What's really interesting to me is the trend that all these OEMs just don't fear Microsoft anymore. That coupled with the fact that people are using all kinds of non-MS mobile devices mean that they don't tie their very survival to the whims of Redmond, so they feel emboldened to really try things that would be unheard of in the past.<p>Things like Linux laptops that they actually promote, and actually acknowledging that Windows 8 is A UI pile of poo publicly, these are all moves they wouldn't have made back in the day when MS was the scary juggernaught and Windows was the only option anyone even considered.
Windows 8 suffers from the problem of not knowing what it wants to be. I like the Apple approach of having a hard division between OSX and iOS, because touch interface is inherently different from one that’s keyboard and mouse driven.<p>Someone once described Windows 8 as a large estate house, with many rooms and corridors. For the most part, all the rooms look great. You have the west wing (old windows) and the east wing addition (the new metro UI side). But as you wonder around the building, you on occasion stumble into a room that has no paint, the walls are ripped up, and there is an under construction sign.<p>Now that I think about it, maybe Windows 9 has a chance after all though. Think about it:<p><pre><code> Windows 3.0 - bad - quite terrible
Windows 3.1 - good - worked ok
Windows 95 - bad
Windows 97 - good
Windows Me - terrible
Windows XP - very good
Windows Vista - bad, basically Win 7 Alpha
Windows 7 - good, stable and get’s out of your way
Windows 8 - bad, has no idea who it’s target market is
Windows 9 - ????
</code></pre>
Above is just my opinions, of course, but notice the pattern. Maybe there is a hope for Windows 9 yet.
Who's surprised? When the Surface / Surface RT line released in 2012 Microsoft had a decade of sales data for their Tablet PCs to prove that traditional Windows applications and touch doesn't mesh. As for Metro apps, the obvious problem is ecosystem size (vs iOS and Android). What Microsoft should have done (and this is not hindsight, that's still their way forward) instead of getting into a battle almost impossible to win is to find a good story of why laptops are still relevant, invent new physical formats which are small to carry but much larger in usage (think Sony Tablet P or the old, old Thinkpad with the butterfly keyboard) and stick to its guns. Ultrabooks are not a bad idea, make them lighter weight but obviously it was not enough. That Google beaten them with the Chromebook in the laptop arena just highlights the absolute ineptitude of MS.
>> Repeat after me: An advertising slogan is not news.<p>>> A few tech journalists need to be reminded of that rule today, after piling on to the story that HP is bringing Windows 7 back “by popular demand.”<p><a href="http://www.zdnet.com/hp-bringing-back-windows-7-pcs-not-so-fast-7000025351/" rel="nofollow">http://www.zdnet.com/hp-bringing-back-windows-7-pcs-not-so-f...</a>
Maybe it's not obvious to the designers at MS, but the ideal touch screen interface just isn't the same as the ideal mouse and keyboard interface. Sure, put both modes in the same OS, just let us default to something that makes sense for the desktop on the desktop. There is no need for the start menu to be full screen, and there is no need to boot to a touchscreen interface. That's all there is to it.<p>Windows 8 isn't that bad. That is, it doesn't get in my way to an unacceptable degree. It's just that none of the visible additions are helpful versus Windows 7.
Windows 8.1 is pretty amazing and its a mistake to install Windows 7 on any machine that is "made for Windows 8". I have seen multiple instances where Windows 8.1 handles huge excel files better, makes SSD's faster and runs snappier than Windows 7 on the same machine. The updating for Windows 7 is also a pain and has a huge system folder size compared to 8.1. HP actually has been very good at upgrading drivers to 8.1 so I seriously doubt they are "promoting" Windows 7. Just another example of reporting a made up story to get clicks.
I use a Windows 8 laptop at home (in addition to a MacBook Pro and Windows 7 at work). I have not had problems with it. I'm not sure the reality of Microsoft's troubled OS's is as bad as the perception. 7 and Vista seem very similar to me.<p>The only problem I've had with Windows 8 was quickly solved once I learned the shortcut to search for applications. Win-Q to open the search page, type two or three letters, and hit Enter. It's much simpler than clicking the Start button and wading through menus.
When was the last time HP made the front page of HN? Probably something about how they should sell their hardware business or spin it off.<p>But when was the last time they made the front page because of a laptop or other consumer product?<p>They're only putting Windows 7 on PC's to get their name in the news.
It's interesting how HP, a loyal Microsoft partner and OEM, is now selling an old "outdated" OS. I think HP is the first major OEM to do so, and definitely not the last. Microsoft really screwed up with Windows 8 as they made it to complex for the average person, coupled with inconsistent UX. Build something people want, or at least, give people something they want.
I've wondered if Microsoft adopts a sort of "golden path" (a la Dune) strategy... intentionally make every other operating system unpopular in order to set the stage for their next version.<p>You need bad in order to see good.