Windows 8 Preview users can upgrade to final version for $39.99

[ET3D]

Will you guys quit it?

ig-88, my understanding is that your only problem with Windows 8 is Metro. Since that's a design issue and not a technical problem, you need to acknowledge that it may not be a problem for others, or that some people might actually like it.

Technically Windows 8 has some underlying improvements to Windows 7. They may not be huge enough improvements to convince someone who hates Metro, but for those who don't mind it they're a decent enough reason to upgrade, especially at this price.

By the way this isn't any different from upgrading from Vista to 7. There isn't a huge reason to move from Vista, which is a stable OS and runs well given enough RAM, which is why I stuck with it even though I had a Windows 7 license since it was released (reinstallation is a hassle, though I'll do it soon now that I got my SSD). Still lots of people felt that the technical improvements in 7 were worth the upgrade.

 

[ig-88]

https://www.techspot.com/news/49300-story-page-2.html post # 7 by "ThatGuy" in a different thread.
I didn't say all my quotes about Windows 8 were from this thread.
When you can no longer attack the issue from a logical standpoint, attack the one making the argument, nice.
Anyway, Im taking ET3D's advice. I've said all I need to say. Windows 8 is a choice, ,not a mandate, so let everyone do what they want. Im tired and going to sleep.

 

[ReederOnTheRun]

Wow, I see as usual most of you are missing the point of this upgrade entirely. Metro isn't going to be a big deal. The only reason people are complaining is because most people are always complaining about anything they aren't used to. The main thing most users should be considering is that this new OS has improved speed in almost every category compared to Win 7 and XP. For those people who have a hard time understanding this, that means just about everything you do on your computer everyday will go faster than it does now. Speed tests have proven this. But the best part is that all of this comes at only $40. That's a pretty sick deal for a speed boost across the board.

 

[Archean]

@DBZ

There is one huge thing which many missed with regard to new UI/kernel unification + optimization, I.e. MS is drawing up a course for 'unified' application development for mobile+desktop platforms. Skipping the merits or demirts of it, the logic seems solid IMHO, and if they succeed in it, it will stump both Google and Apple, putting them on-course to continue to dominate computer industry for many more years. The question is, can they pull it off and get programers on-board?

I think if they get the pricing 'right' with their Surface tabs, give compelling enough tools* to manage these devices in the corporate environment + economical/realistic desktop pricing they may well go someway in achieving their goal.

* I think BOYD will increase IT support costs across the board, so managing them will become a huge headache.

 

[Guest]

Marble the kernel from tho microsoft - if neder "Surface" canbe enocomical thro comercial thinking, than tho Apple or google note with the look in!

 

[dividebyzero]

@Archean
I think the unified development is definitely where MS are heading. How they work to achieve it should be an interesting tale. Having a huge library/backround in x86-64 software has to be parlayed into the Win 8 RT market in a very compressed timeframe. I don't know of any high profile MS x86 based apps that are readily available for use with ARM's instruction set- although I'd be the first to admit that my knowledge is lacking in the mobile sector and derived from the ongoing debates surrounding the Surface

 

[ET3D]

Archean, from what I've read until now, it sounds like ARM development will be limited to Metro apps, which IMO is a mistake. If Windows RT machines could run standard .NET apps out of the box, that would have been a great start.

 

[Archean]

@DBZ and E3

I think ARM and x86 debate may well become pointless, provided, Intel backs up Medfield with compelling offering, strengthening case for x86 chips in mobile devices. At this point in time, I am inclining towards Intel achieving this goal with some hard work and technological lead in its manufacturing fabs.

Short comment because I'm watching Alonso heading for a win (? as his tires seems to be running out of grip) at Silverstone with left eye, and hoping Federer nails Murray with right eye.

Note: I know I can multitask

 

[ig-88]

Wow, I see as usual most of you are missing the point of this upgrade entirely. Metro isn't going to be a big deal. The only reason people are complaining is because most people are always complaining about anything they aren't used to. The main thing most users should be considering is that this new OS has improved speed in almost every category compared to Win 7 and XP. For those people who have a hard time understanding this, that means just about everything you do on your computer everyday will go faster than it does now. Speed tests have proven this. But the best part is that all of this comes at only $40. That's a pretty sick deal for a speed boost across the board.

People can get used to anything over time. I can get used to eating cold pizza and drinking warm beer. But if I have a choice I want hot pizza and cold beer. Windows 7 Ultimate was new when it came out and I never had to "get used to it".
The reason everything goes faster on Windows 8 is because cellphones and tablets were added to the equation when calculating what the final product would be like. "Speed" isn't the holy grail of how one chooses which operating system to use. It's a factor to be considered amoung many, many others. The speed of Windows 7 on my computer is just fine. Stripping out complex UI themes for simplistic tiles and telling me its faster isn't an incentive to upgrade to Windows 8. Of course its faster. Because instead of attempting to harness the full power of a desktop they started with the power of cellphones/tablets and used that as the common base when making software design choices. Saying everybody should upgrade to 'Windows 8' because of a speed boost is ludicrous. Releasing the same functionality at an improved speed would be something to talk about. Designing an operating system with cellphones/tablets in mind and then adapting it to the desktop and then telling everybody its faster than Windows 7 is comparing Apples to Oranges.
Yeah, $40 is a pretty sick deal. That's not a bad price to convert my desktop to a cellphone/tablet OS.

@DBZ
There is one huge thing which many missed with regard to new UI/kernel unification + optimization, I.e. MS is drawing up a course for 'unified' application development for mobile+desktop platforms. Skipping the merits or demirts of it, the logic seems solid IMHO, and if they succeed in it, it will stump both Google and Apple, putting them on-course to continue to dominate computer industry for many more years. The question is, can they pull it off and get programers on-board?

Actually, I don't think alot of people are missing what Microsoft is attempting to do at all. I think almost everybody who is unhappy with the new Windows 8 OS sees exactly what Microsoft is attempting to do. I think the unified application development of desktop+mobile platforms is the most obvious and glaring reason for most people's complaints about Windows 8. It's an assumption that one UI can be designed that will work equally well across all devices. So, whether or not you using a 27" desktop monitor or a 4.3" cellphone screen you will be using the same interface. I don't how your brain works but, on the contrary, this doesn't seem logical to me at all. It seems completely delusional. And since cellphones and tablets lack the raw power a desktop CPU the "unified" operating system gets designed around the lowest common denominator so that no child gets left behind.

 

[Guest]

I look it at nothing more then this is what MS wants you to do, not something we were asking for. They want to make all their products the same (pc/tablet/phone) so there is uniform between the 3. That is how they plan to catch back up with Apple in 2 of those 3 markets.

But to me this is like MS adding ribbons to their apps (no one asked), or like their xbox will use any controller except a mouse, for no good reason (limiting our choice on how we want to do things). I think MS hates mice. They now feel I want to touch my pc screen as if it is easier and faster. Both are false. So these changes are really are for their benefit and wanting to change something we are not asking for.

I look forward to after market apps to give me back a more standard desktop. I have not been asking for a desktop change, so I don't want one. It is also fair to judge it artistically and it's fugly, looks like an early 70's vibe of squares and odd non-favorite colors, I'm waiting for people to pop out of the squares and tell jokes and that the joke is on me. After market app's will use some of the metro technology to add good functionality with what we are accustomed to. A real benefit of both worlds and not the heavy forced hand of "You will do this!".

 

[ReederOnTheRun]

People can get used to anything over time. I can get used to eating cold pizza and drinking warm beer. But if I have a choice I want hot pizza and cold beer. Windows 7 Ultimate was new when it came out and I never had to "get used to it".
The reason everything goes faster on Windows 8 is because cellphones and tablets were added to the equation when calculating what the final product would be like. "Speed" isn't the holy grail of how one chooses which operating system to use. It's a factor to be considered amoung many, many others. The speed of Windows 7 on my computer is just fine. Stripping out complex UI themes for simplistic tiles and telling me its faster isn't an incentive to upgrade to Windows 8. Of course its faster. Because instead of attempting to harness the full power of a desktop they started with the power of cellphones/tablets and used that as the common base when making software design choices. Saying everybody should upgrade to 'Windows 8' because of a speed boost is ludicrous. Releasing the same functionality at an improved speed would be something to talk about. Designing an operating system with cellphones/tablets in mind and then adapting it to the desktop and then telling everybody its faster than Windows 7 is comparing Apples to Oranges.
Yeah, $40 is a pretty sick deal. That's not a bad price to convert my desktop to a cellphone/tablet OS.

Except tweaking the UI isn't quite the same as turning it into a cellphone/tablet OS. It will still be able to run everything it did before and more in a faster, prettier (albeit different) package. And thanks to pressure from Apple, at a much cheaper price than usual. This is definitely good progress for Microsoft. Besides if you think that "releasing the same functionality at an improved speed would be something to talk about" then you are waiting for a magic speed boosting update, not a new operating system. The point of new operating systems is to change things. As a result, I'm sorry to tell you that things sometimes do change. But that's ok! Because if you like everything about Windows 7, you can stick with Windows 7.

 

[blackdragon1230]

For one, the start screen is not superior to the start button. For a power user it is the opposite.

keep in mind not everyone is a power user, just because its not as user friendly to a power user doesnt mean its unusable to everybody. microsoft believes the future of computers is touchscreen monitors, tablets, end eventually interactive touch surfaces, ie. your kitchen countertop. this operating system is aimed at touch devices of all kinds, and not at power users. now I myself have tried it and didnt like it cause its not as nice to use with a mouse and keyboard, if I had a touch screen monitor I would use it. for power users your best bet is really Linux, or if you have to use windows then xp. just a few things to point out, not an argument.

 

[audioman83]

How can the start screen be superior to the start button? the start button takes less time to do stuff plus you use less resources with it seriously think about it.

You're uninformed. Why not read about W8 before you try to influence others with your ignorance. W8 is a worthy desktop successor not only for it's new feature set, but also for the fact that will converge the gap between desktops and tablets/phones.
http://www.hongkiat.com/blog/windows-8-new-features-you-will-love/
http://lifehacker.com/5839777/first-look-at-whats-new-in-windows-8
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Features_new_to_Windows_8

 

[audioman83]

So...unless you have an All-In-One touchscreen computer...What's the point of Windows 8?
Why not call it "Windows Touch", or rather than call the hardware "surface", call windows 8 "Microsoft Surface".
Calling it "Windows 8" just pisses a lot of people off, including myself. Seems like half an OS. Or even feels like a bubbly GUI on top of a good OS (kinda like Windows Media Center).
In fact, I bet they could release this as a GUI for Windows 7. But they won't.

You're uninformed too. Why not read about W8 before you try to influence others with your ignorance??? W8 is a worthy desktop successor not only for it's new feature set, but also for the fact that will converge the gap between desktops and tablets/phones. Info on its new features linked below.
http://www.hongkiat.com/blog/windows-8-new-features-you-will-love/
http://lifehacker.com/5839777/first-look-at-whats-new-in-windows-8
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Features_new_to_Windows_8

 

[ig-88]

You're uninformed too. Why not read about W8 before you try to influence others with your ignorance??? W8 is a worthy desktop successor not only for it's new feature set, but also for the fact that will converge the gap between desktops and tablets/phones. Info on its new features linked below.
http://www.hongkiat.com/blog/windows-8-new-features-you-will-love/
http://lifehacker.com/5839777/first-look-at-whats-new-in-windows-8
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Features_new_to_Windows_8

What is this dribble about "bridging the gap between desktops and tablets/phones"? I like that gap. I want my desktop to act like a desktop and I want my cellphone to act like a cellphone and tablets to act like tablets. What in THE HELL is this "dribble" about bridging the gap??? There's a gap for a reason. Those gaps are what make each device unique.

Are you seriously telling me that in 20 years all desktops/tablets/cellphones will have morphed into a single universal device? Is that what Windows 8 is all about?

Poll question: How many people hope that in 20 years there will be a single universal mobile computing device with 1 operating system? No more choices. No more having to think about whether or not you wanna purchase a desktop, a cellphone, or a tablet. Microsoft will have taken choice out of the equation. How many people honestly look forward to that day?
How many people believe that 1 universal computing device can fill every niche in society?

 

[audioman83]

What is this dribble about "bridging the gap between desktops and tablets/phones"? I like that gap. I want my desktop to act like a desktop and I want my cellphone to act like a cellphone and tablets to act like tablets. What in THE HELL is this "dribble" about bridging the gap??? There's a gap for a reason. Those gaps are what make each device unique.

Are you seriously telling me that in 20 years all desktops/tablets/cellphones will have morphed into a single universal device? Is that what Windows 8 is all about?

Poll question: How many people hope that in 20 years there will be a single universal mobile computing device with 1 operating system? No more choices. No more having to think about whether or not you wanna purchase a desktop, a cellphone, or a tablet. Microsoft will have taken choice out of the equation. How many people honestly look forward to that day?
How many people believe that 1 universal computing device can fill every niche in society?

Whoa. Dial back the crotchety a bit. Sheesh. Talk about irrational. "no more options" hahaha. If you want to continue doing tasks like web browsing and networking and media on your android or ios please feel free. But I'm looking forward the whole new league of features and abilities that W8 will bring to my portable devices. And again, it's still full featured windows in the "desktop os" realm as well. It just has a new UI for launching applications. Run a third party app for that if you want. Don't know why everyone is freaking out.

 

[dividebyzero]

What is this dribble about "bridging the gap between desktops and tablets/phones"? I like that gap. I want my desktop to act like a desktop and I want my cellphone to act like a cellphone and tablets to act like tablets

Then buy a desktop, and a cellphone and a tablet. I think the viewpoint is not and "either/or" but more of having a homogeneous enviroment where devices work with each other rather than at odds.

What in THE HELL is this "dribble" about bridging the gap??? There's a gap for a reason. Those gaps are what make each device unique.

Rubbish. If you can't already see that the process is taking place then you probably own one of these. Have a look at any marketing spiel for a new phone. How high up on the feature list does "Being able talk to someone" figure?

Are you seriously telling me that in 20 years all desktops/tablets/cellphones will have morphed into a single universal device? Is that what Windows 8 is all about?

If in twenty years, the common computing interface is a portable multicore platform that I can put in my pocket, have access to virtually unlimited storage/applications anywhere on earth, is controlled/viewed by eye movement via a virtual HUD, and can be synced with any other interface that I might communicate with others -or as entertainment....tough call, but yeah. I'd be onboard for that.

Poll question: How many people hope that in 20 years there will be a single universal mobile computing device with 1 operating system? No more choices. No more having to think about whether or not you wanna purchase a desktop, a cellphone, or a tablet. Microsoft will have taken choice out of the equation. How many people honestly look forward to that day?
How many people believe that 1 universal computing device can fill every niche in society?

You (and possibly Steve Ballmer) might be the only people who see Microsoft will be the sole choice in the future of computing. I personally don't see a future without Apple/ARM licencees, non-MS RISC based software and the FTC.

 

[tipstir]

On got this loaded on my Q-core and O-Ram. Yes you have to tinker with this OS to get it where you want to be. the LAN/WAN issues from all prior Windows is not fix yet. I have to do it myself again. Bandwidth throughput is set to 3mbps, MTU is not set nor it TTL. RAM VRM always out of control. What are they doing there at MS HQ. 8 should screen out of the box not be shy out of the box. Anyway I had to but 8 64 on 7 U64 do to all sorts of issues. I was wondering why the old OS could fix itself. I see 8 has self healing features. But they can only work if it's ideal issues. If too complex your system will be in reboot loop all day long.

Frankly I heard what will come with most systems are going to be starters versions of 8. Unless you pay for Pro 64-bit. With Q-C system it still fails to lock on all 4 cords instead by default fallback is 1 core.

They got everyone running around buying Q-cores and the OS doesn't use all the cores. Powersaver on AC system set to balance forces the CPU not to run at High power. Even on desktop I know they want you to use less power but come on now.

Now that start addition that was put out for free works very well down in the system tray.

To have fun with this newer OS you should have TSP otherwise using the mouse to flip and flop through screen is not the same.

 

[ig-88]

Then buy a desktop, and a cellphone and a tablet. I think the viewpoint is not and "either/or" but more of having a homogeneous enviroment where devices work with each other rather than at odds.

Rubbish. If you can't already see that the process is taking place then you probably own one of these. Have a look at any marketing spiel for a new phone. How high up on the feature list does "Being able talk to someone" figure?

If in twenty years, the common computing interface is a portable multicore platform that I can put in my pocket, have access to virtually unlimited storage/applications anywhere on earth, is controlled/viewed by eye movement via a virtual HUD, and can be synced with any other interface that I might communicate with others -or as entertainment....tough call, but yeah. I'd be onboard for that.

You (and possibly Steve Ballmer) might be the only people who see Microsoft will be the sole choice in the future of computing. I personally don't see a future without Apple/ARM licencees, non-MS RISC based software and the FTC.

I was referring more to a lack of choice in the "type" of computing devices, I.e., desktop, tablet, or cellphone. Not a lack of choice in what company to purchase the unified computing device from.

I don't mind the attempt to try and make all computing devices play well together. That's fine. I just feel like the desktop got the short end of the stick because it's the most powerful. Why didn't Microsoft shoehorn a keyboard and mouse interface onto tablets and cellphones? Because portable devices are the least powerful and the most popular. Couldn't they have made them all play well together and kept the UI unique to each device? In fact, I think that has already been accomplished. So, what's the gain of providing the same UI across all computing devices? A smaller learning curve and consistent UI when going from one device to the next. It makes sense to "some" degree but just like when a game developer begins development on the major consoles, their goal is to sell the most games on as many platforms as they can. Lazy developers probably start with the least powerful machine and the more powerful hardware doesn't get utilized to its full potential. A consistent UI across desktops/tablets/cellphones is a noble idea but there is a danger in doing this. We all get stuck with the least sophisticated of the available UI options because it's easier to swipe a finger across the screen on "all" devices than to use a keyboard and mouse on "all" devices.

You will never be able to fully enjoy a video game like Battlefield 3 on a cellphone the way you can on a desktop. As long as Microsoft doesn't ever take away keyboard and mouse functionality I may try Windows 8 at some point. May not ever try it to too. Definitely won't be anytime soon. I have a cellphone that works perfectly well all on its own.

Edit: It seems 'Windows 8' fanboys are still in the minority according to this link:
http://www.computerworld.com/s/arti..._further_behind_Windows_7_in_pre_launch_stats

I sense a very possible DOA here....it will be interesting to see! Might be Vista all over again. "Mr. Salesman, how much do I have to pay you to downgrade my new computer to Windows 7"?

 

[dividebyzero]

You will never be able to fully enjoy a video game like Battlefield 3 on a cellphone the way you can on a desktop

I don't see the problem in the medium/long term. If your phone has the graphics processing capabililty, can interface with a conventional monitor, or some future alternative, and you can use a virtual kb or reflex based input it would seem a natural extrapolation of current trends....unless you are of the opinion that computing power wont ever progress to that level of sophistication.
In the short term...I.e. Battlefield 3...then Windows 7 support is available through January 2020....were not quite at Defcon 1 status yet. As for the desktop, I don't think anyone is suggesting it will disappear in any near timeframe- too many IHV's have an interest in keeping the platform going even if you don't take into consideration the prime mover behind the tech advances for the platform (workstation and server).

I may try Windows 8 at some point.

If nothing else, it gives you an actual hands-on basis for comparison. Formulating a viewpoint via experience is always preferable to getting information second hand.

 

[ig-88]

I don't see the problem in the medium/long term. If your phone has the graphics processing capabililty, can interface with a conventional monitor, or some future alternative, and you can use a virtual kb or reflex based input it would seem a natural extrapolation of current trends....unless you are of the opinion that computing power wont ever progress to that level of sophistication.
In the short term...I.e. Battlefield 3...then Windows 7 support is available through January 2020....were not quite at Defcon 1 status yet. As for the desktop, I don't think anyone is suggesting it will disappear in any near timeframe- too many IHV's have an interest in keeping the platform going even if you don't take into consideration the prime mover behind the tech advances for the platform (workstation and server).

If nothing else, it gives you an actual hands-on basis for comparison. Formulating a viewpoint via experience is always preferable to getting information second hand.

Let me ask you a question. Do you ever feel like its possible that once a product reaches a certain level of advancements, that any further advancements have diminishing returns? If most people using Windows 7 Ultimate are content and happy with it(I happen to be one of those people, btw) continuing to try and improve on ideas seems to be almost an unending quest but how much more advanced does a can opener really need to be? And can opener is meant to serve as an example, not to be taken literally.

Back to the Battlefield 3 example, unless they release portable devices with screens that are at least 21.5" inches or larger with a minimum resolution of at least 1280x1024 I really don't care if they can produce a cellphone that is powerful enough to power the game. Taking the cellphone to the monitor to play the game would be redundant if all functionality is not contained in a single device whats the point? Downloading the game to your phone and then inserting it into some USB slot built into the mointor? I guess technology advances by trying all things. Good ideas will remain, bad ideas will fade away. It's all good.

Windows 8 may have tried too hard to be all things to all people.

 

[dividebyzero]

Let me ask you a question. Do you ever feel like its possible that once a product reaches a certain level of advancements, that any further advancements have diminishing returns?

In an OS as of now? No.
The day an OS can be totally future proofed is when your statement holds validity.
100% completely effective utilization of resources (threads, cache, power management etc), fully redundant autonomous repair, self-adaptive services and interoperability between the OS, hardware enviroment, software and user are all still a long way off. Win7 is nowhere near the pinnacle of OS achievement - ask anyone whose had to tweak a registry setting as an obvious case in point.

Back to the Battlefield 3 example...

Pointless.
You're talking about the here-and-now regarding phones/ultraportables and attempting to apply a current situation with a rapidly changing technological landscape. Now, since these devices -now- don't have the horsepower to undertake these tasks, whose to say in 2, 5, 10 years that is still the case. How many phones in 2002 were quad core 1+GHz with capacitive screens able to play any graphic games? And if you're applying the argument solely for here-and-now/ Win8, then you already have the choice of XP, Vista, 7, OSX and as many flavours of Linux as you can poke a stick at....by the time Win7 is EOL in 2020 what version of Windows will be current? If it's Win8 then that would put it in line for one of the most successful OS's in history (which kind of destroys the argument)....and if it's Win10, 11 or 12 whose to say what kind of UI you'll be integrating with. The fact that you have the option to stay with the OS you're using for the next seven-and-a-half-years if you want to doesn't bolster a viewpoint that you as an individual are being railroaded into Win8 adoption
Are you 100% certain that by the time MS withdraws support for Win7 in 2020 that a further evolved OS/UI wont be needed ?

/bookmarked for 2020

 

[ReederOnTheRun]

Let me ask you a question. Do you ever feel like its possible that once a product reaches a certain level of advancements, that any further advancements have diminishing returns? If most people using Windows 7 Ultimate are content and happy with it(I happen to be one of those people, btw) continuing to try and improve on ideas seems to be almost an unending quest but how much more advanced does a can opener really need to be? And can opener is meant to serve as an example, not to be taken literally.

No. I really don't think anyone thinks that. But hey, maybe you're right. Maybe Windows, Apple, Linux, and anyone else out there improving current technology needs to stop right now and liquidate all of their assets. Clearly Windows 7 is the pinnacle of human technology, and nothing can ever top it.

But that aside, just listen to this: Say someone has three vehicles. A sports car, an luxury sedan, and an economy sedan. Now this person could have bought these cars from the same manufacturer and given them the same paint job, but do you think they are going to perform different? Of course. The sports car's performance wouldn't fall to that of an economy sedan's just because it looks like it. Same thing with Windows 8. The desktop might look a little bit more like the tablet or phone UI and be built from compatible codes but it will still perform like a desktop. Developers will still utilize the desktop's power. Games will continue to advance in technology just like operating systems. It's all good.

 

[ig-88]

No. I really don't think anyone thinks that. But hey, maybe you're right. Maybe Windows, Apple, Linux, and anyone else out there improving current technology needs to stop right now and liquidate all of their assets. Clearly Windows 7 is the pinnacle of human technology, and nothing can ever top it.

Okay, your a little over the top on the sarcasm here. I suggested nothing of the sort. My point was that there are certain things that people expect certain things to do and once they own a product which does what they expect it to do everything above and beyond that has diminishing returns but different people expect different things from different products. I am content with 'Windows 7' and as of now have no compelling need to upgrade to Windows 8 out of either want or even necessity because while I don't believe 'Windows 7' is the pinnacle of operating systems, its more than good enough for me at the moment. I didn't suggest that Microsoft or anybody else liquidate all assets. Geesh.....

But that aside, just listen to this: Say someone has three vehicles. A sports car, an luxury sedan, and an economy sedan. Now this person could have bought these cars from the same manufacturer and given them the same paint job, but do you think they are going to preform different? Of course. The sports car's performance wouldn't fall to that of an economy sedan's just because it looks like it. Same thing with Windows 8. The desktop might look a little bit more like the tablet or phone UI and be built from compatible codes but it will still perform like a desktop. Developers will still utilize the desktop's power. Games will continue to advance in technology just like operating systems. It's all good.

I think your second paragraph has very valid logic. My only concern with it as it applies to Windows 8 is, why then, did Microsoft choose to implement the UI of the least powerful platform across all other devices? They choose the UI that was most practical across all devices. So, whether you want to admit it or not, Windows 8 for the desktop has been branded with a tablet/cellphone UI even if everything else under the hood is better, faster, and more powerful than a speeding locomotive. It's this perception, whether true or false, that has a lot of people worried. And so in the end the truth may not matter. Only the perception. We will see soon enough.

 

[Archean]

All that space wasted for just one complaint I.e. W8 UI is a derivative of WP UI. Beyond that there is absolutely nothing substantial in your argument. I think this is more of a problem for 'click' generation than for people who grew up using 'keyboard' as primary input device.

What MS is doing is 'very bold' IMHO, as they are essentially on path to create 'one windows to rule them all' (thanks to Sebastian over at EE for this) I.e. same kernel will drive OS on smartphones / tablets / PCs / Xbox and what not. The logic behind this approach is very practical and correct, remember MS integrated browser in the OS before anyone else did? Now everyone has essentially copied that concept.

As the OS will be supporting native code, in most cases porting an app will be as simple as turning on a switch in visual studio. It also means that common graphic drivers + DirectX support across all versions of OS. So at least theoretically, this mean even WP can run any PC game as well. Native code support will also result in much easier route for porting iOS / Android apps to WP. Now imagine the cost savings this will bring? Simply put, developers are going to be very happy about this change.

[FONT=Arial]This should also clarify you one thing, that why MS was forced to choose one UI for all versions of OS.[/FONT]

What about users then? Well, in general people (I am not targeting anyone here) are averse to change, so I can understand all this negativity related to such a major UI overhaul. But really, getting into desktop mode is just one 'key press' away, if you want your beloved 'Start' button back, it is not that difficult either. Or one can easily get Start8 (or whatever it is called) by Stardock.

To wrap it up, even Apple is slowly bringing iOS features to OSX (I.e. style Notifications, iMessage support, GameCenter integration, AirPlay Mirroring, Notes and Reminders). Will they merge mobile / desktop platforms? One can only guess but who knows they may end up following their competitors.