Windows XP up > until a little while ago. I ordered a machine for our office about a year > ago and still had XP pre-installed by Dell. I think what finally killed the > XP pre-installs was that everything was going 64-bit, and memory > requirements finally exceeded what the OS could handle. >> >> I would imagine that you can order Windows 7 pre-installed on a PC with a > downgrade license for quite a while. Microsoft alluded that W7 was going to > be another of their 'extended support releases', so this may be happening > for a while. >> >> -Nick >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: David McFarlane [mailto:[log in to unmask]] >> Sent: Monday, August 06, 2012 4:02 PM >> To: [log in to unmask] >> Subject: Re: [MSUNAG] Windows 8 Reaches RTM Milestone >> >> So, are folks really planning to keep ordering machines with Win7 instead > of Win8 as long as possible, and then reformat Win8 machines to install Win7 > after they can no longer buy machines with Win7? That's fine, but, depite > an earlier comment, it does seem to involve a lot of "involuntary" action > :). >> >> -- dkm >> >> >> At 8/6/2012 03:51 PM Monday, Gary Schrock wrote: >>> We were able to order machines with XP for a long time after Vista >>> came out, can't remember if it was all the way up until 7 came out or > not. >>> Now, you couldn't walk into Best Buy and get a machine without Vista >>> (for that matter, I think the home stores of the various PC >>> manufactures didn't give the option, I think it was mainly their >>> business oriented stores). There were some laptops that I ran into >>> that were difficult to get drivers for XP, so that's really what to >>> me became the biggest issue. 7 ended up decent enough that one >>> didn't really need to avoid it. >>> >>> I'm guessing MS is going to get the same type of reaction from >>> businesses for Win8 as they did for Vista, and get forced to keep Win >>> 7 around far longer than they might want to. >>> >>> On Mon, Aug 6, 2012 at 3:47 PM, David McFarlane <[log in to unmask]> wrote: >>>> Indeed, but can we ever voluntarily opt out of eventually >>> deploying each new >>>> version of Windows? Especially when it becomes impossible to order >>>> new PCs without it? Did we succeed in voluntarily avoiding Vista, or 7? >>>> >>>> -- dkm >>>> >>>> >>>> At 8/6/2012 03:37 PM Monday, Jon Galbreath wrote: >>>>> It's a voluntary action to run the installer, so yes. >>>>> >>>>> Jon Galbreath, MCSE >>>>> Systems Administrator >>>>> International Studies and Programs >>>>> Helpdesk: 517-884-2148 >>>>> Ph: 517-884-2144 >>>>> [log in to unmask] >>>>> >>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>> From: David McFarlane [mailto:[log in to unmask]] >>>>> Sent: Monday, August 06, 2012 3:24 PM >>>>> To: [log in to unmask] >>>>> Subject: Re: [MSUNAG] Windows 8 Reaches RTM Milestone >>>>> >>>>> But will we have any choice? Do we ever? >>>>> >>>>> -- dkm >>>>> (Sorry, late to the party, was gone on vacation) >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> At 8/1/2012 03:10 PM Wednesday, Stehouwer, Matt wrote: >>>>>> I would have to 2nd that. >>>>>> >>>>>> Matt Stehouwer >>>>>> Technology Manager >>>>>> Michigan State University >>>>>> College of Natural Science Deans Office >>>>>> 288 Farm Lane RM 154 >>>>>> East Lansing, MI 48824 >>>>>> 517 355-9003 | Email: [log in to unmask] >>>>>> >>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>> From: Gary Schrock [mailto:[log in to unmask]] >>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2012 2:41 PM >>>>>> To: [log in to unmask] >>>>>> Subject: Re: [MSUNAG] Windows 8 Reaches RTM Milestone >>>>>> >>>>>> On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 2:26 PM, Jon Galbreath <[log in to unmask]> > wrote: >>>>>>> TechNet and MSDN gets it Aug 15! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Anyone planning to actually deploy this? >>>>>> The words "over my dead body" come to mind :).