Upgrade to Windows 8 Pro for only $39.99!

[commodorejohn]

FALSE: There are over 5000 apps in the app store at the moment. From that site over 5200 are compatible with ARM based RT.

http://www.neowin.net/news/report-windows-store-now-has-over-5000-windows-8-apps

87 percent of those apps are free and 94 percent of the apps made for the x86 version of Windows 8 can also run on Windows RT.

I'm down with free-as-in-dollars software, but if 87% of what's in the Windows Store is free, then only 13% (688) are complex and/or good enough that the developers thought they could reasonably charge money for them. That says less "broad developer support" and more "shovelware," to me; I suspect a lot of Metro demo applications with things like stock tickers, etc. Interesting, maybe, but not what you buy a system for. (And nothing that's going to get Microsoft any revenue, either.) And of those 688 commercial apps, how many are productivity mainstays like Photoshop or other essential software? Are you going to buy a Windows 8 system and then find 4,500 free apps and 700 Angry Birds clones?

Also the only people stupid enough to buy an RT tablet and think it is a full PC capable of running legacy code should have bought iPad's in the first place. Though for 70% of internet users a facebook app, angry birds, fruitninja and bubble pop is all they care about anyway. Therefore Win8 already has "more than enough apps"

Contrariwise, why would anybody who needs what Windows RT offers not already have an iPad or Android tablet?

Though be honest, if Win8 is going on every single desktop sold there will be more Win8 apps then any other ecosystem in less than a year.

That's assuming that it is going on every single desktop sold - I don't know why it would be, when it's plainly not intended for desktop use at all. As far as I know Microsoft hasn't announced any plans to stop selling Windows 7 yet; even from the Wikipedia article, mainstream support is scheduled to end sometime in early 2015, and extended support in 2020 - and we all know how thoroughly the end-of-support has killed XP.

[commodorejohn]

No desktop GUI in Windows RT?

O'RLY?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=GOyOqzLKRKg#t=73s



Though it remains to be seen if anything other apps can be used in desktop mode.

As I said earlier, only the packaged MS programs will be allowed to use it. (Unless, presumably, you jailbreak it.) Yes, it's still there, but they've nerfed it for anybody but themselves (because I guess it's all very well to stick third-party developers with the burden of converting their desktop software to Metro, but it'd just be too much work for poor lil' Microsoft to lead the way with their software.)

[partycentralpartygirl]

I'm down with free-as-in-dollars software, but if 87% of what's in the Windows Store is free, then only 13% (688) are complex and/or good enough that the developers thought they could reasonably charge money for them....

.... productivity mainstays like Photoshop or other essential software? Are you going to buy a Windows 8 system and then find 4,500 free apps and 700 Angry Birds clones?

By this argument all Android software is garbage since it is also free. Only Apple has been able to get users to pay for Apps thus far. Also you are implying people are using their tablets for "serious work" They are $700 facebook machines. Good for taking notes and little else at this point. Would you run photoshop CS5 on an iPad? No you would use the FREE APP to make **** instagram looking pictures.

Contrariwise, why would anybody who needs what Windows RT offers not already have an iPad or Android tablet?

Microsoft Office, installed on every single Win8 tablet, plus easy integration into corporate environments and virtualization support without having to pay licensingfees. iPad is an expensive toy to watch iTunes movies and play angry birds + facebook. Most Android tablets at least have removable storage unlike the iPad. So I take them more seriously than an iPad.

In the end MS tablets will have more useful software on them then for reasons already stated.

....when it's plainly not suitable for desktop use at all.

This comment illustrates that you have not tried Win8. The "metro" start menu is basically the same as the start menu except it fills the entire screen. It is perfectly useable as a desktop OS. People will be butthurt about it for a year or two and then they will be used to it. People were pissed when they went from 3.1 to 95 if you recall. HURR DURR I HAVE TO PRESS START TO SHUT MY COMPUTER OFF!!!!!!

All things considered I will continue using my Android tablets because I do not use them for serious business work. Though I do lust after the surface. If anything I would buy a Surface Pro, but I'm kinda frugal so I probably won't. I will not upgrade my PC's to Win8 until I buy a PC as they work perfectly fine with the OS's they came with. I have some older machines with XP and a couple of laptops with Vista (that work fine as they have 1 gig of ram) and a Windows 7 desktop.

[whabang]

Metro isn't that bad - it's perfectly usable with a touch interface, and isn't that bad when using a mouse.

The store isn't a bad thing either, nor is software signing.

Not allowing people to install apps at their own peril, if that's what they want, is bad.

And yes, tablets are media consumption devices. Computers will still be used, although consumers will probably move a large part of their surfing, video watching, Farmvilling and Facebooking to more portable formats. After all, that's why netbooks were all the rage a few years back.

[commodorejohn]

By this argument all Android software is garbage since it is also free. Only Apple has been able to get users to pay for Apps thus far.

I'll have to submit on this to someone who actually has an Android device, but I've witnessed my (staunchly Android) coworkers agonizing over which game to buy, so I'm going to have to say that that isn't the case.

Also you are implying people are using their tablets for "serious work" They are $700 facebook machines. Good for taking notes and little else at this point. Would you run photoshop CS5 on an iPad? No you would use the FREE APP to make **** instagram looking pictures.

The problem is that I'm not the one implying that - Microsoft is. They want everybody to move to Metro, whether on the desktop or on a tablet, and they want everybody to get their "apps" from the Windows Store so that they get a cut of it. They're intentionally trying to blur the boundaries between tablet and PC because they think it'll make them more money - any confusion that results is their own damn fault.

And that still doesn't answer the question: does the Windows Store have its bases covered? If it goes to market with only piffly little tablet "apps," then good luck making any headway in the PC market, especially since it'll be competing against Windows 7 there.

This would have made so much more sense if it had just been "Windows for Tablets." Instead they're trying to have it both ways, and they're going to wind up shooting themselves in the foot.

Microsoft Office, installed on every single Win8 tablet, plus easy integration into corporate environments and virtualization support without having to pay licensingfees.

God Almighty, you think people are going to make productive use of Office on tablets? Look at that video - it's just a straight-up port of desktop Office! The guy has to stab at a tiny little menu option four times just to get it to recognize! "Easy integration into corporate environments" compared to other tablets, maybe, but it's still simpler for work purposes just to have a damn workstation or laptop. And weren't you just arguing that nobody uses a tablet for productivity to begin with?

iPad is an expensive toy to watch iTunes movies and play angry birds + facebook. Most Android tablets at least have removable storage unlike the iPad. So I take them more seriously than an iPad.

No argument there. But if these much-vaunted "average users" who spend 90% of their time being Facebook mall-rats and watching cats on YouTube want what the iPad and Android already have, why would they have held out this long for Windows 8?

In the end MS tablets will have more useful software on them then for reasons already stated.

More useful software on them than what? Than other tablets? Maybe. But you yourself have been arguing that nobody uses a tablet for work anyway. More useful software than a PC? Not a friggin' chance. Even PCs running 64-bit Windows versions with no 16-bit support have the last seventeen years' backlog of Win32 software to choose from.

This comment illustrates that you have not tried Win8. The "metro" start menu is basically the same as the start menu except it fills the entire screen. It is perfectly useable as a desktop OS.

Well, if you'll look, I did revise that - it's not intended as a desktop OS. Yes, you can use it as one, but it doesn't play to the strengths and capabilities of a PC at all. The Start screen is basically the same as the Start menu, yes - except that it wastes ridiculous amounts of screen space so that even for a Start folder with a moderate number of items you have to scroll through screens and screens' worth of oversized tiles. That's a thing that makes some amount of sense on a tablet - it's absolutely bogus on a PC. Metro is clearly designed for tablets and made to work with PCs as an afterthought.

People will be butthurt about it for a year or two and then they will be used to it.

Didn't happen with Vista - and that was a precedent-setter. People now know that they can make Microsoft listen to reason (somewhat) if they simply hold off on upgrading as long as possible.

Though I do lust after the surface. If anything I would buy a Surface Pro, but I'm kinda frugal so I probably won't. I will not upgrade my PC's to Win8 until I buy a PC as they work perfectly fine with the OS's they came with.

So even you, outspoken Windows 8 advocate, aren't actually that hot for it. Yes, Microsoft's fortunes are certainly looking good.

[XDelusion]

Cool! I'm going to sell my Amigas so I don't miss out on this amazing opportunity!

[psxphill]

They want everybody to move to Metro, whether on the desktop or on a tablet,

No they don't. You missed out Windows Server 2012, which is the server version of Windows 8, and they aren't pushing you to move to windows store apps on that either (it's not called Metro anymore).
 
You seem very upset about Windows 8.
 

Not allowing people to install apps at their own peril, if that's what they want, is bad.

Forcing apps to be signed is the only way to save people from themselves. It worked out for Apple.

[commodorejohn]

No they don't. You missed out Windows Server 2012, which is the server version of Windows 8, and they aren't pushing you to move to windows store apps on that either (it's not called Metro anymore).

Okay, so the server version is exempt. Big frickin' deal. Are you going to be able to get the server version for home use? If so, is it going to be the same price as the home version? Because if it's not, then it's pretty clear where Microsoft wants users to go.
 
Also, they're not calling it Metro anymore, because of the tremendous amount of negative reaction to Metro, but it's clear that they haven't actually changed anything significant about it.

Forcing apps to be signed is the only way to save people from themselves. It worked out for Apple.

And how many other terrible things have been justified by saying it's "necessary" because people just don't know what's best for themselves? Vendor-controlled software distribution is a hideous idea and I don't give a damn if someone thinks it might help security. Security at what price? The freedom to run whatever software you God-damn please? No thanks.

It worked for Apple because Apple has spent decades creating a user culture that wants to be coddled and have their hand held and never once have to think about the fact that their computer doesn't run on magic and that they might sometimes have to understand it a little bit in order to keep it running well. (And even Apple has vulnerabilities, though they like to pretend they don't.) Windows users are not, fundamentally, part of the iOS user culture, and they never have been. Before that, they often weren't even Mac users. Windows users are used to having the freedom to do as they please, and when Microsoft arbitrarily decides to take that away, all the rationalizations about "security" in the world aren't going to hide the fact that their freedom is being stolen as part of a naked cash-grab.

You seem very upset about Windows 8.

That's because I am. You seem to think that that's a way to dismiss my arguments, as if the mere fact that I have an emotional reaction to it means that it's therefore not grounded in rational thinking. I'm upset about Windows 8 because it's another step taken towards the death of general-purpose computing and into a future where computers are mere appliances that are only allowed to perform a selected set of functions chosen by the vendor, which will be acting in its best interests with the user's as an afterthought.

I don't want that to happen, and I don't want to have to fall back on Linux to avoid it, either. Windows has been the only really open commercial OS for years now, with Apple slowly sewing up Mac OS X into as much of a closed environment as iOS. I don't want that to go away, but it's clear that Microsoft does.

[odin]

FWIW, I found Server 2012 looking very tempting with all the Hyper-V stuff included for 'free'. VMWare could find themselves in deep ****.

[runequester]

I don't want that to happen, and I don't want to have to fall back on Linux to avoid it, either. Windows has been the only really open commercial OS for years now, with Apple slowly sewing up Mac OS X into as much of a closed environment as iOS. I don't want that to go away, but it's clear that Microsoft does.

Someone said Linux? :angel:

Joking aside, isn't this the sort of logical end result though? Apple is making filthy amounts of money, and a certain share of their reputation as "reliable" comes from a relatively walled in garden where they can control the number of moving parts. Microsoft would kill for a setup like that, and if the consumers (and you're always a consumer, never a user) basically don't care, that's what will happen.

(this is ignoring the possibility for sweet sweet app revenue from a "microsoft store of course but Im sure that crossed their minds too)


A lot of the explosion of computers in the last few years came, I think, from people who fundamentally don't like computers. THey like what the computer let's them do (facebook, porn and angry birds, as far as I can tell), and when other options came along (phones, tablets, locked in computer choices) that did those things simpler and easier, they went for them.

[Duce]

The reasons for dropping the Metro moniker were not at all to do with public outcry, it was due to a trademark conflict.

For those interested in MS server offerings, feel free to buy WHS 2011 for $50 OEM.  Works a treat and no tile/metro stuff in sight.

That being said, MS's advertising and lack of clarity between RT and Windows 8 is staggering and it will bite them.  I had a friend of the family pre-order a Surface RT tablet, they travel a lot and the guys wife just loves this Windows shareware game she's been playing for years.  A weird, goofy little breakout type game that likely only 200 people on earth still play, a game that will never get ported to RT.  He figured "Windows is Windows" and bought the thing.

Said game is a Windows x86 game, not Windows RT.  He's essentially bought a $600 paperweight, the little game she planned to play on the machine will not work in the least on RT.  To say he's pissed off is an understatement.

MS's advertising on this is sketchy and extremely misleading to the common man.  I know the diff between RT and Windows 8, and know they don't mix.  But most people just see "Windows" and make an assumption of "hey, it's windows, this will work".  It won't, traditional x86 Windows programs will not work on RT in the least in their native form, even if you could sideload them.

[tone007]

Said game is a Windows x86 game, not Windows RT.  He's essentially bought a $600 paperweight, the little game she planned to play on the machine will not work in the least on RT.  To say he's pissed off is an understatement.

Someone bought a $600 device solely to play one shareware game?  No wonder Apple sells so many iPads.

[Duce]

As I said, they travel quite a bit.  They figured it'd be a lot easier than lugging their 6 pound older WinXP laptop around, and figured the Surface RT machine would kill two birds with one lighter and more compact stone and allow her to play her little game, check her facebook, email, and etc. when they were on their vacations down south.

So not purchased solely for playing a shareware game on, but definitely a big factor that's now out the window entirely.

[persia]

The average user doesn't want or need general purpose computing, they want to post to facebook, skype (a Microsoft company), watch videos, see their photos, they don't give a darn if the thing is locked down, in fact they are happier because they never really understood virus protection anyway.

[commodorejohn]

Joking aside, isn't this the sort of logical end result though? Apple is making filthy amounts of money, and a certain share of their reputation as "reliable" comes from a relatively walled in garden where they can control the number of moving parts. Microsoft would kill for a setup like that, and if the consumers (and you're always a consumer, never a user) basically don't care, that's what will happen.

Yes, it probably does seem logical through the lens of "MAXIMIZE PROFITS, MINIMIZE COSTS" isolated boardroom thinking. But it falls apart when you take even a cursory look at the types of people who use Windows, how they use it, and what they want out of it. There probably are people who don't care about using software that's not directly approved by the OS developer, but don't the tablet advocates like to ballyhoo the fact that all of them are supposedly moving to tablets? And there's a lot of people who do care about that.

Let the people who want a featureless Facebook slab go to tablets, fine. I'll look with mild distaste on them, but what the hell, it's no skin off my nose. For those of us who actually do use Windows for its vast selection of third-party software from any and all sources, though (and there are many more than Microsoft seems to think,) this is a catastrophe, and that's going to be reflected in the reaction of Windows power-users to this.

The average user doesn't want or need general  purpose computing, they want to post to facebook, skype (a Microsoft  company), watch videos, see their photos, they don't give a darn if the  thing is locked down, in fact they are happier because they never really  understood virus protection anyway.

You say that like it's an excuse for taking the capability away.

[MiAmigo]

Not even Windows 3.1 was this inexpensive!

http://windowsteamblog.com/windows/b/bloggingwindows/archive/2012/07/02/upgrade-to-windows-8-pro-for-39-99.aspx

I wonder how it'll sell.  I think the low price will make it move.

Thanks for the tip! I'm on it!