Windows 10: Windows 8, 8.1 & 10 versus Windows 7

This line of argument has been made many times before, and it always is based on a misunderstanding of what Windows 8+ is.

Windows 8, 8.1, and 10 are not a "mobilization" of Windows. It's not a Mobile or Touch or Phone OS. It's just an OS that can be used on multiple types of devices, be they desktops, phones, laptops or tablets.

There is no longer such a thing as a "mobile os" or a "desktop os". It's just one thing. One OS. It means that you can run the EXACT SAME applications on any device. Not a mobile phone version of the app. Not a Tablet version. The same version.

The same OS for XBOX, Phones, Tablets and PC's. Let that sink in. You no longer need to buy separate apps for different kinds of devices. You don't have to learn different UI's for different devices. You can play that game you love on your xbox or PC. You can use that contact management tool in your phone, tablet and desktop.

Then consider that devices are crossing boundaries... Look at the Surface, it's both a Tablet and a PC. Look at 2-in-1 laptops. Look at designs where you can take your phone, and plug it into your desktop workstation and use it as a desktop PC, then take your phone with you and plug it into a tablet dock and use it as a tablet. One device with different input devices.

The fact is, the desktop PC market is shrinking. There are far more Mobile devices (laptops, tablets, phones) than desktops. The desktop market shrinks each year. That doesn't mean desktops will disappear completely, at least not for a while... but people prefer mobility. Why should Microsoft make a separate OS for a market that is shrinking each year?

In reality, you need to be thankful for Windows 8, 8.1 and Windows 10. You should count your lucky stars Microsoft is still committed to Desktop OS's. The alternative, based on the way the market is going, would be to totally ignore Desktop OS's and focus on mobile. The fact that Microsoft is dragging Desktops into a unified ecosystem is a good thing, because the alternative would be that the desktop OS would stagnate and nothing new would happen.

You have to get this. It's important. You have to understand it at a core level. Win32 (traditional desktop applications) are going away. There will always be support for them, for a long time to come, but new apps are not being developed in the desktop space. Everyone is writing mobile apps. That is where the market is going. If you want to use those new apps, you will have to have an OS that runs them. Maybe you don't want them today... but I guarantee that within a few years, when nothing new has come out for desktops in a long time, you'll want to start using some of those new apps .

Universal apps are more than just mobile. It's cross platform. You can buy devices with any kind of processor, and they work without change. You can buy devices with any kind of form factor, and they work. You're not stuck with x86/64 in a desktop form factor. If you really don't see this change happening, you're not looking hard enough (or at all).

Look at Chromebooks... how popular they are... and they definitely are.

You're going to have to change sooner or later (unless you don't see yourself living longer than 5 years). Why not do it now, rather than waiting until the world has passed you by?

The reason control panel is going away is that control panel only works with x86/64 processors (well, technically, it can work in any of them, but it requires recompiling all the applications for that processor, something third party control panel applet developers don't and won't do.)

Microsoft isn't "dumbing down" the interface. It's just not as mature as the Win32 interface. Over time, you will see it mature to offer the same functionality as the older interface.

In other words, you're drawing the wrong conclusions. When you see a simpler interface for a Universal interface, you see it as being dumbed down. What you should be seeing is "Version .1" with more versions coming to expand the functionality.

Microsoft has a lot of work to do to fully convert the entire OS to Universal, and their first versions are not as feature complete as we all would like. That will come in time.

 

Thanks. Quite a nice essay.

I lived in the Boston area in the early 80's. Minicomputer companies (DEC, Wang, Data General, Prime, etc.) were major employers in the region at the time. The market shifted to PCs, and all of those companies are now gone.

When I saw Windows 8, I thought that it was an attempt by Microsoft to allow a smooth transition to non-PC devices. I disliked the lack of integration with the traditional Windows desktop. Even minor details like not being able to see the Windows taskbar while in a "Metro" app (full screen only) continued to annoy me.

I'm not optimistic that the Windows ecosystem will ever develop to the point where a Universal app could be run efficiently on a phone with a 6" screen and my desktop with a 28" UHD monitor, but I won't declare it to be impossible.

 

I love Windows 7, however it does have it drawbacks in today's technical age.

Windows 8/8.1 are an upgrade do to the sure fact that they can support HD drives larger than 2TB. Windows 7 can do it, but requires additional software, and can be a bit of a hassle. Of course 7 does not have the app store, which may or may not be a good thing depending on your usage.

Windows 8/8.1 major failure in my opinion was the lack of the start menu, had it been included I doubt, we would even be looking at Windows 10. But with a 3rd party app that adds the start menu, Windows 8/8.1 is really a viable product, though it still has many driver issues.

So the question for me really is, is Windows 10 better than Windows 8?

I feel NO, hands down, it has removed so much of Windows that they should have called it something else. Even designing a desktop theme is pathetic. Cortana is not new to Windows it has been there since Windows 7, they just renamed it and added the search function. Removing WMC and dvd support was silly, though it may have been used by a small portion of the Windows consortium, they are avid supporters of Windows products. WMC is the only software for LiveTV that supports premium channel viewing, and was part of the original designers of the cable card features, so to drop that only shows disregard of this client base. Also, the removal of gadgets (though I am not a user), many people are, here again it is much a repeat of Microsoft over the past 10-12 years of designing products and dropping them.

Not allowing people to chose what updates they want or need I feel is another major drawback.

Visually, I am not a fan of the Windows 10 interface, I personally like the Windows 8 metro design, but again that is only my opinion. The edge browser at this point is debatable in my opinion. It was supposed to have extensions support, though I haven't seen any of this. Honestly, it is just a browser and so I don't consider it as a reason to switch to Windows 10.

A few of my legacy software simply won't function, but I am an audio/video type of guy and I had to install an old DirectX 9 software to make a number of my games run. So that, isn't a help.

The one thing the free give away does, is removes a lot of the boot-legged copies. Though, I highly doubt anyone within this forum is one of those. And I suppose it helps Microsoft in trying to get back some of it's waning clientele, who ran from Windows 8.

The cross platform talk, unless you are a Windows phone user (those numbers have been dropping) or Windows tablet fan, I can see where that would be useful. But, I don't see Microsoft being a real contender in the mobile arena, it simply lacks in to many areas.

So, I am left with the fact, that it really has no true advantage, perhaps less reasons, to chose it over previous versions. But, some like it and that is fine, as many in this forum have said, if you don't like it, just keep using what you have.

*Wink

 

To accept and embrace Windows 10 is kind of like a factory that just installed a fancy, new computerized machine.
None of the employees want to get put on the new machine because they don't know how to run it and it doesn't seem to work as well as the older machines.
Yet, the boss says: "We've got to increase production and, soon all of these old machines will get replaced so, get on it!"

 

I think before answering such questions, one needs to understand what the computer (and hence the OS) will be used for.

Most people use computers and similar devices (tablets, etc) for entertainment and communication, as in media consumption, email and social networking, and light gaming. For these people, the difference between devices like iPad, Surface, Chromebook, etc, are just visual aesthetics and mobility requirements. There is no other difference when all you want to do is to check out your Facebook.

A smaller number of people use computers for work. And here all depends on the kind of work you are doing. An insurance agent on the go will surely prefer a tablet, as long as his company ports their software to it. On the other hand, a trader needs a machine that supports multiple (as in more than 6) monitors, and typically, tablets and laptops cannot. Someone who runs intense simulations (e.g. weather forecasts, power plant designs, etc.) most likely needs something way more powerful than a PC. I doubt such people will find anything in the App Store useful.

On my main working machine I use Windows 7. It works great and I don't see any reason to change it. I have all the software that I need, so I don't need the App Store. It's a working machine, so I need neither 5 TB hard drives, nor multimedia libraries. I surely don't care about boot time, I never understood why is that important for anyone - how often do you actually restart your machine? I tried Windows 8 and then Windows 10 on my test machine and I haven't found any reason to change. Moreover, I find the new design visually lacking, simpler put, it's plain ugly.

Now, someone said that Windows 7 is outdated. What does that mean exactly? Well, my new Acer laptop runs it, but Acer does not provide any support for it, they "recommend" Windows 8. OK, but this laptop also does not have a VGA port, so if I need to connect the thing to a projector, I have to use an HDMI-VGA adapter. While looking for such an adapter I read several "opinions" that VGA is ancient tech and nobody uses it anymore. Well, unless you count every University and other academic institutions as "nobody", then you might be getting somewhere, but every projector in every University conference room or lecture hall is equipped with the VGA cord and nothing else. May be it's outdated tech, but in my world, nobody uses anything else.

So, to wrap it up, I don't believe there is any "better" when comparing modern OSs. I think it comes down to personal usage patterns, and therefore any opinion is necessarily subjective.

 

Thanks for all of the interesting and informative replies. I apologise in advance for not addressing all replies.

Mystere, I appreciate your reply. I can understand why you interpreted my postings as a misunderstanding of Windows 8+. Perhaps I worded my thoughts incoherently. Indeed, as you're aware Microsoft have marketed multiple versions of Windows 10, including Windows 10 Mobile and Windows 10 Pro. As you have correctly stated, the consumer market for desktop PCs is rapidly declining and I am also aware that traditional software applications will be largely superseded by "apps". Nobody can escape the fact that mobile and tablet computing devices will eventually dominate the market share for consumer computing hardware; this much is obvious. My point is that I do not care! *Smile

I believe that a lot of people are falling victim to planned obsolescence as regards operating system and application software. I am a power user and I perceive computer usage in the following manner. At an abstract level, a computer is a programmable hardware device that performs arithmetic operations. At a higher level, a computer is a hardware device that performs useful and/or entertaining tasks facilitated by software, such as operating system software and application software. If I have an operating system, such as Windows 7 (on which a multitude of useful software programs are installed), which entirely satisfies my needs, then upgrading to a new operating system is utterly superfluous. Furthermore, there will always be a small niche market for desktop PCs and, in addition, there will always be people developing traditional application software (mostly open source) for older versions of Windows and, indeed, Linux distributions.

 

A lot of people seem to have clamped on to this idea that there is a fundamental difference in use cases. When you hear words like "Content Creator" vs "Content Consumer", you know its one of those arguments.

The fact is, the only thing that is different between these use cases in regards to Universal apps is that the Universal app API is less mature and doesn't yet have all the API's necessary for certain Content Creator style apps like Photoshop or Premier. This will change as the API matures. It is ONLY an issue with API availability, not anything inherent in Universal apps.

As an example, when Windows 8 was released, there were many missing API's for network support, media support, etc... There were a lot of API improvements in Windows 8.1 in this regard, and many new style of applications were enabled. In Windows 10 this has increased again, with new API's that allow (for example) Media to play even in minimized apps.

This list is a bit old, but as of last October, this was the list of new API's in Windows 10 (Yes, this will be gobbledygook to most people)

New Windows 10 APIs

 

Unifex, I agree absolutely with everything you have written. Nice post!

 

It really doesn't matter what anyones opinion is. Microsoft is on this path and will not be changing it.

You have two options, stick with Windows 7 until it no longer works for you, or get on the new platform. Windows 7 will only be supported for another 5 years.. which is a long time for sure, but 5 years comes pretty quickly. Remember, Windows 7 was released 6 years ago. You can keep using it after it's no longer supported, but you'll be at increased risk from malware and other attacks.

What's more, IE will become less and less supported as well, so you will find more and more sites that want you to be on Edge (you will of course be able to use Chrome or FF, but even Chrome drops support.. for instance, Chrome is dropping XP support this year).

So you can either cling to the melting iceberg of Windows 7 for dear life, or just bite the bullet now.

 

Surely, the world goes forward and eventually one has to get up to date. On the other hand, from a users perspective, change for the sake of change makes no sense. For example, I still keep an old XP laptop and moreover use it more or less regularly. Not for work, but for a few very specific tasks. I have no other machine for those tasks. It does its job and whether or not Google and Microsoft support XP makes no difference to me whatsoever.

Now, at work we get standard Linux boxes, but I prefer to use Windows, so I use my new laptop. Is there any particular reason why? Actually no, both systems will do what I have to do equally well (I really don't care is one is few nanoseconds faster than another). But, I find Windows more familiar and while I'm sure I can tune the Linux box to give me the same experience, I don't want to waste my time on that.

Now this familiarity is important to me. At work, I use computers as tools. I really don't care which OS is there as long as it runs the software that I need. But given that most OSs do the job, I choose the one which is more familiar, so that I don't have to waste time on getting used to something else. A brand new OS might actually have a few quirks that need to be worked out, so jumping to Windows 10 on July 29th might be OK on a test machine, but it's plain silly at work or on my main system at home.

Why didn't I use Windows 8? Since there was too much change where there is no need for change. Mobility, touch, voice, it's all nice and dandy, but it won't help me write 50-page documents or diagonalize large matrices. Sure, maybe 100 years form now, one will be able to simply tell a computer "hey, what's the 10th eigenvalue of that matrix I have on the board?", but for now that's just on Star Trek. The desktop experience does not really need that much change. Do I need all those live tiles? No, I don't. Do I want to have Aero? Yes, I do, I like how it looks and I like to have some of the windows transparent. Was there any task that was important to me that could be done better (or faster, etc.) on Windows 8 as compared to 7? I don't think I can name even one. That's it, to me that means that there was no need to switch to Windows 8. It's the same with Windows 10. If 5 years from now Windows 7 will no longer be adequate to my tasks - I will switch in an instant (and I will know what to do, that's why I am testing 10, *Wink). But to change the OS today, just because at some point down the road it will be necessary - I don't see any logic in that.

 

Security improvements alone are a good reason to upgrade an OS. And keep in mind.. no one is forcing anyone to upgrade to Win10.

 

I feel exactly the same as you.

 

Again.. who is forcing you to do anything?? You don't have to upgrade your current OS.

 

WoW ,great post ,one day everyone will look at that post and say ,you was ,BANG ON *Thumbs

 

The one place where Microsoft looks harder than any users of their software, is the future. They can lose money in the market to competitors in the short term, but not too far into the future.

There are new markets opening up and these force Microsoft to change their direction. If Microsoft still just made PC software, it would miss out on the opportunities for mobile computing and especially the mobile phone market. If it didn't branch out into the Cloud, there would be a smaller marketplace for independent software writers.

So far it has found the phone market very difficult to leverage, and every iPhone or Android mobile that gets replaced by another model from the same stable cuts Microsoft's profitability down.

Big firms can go bust, taking their flagship products down with them, ending up as just a marker in the history of failed business strategies.

Microsoft know what they are doing, and just because it upsets some of their long suffering users, they will not change their plan to be amongst the leaders in their field for as long as they can, whatever the direction that field leads in.

Now the question is, would you see your computing needs in the future being handled by old, well worn and comfortable software, or modern, fashionable, but a little tight and perhaps made of lighter material than you are used to? If the former, you are not paying a penny to Microsoft beyond your Initial investment - yet you still expect Microsoft to listen to you and do things the way they have been done in the past, because it suits you.

Or would you see Microsoft going down the drain because they did not change as fast as their rivals did? Then of course, there would be no new Windows to complain about, you would either be stuck, making do with what you have already, rapidly becoming more obsolete, or getting totally new kit to run unfamiliar systems, and retraining your whole business?

We owe a debt of gratitude to Microsoft because it has changed the world, making personal computing popular, usable and increasingly affordable and capable. Just because a few features you liked in the past have not made it into the newest build, it does not stop you from continuing to use your old system until you find that someone has written an app to fill the gap, or maybe you might just do it yourself and make your fortune.

"Write an app to fill the gap!"