Windows Wants the Desktop to Die: Bill
Gates' Charitable Endeavours Not Reflected In The
Pricing Structure
31 December 2012
By Sahib Mustim Bleher
Windows upgrades are never a simple or straight
forward affair, so I put aside the relatively more
quiet period near the turn of the year to test
upgrading to Windows 8 from a Windows 7 Ultimate
installation, given that new computers are soon only
going to be sold with the new operating system. I had
read mixed reviews but naively hoped that the Vista
Disaster would not be repeated. Unfortunately, it
seems true that every second Windows release is a
complete flop.
With Windows 8 Microsoft corporation is trying to make
inroads into the mobile application market they have
as good as lost to Apple and Google Android. For
people using those perfectly usable and mature
operating systems as platforms for mobile
communication devices there is little incentive to
move over to Windows. To force desktop users to put up
with a poorly designed touchscreen button interface
means Windows is going to vacate that market too if
they don't come up with a new version aimed at
business and professional users soon. When Vista came
out, serious desktop users stuck with Windows XP, and
those who have upgraded to Windows 7 will stick with
it until support is no longer available. To date,
Windows still dominates the desktop (and laptop)
market. The perfect time for business program
developers to think about writing for different
platforms, such as Linux, and providing an upgrade
path.
Ipads and mobile phones have come of age and as
multimedia communication devices contribute immensely
to networking on the move. Today anybody can skype,
email or twitter from their mobile phone handset, and
business people, previously dependent on Blackberry
devices, have taken full advantage of the availability
of alternatives. But social networking does not
contribute directly to the balance sheet and real work
still takes place at the office with a laptop about
the smallest feasible platform for design work using
CAD tools, writing reports or specifications, using
spreadsheets etc. In most cases a large external
screen is a must to be meaningfully productive. To
fill such a screen with a few childish application
buttons and hide the controls in the corners, as
Windows 8 does, whilst removing the start screen to
access programs altogether, is both wasteful and a
serious misjudgment of the needs of professional
users.
There are, of course, already programs on offer to
revert to a more usable user interface, in practice to
bring the Windows XP or Windows 7 layout back to
Windows 8 as an overlay. This in itself makes a
statement, namely that Microsoft completely misjudged
the needs of desktop users. But why waste hours on
upgrading an operating system without gaining anything
at all? Or, in fact, losing the functionality of some
(not even very old) legacy programs the new operating
system cannot handle? What is the point in spending
hundreds of pounds in finding new program solutions
for no other reason than that Windows want your
desktop to look different? Professional computing is
still about functionality, not looks, and
functionality is sadly missing from the Windows
upgrade.
Predictably, the installation routine was not smooth.
After installing, several forced restarts were
required before Windows managed to present a usable
interface at all. The first desktop was bare barring a
few non-essential applications and could only be
vacated using the Ctrl+Alt+Del key combination. Bravo
Windows! What use are touchscreen buttons (on a non-touchscreen
monitor) in fancy colour schemes when old-fashioned
key shortcuts are the only way to even get started?
Once Windows 8 settled down, there were dozens of
Windows updates to install, another indicator of poor
user-testing before going to market. This meant
another series of computer restarts. Worse, however,
repeatedly, Windows failed installing its own updates
leaving the user with a system which even according to
Microsoft is missing "important" fixes and
improvements. After wasting a full day on installing
the new Windows operating system and half a day on
trying to make it work satisfactorily with the rest of
my software it was time to mirror the old Windows 7
back onto the computer which is one of the more stable
Windows platforms and a lot faster too than Windows 8.
Well, at least the failed upgrade was cheap (not
counting the time) - £25 is an unusually modest price
for a Microsoft product. But let's not be fooled. Bill
Gates' charitable endeavours have not suddenly been
reflected in the pricing structure. It's still "What
you pay is what you get", and the upgrade price is a
true reflection of the product value, this being
Microsoft's cheapest operating system version ever!