Direction of Windows and OS X Rant

[mrratburn]

Back when Windows 7 came out it was like such a breath of fresh air for Microsoft after the joke that was Windows Vista. I thought (and I still think) Windows had made their best operating system yet and the rest of the world, even the cautious educational and business sectors seemed to agree.

Then came Windows 8 and screwed that up. With Windows 7 I thought Microsoft had finally "gotten it" and with 8 it was like LOL NOPE. Full screen tablet apps on a desktop? GARBAGE! They fixed it up a little with 8.1 but they still dropped the ball in my book.

Now comes OS X Yosemite, here to change the look and feel of the best looking and feeling operating system ever IMO. Ever since Leopard, OS X has been steadily getting better and better and I think we're finally at nirvana with Mavericks. Now that we're at the peak of perfection (or as close as we'll ever get), I'm afraid that Apple will make the same mistakes as Microsoft now that they're going to do some radical changees. Here are my predictions, and if you're reading this after fall 2014, no my real name is not Nostradamus:

Step 1. Promise changes, get everyone excited for new OS.
Step 2. Roll out Yosemite instantly becoming controversial and pissing on many longtime users. Apple die-hards still approve.
Step 3. Surprised by the unexpected backlash, Apple hastily rolls out an update to bring things partially to how they were before.
Step 4. All is mediocre in the world.

Do you guys feel the same or am I completely off-base on this?? I've heard surprisingly little criticism of Yosemite thus far so I was wondering if it was because the critics were being threatened to be sent to concentration camps or if I was just crazy.

 

[2984839]

Windows 8 is lighter weight and faster than 7 on every machine I have used it on. It also has far better security than any previous WIndows release. The UI is crap, but that's not an important part of the OS IMHO since it can be easily changed or adapted to.

 

[mrratburn]

Windows 8 is lighter weight and faster than 7 on every machine I have used it on. It also has far better security than any previous WIndows release. The UI is crap, but that's not an important part of the OS IMHO since it can be easily changed or adapted to.

I agree, they made little changes here and there that are very nice such as what you listed and the improved Task Manager among others. But why reinvent the wheel with UI other than PR business consumer bulls**t?

 

[2984839]

I agree, they made little changes here and there that are very nice such as what you listed and the improved Task Manager among others. But why reinvent the wheel with UI other than PR business consumer bulls**t?

Yeah I don't know what they were thinking. Changing the UI was stupid when you consider that the best thing Windows had going for it was familiarity. Anyone could go from 98 to XP to 7 without relearning anything. Why throw that away? Makes no sense to me.

Still, I never judge an OS by the UI, unless the UI is actually causing system problems. For example, Ubuntu's Unity interface crashed constantly and used a truckload of RAM in 12.04. I don't know if they have since fixed it, but it was enough to make me dump Unity in the short term and start looking at other distros.

 

[mrratburn]

Yeah I don't know what they were thinking. Changing the UI was stupid when you consider that the best thing Windows had going for it was familiarity. Anyone could go from 98 to XP to 7 without relearning anything. Why throw that away? Makes no sense to me.

Still, I never judge an OS by the UI, unless the UI is actually causing system problems. For example, Ubuntu's Unity interface crashed constantly and used a truckload of RAM in 12.04. I don't know if they have since fixed it, but it was enough to make me dump Unity in the short term and start looking at other distros.

Oh man now that you remind me, Ubuntu did the same ***** when they switched to Unity. I experienced everything you said back then. I didn't drop Ubuntu though and the UI isn't so bad in 14.04 now and it's very stable (except once in a blue moon the UI will decide to go behind the windows and there's nothing you can do about it!).

At this point, I firmly believe that OS makers change the user interface if not for added functionality or improved aesthetics, for the sake of change and to create media buzz and bring in the $$$.

 

[Mac.User]

I can to OS X with 10.5 when I was growing tired of XP and hated Vista.

Now I find that I am liking windows 8.1 more and growing a dislike for OS X, more so with 10.10.

Personally I wish I could still use 10.5 or .6. 7-10 are not adding anything of worth to me feature wise and I'm not fond of the UI. I know that lot of change under the hood is happening, but aside from better battery/CUP/RAM usage that means little to me. Even less when I already get 7-8hrs of batter on a charge.

OS X just offers me almost nothing in usability over Windows anymore.

 

[Michael Goff]

I agree, they made little changes here and there that are very nice such as what you listed and the improved Task Manager among others. But why reinvent the wheel with UI other than PR business consumer bulls**t?

They changed the UI so they could try to keep up with the current trend of mobile. Microsoft doesn't want to be left behind if tablets overtake traditional computers, and I can't blame them. I know that it's popular to hate on Windows 8, but they had to change the UI at this point. If they didn't, things wouldn't be any better than they are now they'd be worse.

 

[BenTrovato]

I don't think there's anything wrong with making a crappy release. That's the only reason Win 7 was such a hit, because Vista was horrible. I don't know what people are saying that Win 8 is faster than 7 on every machine they have tried. Win 8 is only snappier on much faster machines. Any older system especially without an SSD is way faster on 7 than 8.

As far as the predictions for os x.. it's hard to tell. Could be right, could not. I personally like the changes they've shown so far. How the release will pan out, I really don't know.

 

[maflynn]

Windows 8.1 - a solid product getting better
OSX - change in the UI and tighter integration with iOS.

Pick your poison, I do like where windows is headed and like less where OS X is. To put it another way, Yosemite is a bad upgrade, but I'm not able to fully take advantage of the improvements since I don't have an iPhone.

 

[2984839]

They changed the UI so they could try to keep up with the current trend of mobile. Microsoft doesn't want to be left behind if tablets overtake traditional computers, and I can't blame them. I know that it's popular to hate on Windows 8, but they had to change the UI at this point. If they didn't, things wouldn't be any better than they are now they'd be worse.

They didn't have to make the Jekyll and Hyde approach mandatory though. Simply let the user decide if he wants to run it in desktop mode or mobile mode, with desktop mode being the traditional Windows 7 layout. KDE 4 does something similar with its netbook mode feature. The same OS can work fine on a tablet and a desktop without trying to have the UI do both simultaneously.

 

[mrratburn]

They changed the UI so they could try to keep up with the current trend of mobile. Microsoft doesn't want to be left behind if tablets overtake traditional computers, and I can't blame them. I know that it's popular to hate on Windows 8, but they had to change the UI at this point. If they didn't, things wouldn't be any better than they are now they'd be worse.

That's true, but Windows 8 was just a half-measure, much akin to Vista. Using it like a tablet just through the Metro interface is very underwhelming, especially when you take into account the competition: Apple, Google, hell even Amazon makes a better tablet than Microsoft's attempt.

As far as traditional computers and Windows 8, it's still pointless since it is essentially an updated version of 7 with that awkward Metro UI you're greeted to time and time again. Plus, using it on a laptop, sometimes you'll be doing something and it will accidentally switch over to Metro or open up a settings pane or something--this is all due to the useless tablet implementation on a device that is NOT A TABLET! No matter how many touchscreens they put on modern laptops, they are still just laptops.

So there ya go, Windows 8 is a fail on the tablet front and mostly a fail (or a mild improvement at best) on the desktop front -- worst of both worlds people.

The only positive thing I've seen come out of 8 is now there are many tablet-pc models that are actually pretty good (Surface Pro and others). Before this, tablet pcs were a very niche expensive product. If you're a graphic designer or like to take notes by hand on a computer, there are more options now than before. Still, the implementation of the OS sucks.

----------

They didn't have to make the Jekyll and Hyde approach mandatory though. Simply let the user decide if he wants to run it in desktop mode or mobile mode, with desktop mode being the traditional Windows 7 layout. KDE 4 does something similar with its netbook mode feature. The same OS can work fine on a tablet and a desktop without trying to have the UI do both simultaneously.

This.

 

[Epikuros]

They fixed it up a little with 8.1 but they still dropped the ball in my book.

I love mixed metaphors as much as the next guy but I really hope your book is OK. Microsoft can be real clumsy sometimes.

 

[Michael Goff]

They didn't have to make the Jekyll and Hyde approach mandatory though. Simply let the user decide if he wants to run it in desktop mode or mobile mode, with desktop mode being the traditional Windows 7 layout. KDE 4 does something similar with its netbook mode feature. The same OS can work fine on a tablet and a desktop without trying to have the UI do both simultaneously.

Except they had to have the desktop on the tablet because Office wasn't touch yet. And they put the touch UI on the other because they wanted to encourage developers to make Modern UI apps.

That's true, but Windows 8 was just a half-measure, much akin to Vista. Using it like a tablet just through the Metro interface is very underwhelming, especially when you take into account the competition: Apple, Google, hell even Amazon makes a better tablet than Microsoft's attempt.

As far as traditional computers and Windows 8, it's still pointless since it is essentially an updated version of 7 with that awkward Metro UI you're greeted to time and time again. Plus, using it on a laptop, sometimes you'll be doing something and it will accidentally switch over to Metro or open up a settings pane or something--this is all due to the useless tablet implementation on a device that is NOT A TABLET! No matter how many touchscreens they put on modern laptops, they are still just laptops.

So there ya go, Windows 8 is a fail on the tablet front and mostly a fail (or a mild improvement at best) on the desktop front -- worst of both worlds people.

The only positive thing I've seen come out of 8 is now there are many tablet-pc models that are actually pretty good (Surface Pro and others). Before this, tablet pcs were a very niche expensive product. If you're a graphic designer or like to take notes by hand on a computer, there are more options now than before. Still, the implementation of the OS sucks.

----------



This.

I completely disagree with you. I haven't opened up the Modern Interface a single time on my MBA that was an accident for one thing. And it hasn't been a fail on the tablet, though my tablet is an RT.