Still_Small_Voice Posted January 21, 2014 Report Share Posted January 21, 2014 I found the below article written January 20th, 2014:Microsoft's woes continue to mount as one of its most important customers—Hewlett Packard—is bringing back Windows 7. The move is one of the most prominent rejections of Microsoft's Windows 8 strategy to date, and shows just how badly the personal computer industry is faring.The Verge noted Hewlett Packard's move, reporting that the company was emailing customers with the news that "Windows 7 is back," accompanied by promotional material on the HP website saying that Windows 7 is "back by popular demand." That demand is so popular, HP will give you up to $150 off the price of your PC if you'll only, please, choose Windows 7, giving proof to the old adage that companies discount things that are in high demand. Or something.Hewlett Packard's rejection of Windows 8 is so profound that you can only find mention of it under customizable options. This isn't just a rejection of Windows 8—more on that below—it shows how troubled the entire PC paradigm is. Windows personal computer sales are falling, and faced with that reality, HP's solution is to try and turn the clock back to a four year old operating system that Microsoft has done its best to pretend is no longer relevant.Read more at:Microsoft's Woes Mount as HP Brings Windows 7 'Back by Popular Demand' - The Mac Observer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pam Posted January 21, 2014 Report Share Posted January 21, 2014 I happen to like Windows 8. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Still_Small_Voice Posted January 21, 2014 Author Report Share Posted January 21, 2014 I happen to like Windows 8.You are the uncommon one Pam. I hope Windows 8 dies a horrible, painful death with several large holes in it. Windows 7 is one of my favorite operating systems. I also really like the Linux Mint version 13 operating system. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skippy740 Posted January 21, 2014 Report Share Posted January 21, 2014 Microsoft's April 2015 "Threshold" Release May Be Windows 9 Windows OS' are like Star Trek movies - only every other one is good. :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Still_Small_Voice Posted January 21, 2014 Author Report Share Posted January 21, 2014 Someone else said it and I agree. The next Microsoft C.E.O. will have to slash and burn when he comes in. He needs to be totally ruthless if Microsoft is to thrive starting with a total reset of this ill-conceived common platform approach for personal computers. Sales in the Windows 8 personal computer market are a failure as they should be with an operating system that is just not good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NeuroTypical Posted January 21, 2014 Report Share Posted January 21, 2014 We got a new computer with Win8. We do what we always do with every new version of windows. Swear at it, get mad, figure it out, use the helpful stuff, avoid the useless stuff, and life goes on.Yeah, it's trying to make believe it's an iPod touch. I don't care - I figured out how to get to my desktop and search for programs, and it can sit there and think what it wants. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Still_Small_Voice Posted January 21, 2014 Author Report Share Posted January 21, 2014 Loudmouth there are work arounds for Windows 8 to get your good graphic user interface back. There is great free third party software to put the Windows 7 Start Menu and your Taskbar back. Go here if you want it: Download Classic Shell from SourceForge.net Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prisonchaplain Posted January 21, 2014 Report Share Posted January 21, 2014 Here I thought Windows 7 was the newest and greatest thing, as I think of my office computer, still welcoming me with the alpha characters: XP Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Still_Small_Voice Posted January 21, 2014 Author Report Share Posted January 21, 2014 You still have a computer PrisonChaplain that has the Windows XP operating system on it? If you do that is one old machine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prisonchaplain Posted January 21, 2014 Report Share Posted January 21, 2014 (edited) Well, it was new to me. Those outlet "off-lease" deals are really good sometimes . . . Edited January 21, 2014 by prisonchaplain Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bini Posted January 21, 2014 Report Share Posted January 21, 2014 Everything we own is Apple and we don't have to mess with Windows stuff - except - for my desktop which I got a new one recently. I love my ASUS and I wouldn't ever get an Apple as a gaming rig, which is mostly what the ASUS is for, actually solely for. I'm not a fan of Win8 but I've got the hang of it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpiritDragon Posted January 21, 2014 Report Share Posted January 21, 2014 PC that is an awesome picture of an ancient computer predating the internet. I doubt it even had the ability to connect to a modem. It looks older than the Tandy 1000 i played on as a kid that outdates windows 3.1... yikes.I too still have a desk-top that uses XP, but it rarely gets used now that we have an HP laptop with win7. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skippy740 Posted January 21, 2014 Report Share Posted January 21, 2014 If your computer has drives for either of these 2 disks, or you can tell the version of windows you're running by the year it came out... it's too old. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NeuroTypical Posted January 21, 2014 Report Share Posted January 21, 2014 I threw away the last of my 3.5" backup disks last year. About three years after my last 3.5" drive went away. Now I miss what was on them. I can't exactly remember, but it was important enough that I made backups, so obviously their departure should leave a ragged hole in my heart. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canuck Mormon Posted January 21, 2014 Report Share Posted January 21, 2014 Our PC is basically a paperweight now. It runs Windows 7, but we never use it. I have a Galaxy Note 10.1 and my wife has an iPad. What do we need a desktop for anymore?At work we just switched over to a Windows 7 machine. We are still running Xp on the majority of our machines. I happen to get a Windows 7 as a beta tester to see how our design software works on the new platform. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vort Posted January 21, 2014 Report Share Posted January 21, 2014 Not sure where MS has gone wrong with Windows. I can tell you from personal experience that MS hires many of the brightest software developer minds in the country (or world). But Apple is a genius at marketing, and MS seems willingly to conform to the silly Apple stereotypes.It may not be all in the presentation, but to a large extent it is, and MS simply cannot communicate their efforts well.I am not a fan of Windows 8, but that's because I'm something of a Luddite. I don't even use a smartphone. I have used MacOS a fair amount, and I like it very well. But I don't really see it's much, or any, better than Windows 7. Slicker in some areas, yes; but frankly, I find Windows more intuitive and open with networking concerns, so it's six of one and a half dozen of the other. I have many friends who use Windows 8 tablets, and I have used them a (very) little bit. I can't tell that Windows 8 is inferior to Apple's touch OSes to any significant degree. Again, it's marketing and pushing the "sexiness" factor so that all the cool kids are using Apple products, leaving MS products for the old fogeys.I was an early and enthusiastic adopter of Mac technology. I paid thousands of dollars in 1990 for a "Mac Classic" to take to grad school:That was a "special deal" for students. I was dragged kicking and screaming into the PC world. And guess what I found? More functionality for a drastically cheaper price. Drastically cheaper.Apple happily gouged me and millions of other starry-eyed users because we were stupid enough to pay a premium for "sexy". Say what you will about MS, but as far as I know, they never gouged their customers the way Apple did. So I have little love for Apple. It would please me just fine to see the whole "sexy" thing blow up in Cupertino's face. It would serve them right. If there were any justice in this world, it would happen.But they do make some nice products. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 21, 2014 Report Share Posted January 21, 2014 Vort, the difference between Microsoft and Apple goes well beyond "functional" versus "sexy".It goes much much deeper and are rooted in the principles that drive Bill Gates and Steve Jobs.Bill Gates focus is to sell something innovative - or to put something innovative out to public use. Steve Jobs philosophy is to create something innovative, something that is not in existence or something that exists but can be drastically improved. Yes, it seems like a very slight difference, but this difference permeates throughout Microsoft and Apple and is imbedded in their respective cultures.Just as a small example:The Microsoft project life cycle completely exemplifies the Bill Gates' paradigm - you take one big product, break it down into chunks, and put the chunks on overlapping project plans. The product is released to market when enough of the chunks is functional enough for the product to perform its required expectations while the rest of the project deliverables follow as product upgrades/patches. This life cycle is very effective because technology is very rapid. There is no time to perfect a product because by the time you get a product perfected, it's base platform is bordering on obsolete - so you release it in a quickness and then upgrade it. If technology passes through before the product is perfected, then the rest of the upgrades/patches are scrapped in exchange for a new project/product. If pieces of the product already exists somewhere, so much the better, then it shortens the life cycle - buy the existing technology instead of creating it and go straight to product upgrade/patches. The focus is putting a product on the market. Who cares if it crashes in Comdex.The Apple project life cycle completely exemplifies the Steve Jobs paradigm - you take one big project/product and even if it takes 20 years to get the product to market, it doesn't matter because it is going to be innovative and fresh and perfect. They are more focused on the creation/invention than on the market. The Apple concept is a complete package. When you have an Apple product, Apple takes ownership of the entire package. It's like a refrigerator - when you buy a Kenmore fridge, if the software on the digital display fails, you call Kenmore - not the programmer that programmed the display. Of course, because computers thrive on 3rd party software and personalization, Apple can only cover it so far - but this concept is always present in the world of Apple, hence the big difference in software developer platforms between Apple and Microsoft. When you hold an Apple product - it is expected to be innovative, good quality, and stable regardless of what you install in it because that is the focus of the Apple culture. Hardware and software packaged as an appliance. Time to market is sacrificed. But, of course, technology advancements go so fast that for Apple to remain innovative, they have to look so far forward that they tend to be Star Trekky... to compete in the marketplace, they have started to balance versioning with innovation so that they concentrate on smaller innovations to avail of the latest technology instead of big product releases that has to take on bigger risks in its time to market.Both companies have their strengths and weaknesses. Personally, I go by the Apple culture but I work in a Microsoft world... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vort Posted January 21, 2014 Report Share Posted January 21, 2014 Just as a small example:The Microsoft project life cycle completely exemplifies the Bill Gates' paradigm - you take one big product, break it down into chunks, and put the chunks on overlapping project plans. The product is released to market when enough of the chunks is functional enough for the product to perform its required expectations while the rest of the project deliverables follow as product upgrades/patches. This life cycle is very effective because technology is very rapid. There is no time to perfect a product because by the time you get a product perfected, it's base platform is bordering on obsolete - so you release it in a quickness and then upgrade it. If technology passes through before the product is perfected, then the rest of the upgrades/patches are scrapped in exchange for a new project/product. If pieces of the product already exists somewhere, so much the better, then it shortens the life cycle - buy the existing technology instead of creating it and go straight to product upgrade/patches. The focus is putting a product on the market. Who cares if it crashes in Comdex.The Apple project life cycle completely exemplifies the Steve Jobs paradigm - you take one big project/product and even if it takes 20 years to get the product to market, it doesn't matter because it is going to be innovative and fresh and perfect. They are more focused on the creation/invention than on the market. The Apple concept is a complete package. When you have an Apple product, Apple takes ownership of the entire package. It's like a refrigerator - when you buy a Kenmore fridge, if the software on the digital display fails, you call Kenmore - not the programmer that programmed the display. Of course, because computers thrive on 3rd party software and personalization, Apple can only cover it so far - but this concept is always present in the world of Apple, hence the big difference in software developer platforms between Apple and Microsoft. When you hold an Apple product - it is expected to be innovative, good quality, and stable regardless of what you install in it because that is the focus of the Apple culture. Hardware and software packaged as an appliance. Time to market is sacrificed. But, of course, technology advancements go so fast that for Apple to remain innovative, they have to look so far forward that they tend to be Star Trekky... to compete in the marketplace, they have started to balance versioning with innovation so that they concentrate on smaller innovations to avail of the latest technology instead of big product releases that has to take on bigger risks in its time to market.I have worked for Microsoft on and off since 1998 (currently "off", and have been for a few years). My experience does not match up with what you state. I have been involved with releases for Visual Studio, Windows Media Player, Tablet PC (remember that?), Windows CE, and Windows Mobile, and have also worked on projects at MS Research, Azure-related technologies (internal), and other areas. I have not experienced the following:"The product is released to market when enough of the chunks is functional enough for the product to perform its required expectations while the rest of the project deliverables follow as product upgrades/patches."The product is released when in functions to spec, yes. The same is true at Apple and, frankly, at any other software development company. But the idea that other features are included as patches is, in my experience, simply not true. There may be specific instances of such, but I have not seen any overall trend in that direction.And Apple has suffered enough embarrassing public glitches to dispell any idea that they make sure their products are rock-solid before releasing them. That just is not so. One of the reasons Apple migrated the Mac OS to a Linux/UNIX base is almost certainly because it is so established and solid that they managed to get around many of the bugs and serious security flaws that plagued Apple OSes to that point. Ever try to run multiple programs simultaneously on the old Motorola 68k and PowerPC chips? Remember the "pizza box" Macs and how they would hang if you looked at them funny?It's widely known that the primary reason MS OSes suffered the majority of viruses and other exploits in the 1990s and 2000s was not because the OSes were inherently inferior (though I would not argue that point too strongly with the 95 kernel), but because Windows was the 800-pound gorilla of PC OSes, dominating over 90% of the market. Why would any self-respecting Romanian virus author waste his time on Linux or Mac? That does not excuse Microsoft for boneheaded security decisions made by product managers more concerned with their performance reviews than with airtight security, and as such it is an indictment of Microsoft's corporate culture. But you can bet that the Apple execs were congratulating each other on their escape behind closed Cupertino doors. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LittleWyvern Posted January 22, 2014 Report Share Posted January 22, 2014 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 22, 2014 Report Share Posted January 22, 2014 (edited) I have worked for Microsoft on and off since 1998 (currently "off", and have been for a few years). My experience does not match up with what you state. I have been involved with releases for Visual Studio, Windows Media Player, Tablet PC (remember that?), Windows CE, and Windows Mobile, and have also worked on projects at MS Research, Azure-related technologies (internal), and other areas. I have not experienced the following:"The product is released to market when enough of the chunks is functional enough for the product to perform its required expectations while the rest of the project deliverables follow as product upgrades/patches."The product is released when in functions to spec, yes. The same is true at Apple and, frankly, at any other software development company. But the idea that other features are included as patches is, in my experience, simply not true. There may be specific instances of such, but I have not seen any overall trend in that direction.And Apple has suffered enough embarrassing public glitches to dispell any idea that they make sure their products are rock-solid before releasing them. That just is not so. One of the reasons Apple migrated the Mac OS to a Linux/UNIX base is almost certainly because it is so established and solid that they managed to get around many of the bugs and serious security flaws that plagued Apple OSes to that point. Ever try to run multiple programs simultaneously on the old Motorola 68k and PowerPC chips? Remember the "pizza box" Macs and how they would hang if you looked at them funny?It's widely known that the primary reason MS OSes suffered the majority of viruses and other exploits in the 1990s and 2000s was not because the OSes were inherently inferior (though I would not argue that point too strongly with the 95 kernel), but because Windows was the 800-pound gorilla of PC OSes, dominating over 90% of the market. Why would any self-respecting Romanian virus author waste his time on Linux or Mac? That does not excuse Microsoft for boneheaded security decisions made by product managers more concerned with their performance reviews than with airtight security, and as such it is an indictment of Microsoft's corporate culture. But you can bet that the Apple execs were congratulating each other on their escape behind closed Cupertino doors.I don't know why your experience is different than mine but I had to take a 6-month training on that Product Deployment Methodology in 1996. It might have been '97... But it was after the release of Windows 95 and before Windows 97 and waaay before the PMP certs and Six Sigma stuff. Edited January 22, 2014 by anatess Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackmarch Posted January 22, 2014 Report Share Posted January 22, 2014 I happen to like Windows 8.The only thing I like about it is its engine. the GUI designers need to be shot, fired and shot again. And whoever changed how it interacts with external drive needs multiple around the world wedgies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jerome1232 Posted January 22, 2014 Report Share Posted January 22, 2014 Yeah, Windows 8 has a interesting idea for a gui, and it was terribly implemented. I actually like the start screen, sort of. It needs better search capabilities, it needs to not feel like it's something different from my desktop, it needs less ugly tiles.I honestly think it's better than the old one though. Goodness how I hate poking through miles of menu's. I'm an Ubuntu user, and I love their unity interface, instead of menu's, I have a very good search feature. When Unity first came out for Ubuntu the community reaction was much like the reaction to Windows 8, within a release it became some hated it, most couldn't live without it. Luckily if we don't like the default interface, we can install alternate ones. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skippy740 Posted January 25, 2014 Report Share Posted January 25, 2014 Looks like Dell is following HP: "Windows 7 for the win" Dell Home Computers Store with Home Products | Dell Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Still_Small_Voice Posted January 26, 2014 Author Report Share Posted January 26, 2014 Looks like Dell is following Hewlett Packard.Yes! Some companies are understanding what the market wants. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.