Ed Bott
Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols
Opening Statements
Squarely in the right direction
Ed Bott: There are a billion PC owners in the world. If you think they're going to toss their systems in the trash and replace them with tablets overnight, you're dreaming.
If, on the other hand, you think that people worldwide will be using an increasingly diverse variety of computing devices over the next 5-10 years, you've got a much firmer grasp of reality.
That's the vision of Windows 8, which replaces the traditional PC core and user interface with a lighter, faster alternative that should work comfortably on small, medium, and large devices, with or without touch capabilities.
The biggest improvement in Windows 8 is that it's simpler overall. That makes it better for developers, businesses, and consumers alike.
Windows Vista was the wrong direction: bigger, slower, overly complex. Windows 7 was a much-needed course correction. Windows 8 is aimed squarely in the right direction.
Direction is more of a death spiral
Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols: Microsoft sees Windows 8's Metro interface and applications as the future. When I look at Metro, I see gaudy colors, boxy designs, apps that can either run as a small tile or as full screen with no way to resize or move windows. Where have we seen this before? Windows 1.0!
If Metro was just a tablet interface, I might pass it -- except that Android and iOS already have better, more usable interfaces. Besides, bread-and-butter Windows users already know the Windows interface. Sure, you can use a more Windows' like interface, but Microsoft really seems to want everyone to move to Metro.
Windows developers can't love this either. After years learning .NET, WCF, WPF, etc., now you have to learn WinRT and Jupiter/XAML? And since you'll need to rewrite your app for the more traditional Windows-style desktop, your workload has doubled.
Microsoft is headed toward another Vista-sized fiasco.
The Rebuttal
Closing Statements
Place your bets!
Ed Bott
Is Microsoft going in the right direction with Windows 8? Yes.
Will they succeed? Place your bets!
Look, we all know the future of computing involves devices of all sizes and capabilities: smartphones, tablets, laptops, gaming rigs, monster graphics workstations, developer consoles.
To work on those smaller devices you need a simple app framework and a simple user interface.
Microsoft has built that interface in such a way that it scales to larger platforms. Look at the Windows 8 Start screen and Metro-style apps, and then look at Mango on a Windows Phone. Same DNA, same developer story.
The real test will be how many companies follow Microsoft's new direction. If developers fill the Windows 8 Store with great new apps and games, Windows 8 will be a success. Let's meet here same time next year and check the selection in the Windows app store. That will tell the story.
The end of Windows
Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols
There will be more people running Windows in 2015, years after Windows 8 shows up, than all other operating systems combined. But, they'll be running Windows 7. 8? Not so much.
Windows won't be replaced on the desktop, but I don't see any compelling reason for end-users, businesses, developers, or OEMs to move to Windows 8.
I spoke to Linus Torvalds yesterday and he said, “Breaking the user experience in order to 'fix' something is totally broken. If you break the user experience, you may feel that you have 'fixed' something , but you fixed it by breaking the user.”
Microsoft wants to “fix” Windows to be the universal interface for PCs, smartphones, and tablets. But, that will break users' Windows experience. That, in turn, will alienate their core audience, and the tablet and smartphone audience will already be committed to Android or iOS.
Windows 8 looks to a dead-end.
My verdict on Windows 8: Affirmative
Jason Hiner
Let's be honest, this was a home game for Ed, and Steven was a big underdog.
Nevertheless, both Steven and Ed put a lot of points on the board and I think they represented the views that we hear from a lot of commentators and technology professionals in the trenches.
In the end, I have to give the nod to Ed.
The Windows franchise is under serious pressure from mobile devices and Microsoft has to do something dramatic with Windows in order to stay relevant in the long term. At this point, we have to give Microsoft credit for being bold -- and watch with interest to see how it plays out.
In partnership with Ricoh Doc's final thoughts
DocIt’s always a little sad to see Microsoft’s new offerings, as the folks in Redmond are usually playing catch up to Apple. In Windows 8 that trend continues, with a heavy emphasis on a new look and new compatibility with tablet devices. Trouble is, Microsoft doesn’t have the iPad or the legions of Apple developers on its side, and it’s a little late to the tablet party – after all, it’s all about the apps. But for those tablet buyers who will insist on a Windows operating system, I suppose Windows 8 is a step in the right direction. Still, the touch-screen-optimized Metro tile-based interface already looks dated, reminiscent of a 1980s brochure for some sort of health care organization. Also, it’s debatable if a one-size-fits-all strategy is appropriate for today’s variety of computing devices.
And as far as traditional Windows desktop and laptop users go, is there really much interest in yet another new look for Windows? It’s hard for me to get excited about this latest attempt by Microsoft to be more Apple-like, even if the effort is nimbler and more memory efficient. And while Microsoft promises better inter-operability between apps in Metro, that also sounds like a potential sinkhole for conflicts. Yes, there is support for ARM processors, but legacy apps won’t run on them without being re-written. Also in the me-too category is enhanced support for multiple monitors and, at least in the Metro interface, a lack of support for Adobe Flash. Big whoop. Windows 8 could certainly breathe some life into the rather stagnant Microsoft franchise, but revolutionary? It hardly seems so from what we’ve seen thus far (which admittedly has been limited).
Doc remembers back in 2000 when Microsoft showed a prototype tablet PC from Compaq running an optimized version of Windows, and was extolling the virtues of e-books. Back then the company was ahead of its time. Now it seems like just another also-ran.
More from "The Great Debate"
Regarding Linus & SJVN's comments about "breaking" the UI:
a) How is it that Apple can break OSX' UI to create iOS and the world sees it as "magical"?
b) The UI isn't broken - existing apps work just as they always did, but you get a new start menu & new environment for new apps to run in that's safe, reliable and touch friendly.
Windows 8 is both business as usual and the biggest single shift in OS UI design since the move from DOS to Windows.
Or, to put it another way, Windows 8 is a mullet - it's all business up front, but there's a party going on around the back
There really isn't any real business reason to upgrade from 7 on the desktop. Yes Microsoft does need to come up with something for the tablet market and this is not it, 2012 will be really late to the table and seriously over priced due to the hardware requirements of Windows except for the starter version and that is a failure in its own right.
Microsoft should have worked on merging them (a very good idea, but, not in one windows version (ie from 7 to 8). The roll out of this Windows 7 sp? gui update does not deserve a new version designator and most people are looking for ROI and not just to upgrade a gui.....Microsoft has a real management problem with either too much change at one time or too little. Vista was too much and as a result it failed for all the documented reasons dispite being an excellent OS once SP1 rolled out....then 7 rolled out and fixed a lot of the issues with Vista and people bought it wholesale....now Microsoft thinks they can change the gui for the tablet market and call it another major improvement......NOT, not even deserving of a SP designation unless there are substantial improvements over Windows 7 which I seriously doubt. In Android this is called changing your "launcher" and costs $3 or less...so the burning question is "this justifies a cost of more than $100 how?"
Where is the vision that Bill Gates gave us...missing in action...this is nothing but more of the same failed business model we have been subjected to for some years now. What we need is a change in management and some new vision not the same old failed also ran idea's.
Judging by the Visual Studio 11, this is mostly a one-way problem. Windows on Arm won't run traditional x86 apps, but Metro apps written in .NET (e.g. C#, F#, VB) or JavaScript are (by default) architecture-independent. This isn't surprising since .NET is only Jitted to machine code at install time or run time, and JavaScript is only Jitted at runtime. That's why .NET and JavaScript are already architecture independent today.
For Metro apps written in C++, it looks like they'll be architecture-dependent, just like traditional Win32 apps. For well written code, compiling for multiple architectures is easy, but if I were a developer targeting both Arm and x86, I'd probably use .NET and/or JavaScript rather than C/C++.
"Remember, all Windows users currently have been either taught the initial steps by somebody or read a user guide/manual"
I know plenty of people who have gotten pretty darn good with a computer and never taken a class or had to be taught much of anything, they just learned themselves. Its obviously far far more common then you seem to realize. And what user guide is this your talking about? Sure many have gone out and bought third party user guides but I also know they don't usually help much. And all I can say about 2 or 3 year olds using an iPad...if someone didn't show them at least the initial steps, the vast majority of two year olds I have seen would be using it as a Frisbee if someone didn't at least show them what it does and how it does it.
I own an iPhone and I can tell you, I really like it and when I do an upgrade I will likely upgrade to whatever version the iPhone will be at at that point, but the thing that made my iPhone intuitive was my experience with Windows. Windows is the epitome of user friendliness and thats the reason why so many have learned to use a PC on their own, without lessons or manuals.
I think people forget what PC stands for.. PERSONAL Computer .. it doesn't matter if its my office PC, my home PC, my Laptop PC ... they are all lumped into a PERSONAL Computer experience. I work "Windowed" ... with *NO* SINGLE Application occupying my full screen, and in fact I have TWO screens where better than 98% of the time applications run in resizable windows because I'm doing multiple things at one time.. I have *MY* most commonly used icons all around the screen's edges, then another row inward from that of common but less used.. and I even know if "My Network Places" is the icon I click *one* time on, I can use the right arrow on the keyboard, and press enter, and "My Documents" will be opened. its **MY** PERSONAL Computer experience.
*I* need that interface to allow me to stack icons for things *I* use any where, and without restriction for how I access them. I don't solely use my keyboard, and I don't solely use my mouse.. for something like TextPad I have a "CTRL + ALT + SHFT + T" keyboard shortcut, for something like managing the computer *I* Right click the "My Computer" icon and hit manage ... for working with Network properties *I* Right Click "My Network Places" (I'm in XP, forget doing that in vista and 7 as easily, you have to hack/crack microsofts crap just to get that ability with some things) ... ALL of these things I do on a daily basis, *I* make "personal" on what ever PC I'm on because its how *I* work ...
While I won't begrudge you your Metro ... or "Bob" interface, nor would I even block you having a customizable BOB interface ... having it as the sole desktop is wrong, having some cookie cuter "you do it their way or nothing" interface is wrong, always has been, and microsofts' concept for this Metro or Bob is *NOT* for a real computer user ... and only starting them with it, is a BAD IDEA!
Just like hiding the URL bar, hiding Status bar, or making things *LESS* visually obvious... all you're doing is making it far easier for the crackers to get innocent people doing bad things; because they didn't have anything but your glorified newest "BOB" interface to look at.. they didn't know some cracker got them to go to some site, which auto downloaded and installed a "Look Alike" Bob/Metro button ... and so every time you launch "Email" you're restarting their crap, making sure you're infected, and getting spied on.. and EVERYTHING ELSE that comes along with hiding visual cues to what an app does ... Metro hides it all.. the latest and greatest cracker exploit will use Metro's presentation for the computer illiterate against those computer innocent.
And why *YOU* people of *ALL* people don't see this, get this, and DEMAND better from microsoft is just beyond me..
Before you come at me with that Stevie Wonder bullsh*t, sure there's a reason to have Assistance for Disabilities ... which is *another* reason I wouldn't begrudge someone the use of a "bob" ... but I wouldn't tout it as the next greatest thing since sliced bread ... and I would certainly *NOT* stick a regular non-impaired person in front of a bob.. I want them seeing things and questioning "what's going on" ... I want them to distrust what they see ... not blindly push button A because it gives me a cheese doodle or some other "treat" for my pablum mind.
I hate the clunky look of it. I hate the puke green and baby poop yellow boxes that take up huge portions of the screen. I want my wallpaper to dominate the screen, not some puke green and poop yellow tiles.
I like being able to resize different windows and I hate it when I need to resize a window and find that the window is fixed.
I do not care if Win 8 is supposed to be innovative if I can???t stand to look at it. It looks like a throwback to a time that should be left dead. Other options are available that are innovative and beautiful.
I will never own an Apple computer but if my next computer comes with windows 8 on it I will format the HDD and put Win 7 on it (even if I need to pay extra for Win7) and if that is not possible . . . I will purchase Apple.
If, on the other hand, you want your device to be useful, then the new Metro shell exposes the information that's useful to you first and foremost. Unless you specialize in wallpaper, I'd argue that your information is FAR more valuable than your wallpaper.
"I will never own an Apple computer"
ok. that's your choice....
if that is not possible . . . I will purchase Apple.
hmmm. interesting.
I do think you have some good points however. I think MS could have found a better interface. It reminds me of the early Zune ads with the sketchy kids that all looked like they had a STD or something. What is it that MS doesn't understand? They thought THAt was cool? that was their way to trump Apple, get teenagers that have unprotected sex and look like scumbags to be the image of the Zune?
MS would make it if they would replace Ballmer. NOW! Get him out NOW!! MS. YOu can't afford him any longer.
For me - this reduces my efficiency, makes it harder to access what I want to access, and looks as if it were designed with a child in mind, not an adult. It is flashy, and will draw in a generation of tweens and teens because of that (which may be the actual marketing target), but I am planning on purchasing a few copies of Win7, then learning Linux as a go-forward path.
This may succeed, but it'll only be a hit if they convince World of Warcraft to create a touch-sensitive screen interface.
If you do some searching, customizing the Metro UI from Green to Black, Red or Blue is easy as pie.
You still have your legacy desktop. The only thing that changed is the start screen.
....but Ed is more right! Windows ain't going away. Win 8 may go the way of Vista in the upgrade path, but Win 9 will (had better) fix it!
I don't think there will be a Windows 9. 7 is lucky in the west, and 8 in China, but 9--not. Seriously, 9 is bad juju in China. 8 is as good as it gets. Agree otherwise.
I think that the traditional PC will be split into two devices: PC like device with keyboard used mainly by content creators. For content consumers, you will have tablets like the iPad.
In the business world, the split will be about 50/50. In the non-business world, the split will be 20% PC and 80% tablets. There are many more content consumers as there are content creators. For this reason, consumer devices will dominate and they will NOT be running Windows.
As for MS Windows 8, I don't quite get it. If you have to re-write every app, what is the advantage? The days when MS dominated the computing landscape are over...
I don't get it. It's like a long ribbon you have to scroll thru to find anything. Reminds me of an ancient scroll. But weren't scrolls replaced by bound books? Seems to me like a very impractical UI...
The Metrol UI is not useless fir desktop computers. I've installed Windows 8 on my main PC (keyboard/mouse, no touch), and it's going great.
The Start screen would be easier to use with touch, but it's something I rarely interact with as I use my PC as a desktop computer. The Metro touches throughout the UI are much better than fiddling with dialog boxes, tabs, and radio buttons (e.g. the simple Metro control panel).
The functionality and power is there if you need it, but the top layer is simple and intuitive and approachable.
The Start menu change has been blown way out of proportion. The new screen has the same functionality, and is easier to use in most scenarios. You can get around 40 tiles on the Start screen without the need to scroll. I can find an app on the Start screen quicker than I can find it on the old Start menu, and with live tiles I can often get the info I need without even opening the app.
I have more than 300 shortcuts in my start menu in Win7, and I don't think 300+ tiles will be a good idea.
Most of my programs are full fledged applications, I don't see what live info I can get off MS Excel or Photoshop tiles.
I've grown to love the Windows Vista/7 start menu search facility and gave up wasting time organizing sub-menu after sub-menu of app icons. Now I just hit [Windows] key, start typing the first few letters of the app I want or the document I want and hit return.
Guess what? The same mechanism works in Win8 too.
The big difference is that I can also reach all my apps without having to hunt and peck tiny icons on a cascading menu that isn't touch-friendly.
Note also - this is very much a developer's release. I would expect that we'll see some tweaking and improvements based upon feedback and telemetry that Microsoft receives from early testers.
With a new OS out, businesses still holding out will now see Windows 7 as the "safe" choice and I think it will help accelerate the migration of business to Windows 7. Remember, business, by and large is normally running a version behind. And MS has to be supporting Windows 7 for at least several years.
So now they have an OS that can compete with the tablets and smart devices and in 5 years or so, after business beingon win 7, the evolution of the computer will be happening inside the corporate walls on a larger scale and the new Windows interface will appeal to business at that point.
In short, I think Windows 8 will drive mass windows 7 adoption in the enterprise and be a solid contender itself on tablets and other smart devices. It will position MS perfectly for the future. Win 8 will have become common enough by they for business adoption.
Maybe by 2107 the younger generation (esp. the current 10-25 year old, age bracket) will have finally tilted the momentum and critical mass towards mobile and touch-centric (dumbed down) computing - across all OS's (..as if it weren't already).
I think a UI architectural model (and supporting ecosystem) that works for a dumb bunch of under-educated, snotty nosed brats, actually (.. ironically) makes great, business sense ... just look at why Apple products are so popular.
I'll be honest and say it is 'no different' for Linux.
There are a LOT of dissenters for example regarding GNOME 3 and Unity.
Let's agree that this is a 'work in progress' and these are very exciting times for software development.
I could not agree more!
(And your post was far more concise than anything that I would have written.)
I agree with DTS.
It's Official... the world will now end.
Yeah, I felt the same way both times I agreed with him.
Well done DTS - constructive, intelligent and to the point.
I am liking this new leaf you have turned over. Constructive commentary without the sales pitch.
Couldn't agree more.
Big fan of the new DTS
+1 couldn't agree more
You can't resize and re-arrange willy-nilly in Windows 8 because it's simpler when the OS manages the layout to our preference instead of us explicitly having to layout the screen constantly.
Back when we only ran two apps per day we had time to lay things out, but we use tons of apps now and we don't want to constantly layout the screen manually to optimize our experience. And if we do, there's always the traditional Windows experience. How did Steven miss THAT?
Reading this dribble I'm left with the same impression I usually am when reading about Windows 8. The author has almost no experience with it.
Join the conversation!
Debate Event Reminders
The Great Debate Newsletter
With the Great Debate newsletter, you get a front-row seat to every argument until the final gavel falls.
Upcoming Debate
-
Can PC makers survive in a post PC world?
May 29, 2012 | 7:00 AM PDT
Add to Calendar
Comments from the floor
Facebook Activity
"Windows 1.0!"
You can't resize and re-arrange willy-nilly in Windows 8 because it's simpler when the OS manages the layout to our preference instead of us explicitly having to layout the screen constantly.
Back when we only ran two apps per day we had time to lay things out, but we use tons of apps now and we don't want to constantly layout the screen manually to optimize our experience. And if we do, there's always the traditional Windows experience. How did Steven miss THAT?
Reading this dribble I'm left with the same impression I usually am when reading about Windows 8. The author has almost no experience with it.
Why must the new always destroy the old?
I use XP at home, my girlfriend's PC has windows 7. I like some of the new features in Windows 7, such as the search box, but find other features such as the cramped up start menu (all programs doesn't expand into the screen) very irritating compared to XP.
I know people say "oh, but you can still have the classic start menu" but a lot of Microsoft's "classic" options are deliberately stunted ones from old versions. If they really cared about giving users whatever they want, they'd give a "show XP start menu" option, instead of the rubbish old one from windows 98. All the cursing of Microsoft since vista, all the add on start menus you can donwload, and they STILL haven't got the message.
In other words, they're offering a deliberate straw man alternative to push users into their desired direction.
There seems to be this attitude that "oh, you don't need to browse any more, you just search, so we can deprecate the start menu". This has several obvious failings, such as "what if I want to browse the computer for programs I don't yet know of", or "what if I just want to casually browse with the mouse, resting my chin on my hand and not using the keyboard?"
At the other end of the spectrum - e.g. in microsoft office - we are losing the file menu and the handy well known shortcuts in many programs (Alt+e to drop the edit menu down, etc). This means that in work mode, when I want to keep my hands on the keyboard for most of the time, I increasingly have to pick up the mouse!
So, whereas before I could use mouse, keyboard, or both, I am increasingly forced to used both. It's the sort of thing that annoys power users and professionals far more than amateur users, who just see a pretty new ribbon.
I fail to see how any of these changes make things more productive to the power user, only the relatively untrained user can benefit, and with the amount of mouse dependency I can't see how they will ever be as fast as a keyboard trained power user.
Now, on to Windows 8. I see no problem with adding a new UI option such as metro, but have to ask: why is sometjhing so untried being touted as the default operating system interface? Why isn't it just an extra new application called "MetroUI.exe"?
In general, why do new features have to come at the expense of old ones? Most of us prefer gradual evolution to constant revolution, because it gives us time to adapt and throw out the bad ideas (e.g. the annoying paperclip in old versions of Office).
Windows XP was one of the few upgrades I unreservedly liked from the start - gentle unfussy and unobstrusive extras which made life easier. 12 years later, loads of people still use it - showing how badly Microsoft has judged public opinion.
One user rightly predicted that the Metro interface will be easier to spoof with a similar pretty pictures interface which is really a virus. Indeed, another irritating thing is that from an IT professional's point of view, it's increasingly difficult to see into the nuts and bolts of the system, more things are hidden under glossy virtual interfaces.
There are two possible reasons for all of these annoying changes
1. Microsoft have some really enthusiastic UI designers who completely lack empathy with those who don't think like them and intend to force their own view onto people.
2. Microsoft are cynically doing this to try and force people into upgrades they don't want and changes they don't like, because the old system was too good and no-one really needs to upgrade.
One IT professional wrote on the web "thanks microsoft, I've been trying to get people into Linux and OpenOffice for years and you've just helped me no end!" Says it all.
Don't Forget, It's Microsoft.
RE: The Great Debate: Is Windows 8 headed in the right direction?
RE: The Great Debate: Is Windows 8 headed in the right direction?
They also want to make sure that their tablets will be successful - but they have chosen for the Metro interface of the Windows Phone 7 that nobody wants to buy.
And finaly :
They have a very popular product called Windows that runs on almost every desktop around the globe - Why do they ruin it, why do they want to kill it with the same UI that nobody wants ?