[d'@ve]

Originally Posted by IvanIV

So W8 is selling well then

W8 is cool - even on desktops when Metro is buried.

[patternjake]

I'll only ever get any version of Windows above Windows 7 when support for Windows 7 expires due to the fact that I find the Metro interface to be too disruptive to my everyday working needs on my computer!

[cnbcwatcher]

Originally Posted by IvanIV

So W8 is selling well then

Yep. Classic Shell has had 12,796 downloads in the UK alone this week and 48,215 last month. Says it all, doesn't it?

[anniebrion]

Originally Posted by cnbcwatcher

Yep. Classic Shell has had 12,796 downloads in the UK alone this week and 48,215 last month. Says it all, doesn't it?

Just because there are lots of download that does not mean the same amount have it installed

I accidentally installed a start menu app that was included with another app I was installing, it promptly got removed

[Stig]

Originally Posted by cnbcwatcher

Yep. Classic Shell has had 12,796 downloads in the UK alone this week and 48,215 last month. Says it all, doesn't it?

Classic Shell also has regular updates, so maybe people are just downloading a newer version: http://www.classicshell.net/history/

Lies, damn lies and statistics!

[d'@ve]

Originally Posted by Stig

Classic Shell also has regular updates, so maybe people are just downloading a newer version: http://www.classicshell.net/history/

Lies, damn lies and statistics!

You've missed the point!

Look at the rate of increase (and there are other popular classic shells too for which we have no stats).

And all with zero commercial promotion or advertising, just casual mentions in a few forums blogs and technical reviews/reports, which 99% of the population will never ever see, and by word-of-mouth. And of course, the vast majority of licence purchasers (big business and hardware/software vendors) won't dare to go near it because it's not officially supported by Microsoft.

The rate of growth is astonishing in such a scenario and should surely prompt more in-depth investigations into the true user reaction to Metro on desktops (W8 is otherwise fine) to test out the Microsoft spin. This isn't about Windows 8 license sales, it's about it's new front-end for private users with desktop systems.

[flagpole]

Originally Posted by d'@ve

You've missed the point!

Look at the rate of increase (and there are other popular classic shells too for which we have no stats).

And all with zero commercial promotion or advertising, just casual mentions in a few forums blogs and technical reviews/reports, which 99% of the population will never ever see, and by word-of-mouth.

The rate of growth is astonishing in such a scenario and should surely prompt more in-depth investigations into the true user reaction to Metro (W8 is fine) to test out the Microsoft spin.

It may be people googling windows 8 start menu.

[cnbcwatcher]

Originally Posted by anniebrion

Just because there are lots of download that does not mean the same amount have it installed

Yeah but I guess most of the downloaders are Windows 8 users.

[frangipane]

Originally Posted by flagpole

sales of windows are a nit more anodyne than people like to think. A tiny percentage of people are even aware of what version of windows they are getting.

Microsoft, like Apple, Mozilla, Google, maybe even Ubuntu, don't want users to know which version of their software is installed - just as long as it's the newest version, and somehow making money - either through licences or a percentage of the cost of an app download.

[call100]

I downloaded and used Classic shell and used it while I was getting used to W8 and have since stopped using it..
As I'm finding my way around W8 I find I just automatically use it as it's meant to be. My Wife, who's mind is a technical desert (Her own admission), finds it easy to use and likes it.
A lot of people seem to be taking it personally that Microsoft dare to change something. If it's not liked, don't download third party solutions to your problem, just don't use it......It's not compulsory.....

[JeffG1]

Why buy a PC with an operating system pre-installed in the first place? Buy the two separately and you can choose what OS you prefer. A modern OS can be installed by a ten year old with a few clicks.

An added benefit is that you get a proper installation disk to keep.

[John259]

Originally Posted by JeffG1

Why buy a PC with an operating system pre-installed in the first place? Buy the two separately and you can choose what OS you prefer. A modern OS can be installed by a ten year old with a few clicks.

An added benefit is that you get a proper installation disk to keep.

How does UEFI affect that? I've seen some comments (which I won't pretend to fully understand) predicting a PC dystopian future where the hardware and operating system are locked together, as with tablets.

[Tassium]

Obviously people who use and like Win8 feel rather minoritised and react accordingly when Win8 is slagged off.

Attack my OS, attack me.

This is a clue as to how generally unpopular Win8 is, it's a minority OS with acolytes.

[JeffG1]

Originally Posted by John259

How does UEFI affect that?

What is UEFI?

[John259]

Originally Posted by JeffG1

What is UEFI?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uefi - in particular http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uefi#Secure_boot_2 might be of potential concern.

[mac2708]

Originally Posted by JeffG1

Why buy a PC with an operating system pre-installed in the first place? Buy the two separately and you can choose what OS you prefer. A modern OS can be installed by a ten year old with a few clicks.

An added benefit is that you get a proper installation disk to keep.

Actually finding a PC/laptop without an OS pre-installed is not the simplest thing to do.
I agree though and as well as the bonus of a proper installation disc it avoids all the unwanted trial and 'foistware' that manufacturers are intent on installing

[JeffG1]

Originally Posted by mac2708

Actually finding a PC/laptop without an OS pre-installed is not the simplest thing to do.
I agree though and as well as the bonus of a proper installation disc it avoids all the unwanted trial and 'foistware' that manufacturers are intent on installing

Really? Pretty sure you can buy whatever you want with no operating system from Novatech. I'm sure other suppliers can be found that do the same. I have always found it extremely simple to buy a system without an OS.

[s2k]

Novatech is basically self-built equipment and the operation is nowhere near the scale of the larger OEMs. When it comes to the big suppliers like HP, Acer, Dell etc they only pay a tiny fraction of the cost for the Windows licence so they don't really have anything to achieve by offering systems without an OS. In some cases they actually earn money back via preinstalling software on the system (usually bloatware).

[NewWorldMan]

Originally Posted by Helmut10

The vast majority of users don't care, I don't. I use Application software for some specific purpose, like a word processor or a Web Browser, and so on, not an Operating system which is just there to install your software on.

What matters is the Software I use and the hardware works, that is it.

I don't care what geeks say about any OS.

Pretty much my view. Therefore I don't see much point in upgrading an OS independently of buying a new PC.

Of course, there can be OS features that improve or hinder such tasks but I'm not going to upgrade my OS just for some improved feature(s).

[TheBigM]

Originally Posted by NewWorldMan

Pretty much my view. Therefore I don't see much point in upgrading an OS independently of buying a new PC.

Of course, there can be OS features that improve or hinder such tasks but I'm not going to upgrade my OS just for some improved feature(s).

Would you ever buy a new version of an application for its improvements in capability or performance?

Same goes for an OS: improved security, improved performance on the same hardware, introducing new usability models, allowing access to the latest versions of software etc are all great reasons to upgrade an OS.

[NewWorldMan]

Originally Posted by TheBigM

Would you ever buy a new version of an application for its improvements in capability or performance?

Yes, but only if I think the benefits of the improved features outweigh the costs. But applications are more valuable to me than the OS, so I'm more likely to iterate those than I am the OS independently of a new hardware purchase. Though in fact most of what I use tends to be free.

Same goes for an OS: improved security, improved performance on the same hardware, introducing new usability models, allowing access to the latest versions of software etc are all great reasons to upgrade an OS.

I work in the Microsoft world professionally and there does come a time when the minimum OS version exceeds what I currently have, so that would be a good reason for a new OS. But this often corresponds to the time when I need new hardware anyway.

In the Windows world MS tend to raise their minimum OS requirements earlier than other applications vendors, yet I can still just about keep up with them without needing to upgrade the OS independently of the hardware.

[John259]

All software calls a large number of routines in the operating system to perform the majority of its tasks. If those routines are made more efficient, they affect all the software which calls them.

The operating system also provides the means to control the computer, launching programs and switching between them; and adjusting configuration settings. If those procedures are made simpler then both everyday and occasional operations are made more efficient and convenient.

Whether Windows 8 has achieved any of those objectives is of course a separate question.

[d'@ve]

Originally Posted by John259

How does UEFI affect that? I've seen some comments (which I won't pretend to fully understand) predicting a PC dystopian future where the hardware and operating system are locked together, as with tablets.

Given Microsoft's attempt to lock everyone into a tablet interface that many desktop users don't like or want, nothing would surprise me. But as with Metro, those who don't like it can just circumvent it, if necessary by switching to some other O/S altogether (me for one!). If others want to follow the Microsoft (or Apple) herd and get locked in, good luck to them but many wouldn't.

Microsoft would have to be wary of large corporates too, for example Barclays already develops a lot of its software in Linux - and that approach would spread very fast if Microsoft tried anything silly. However, I expect that public pressure and bad publicity would soon stop them in their tracks if they were to try and lock us in via secure boot.

UEFI has many benefits of course, not least it enables me to run a 3TB back-up disk using a GUID Partition Table (GPT).

[NewWorldMan]

Originally Posted by John259

All software calls a large number of routines in the operating system to perform the majority of its tasks. If those routines are made more efficient, they affect all the software which calls them.

The operating system also provides the means to control the computer, launching programs and switching between them; and adjusting configuration settings. If those procedures are made simpler then both everyday and occasional operations are made more efficient and convenient.

This is true. Whether the improvements are enough to bother with the cost and potentially the hassle are separate questions.

I think my Windows 7 PC is better than my old Windows XP PC. I think Windows 7 is a better OS than XP but tbh I only really notice surface level features such as looks and usability rather than technical details of how well the software performs.

[Y Me]

Originally Posted by patternjake

I'll only ever get any version of Windows above Windows 7 when support for Windows 7 expires due to the fact that I find the Metro interface to be too disruptive to my everyday working needs on my computer!

I wish people could explain why the Metro interface is such a problem for them.

Since Windows 95 and every upgrade except Vista I have a blank desk top with a photograph of my grand-daughters on it and all the programmes I use regularly on the task bar.

For Windows 8 I have placed a re-start and shutdown button on the task bar, so I have to click once to get to my desk top or browser from the Metro screen.

Is this really an inconvenience?

I'm not having a go at anybody but I am curious.