PDA

View Full Version : Microsoft Pulls Support on Windows 8



Dave Lehnert
01-16-2016, 11:34 PM
Microsoft Pulls Support on Windows 8

http://www.switchfast.com/switchfast-blog/2016/1/15/microsoft-pulls-support-on-windows-8.aspx

Gerry Grzadzinski
01-17-2016, 12:02 AM
Windows 8, but not Windows 8.1, which is a free upgrade and will still be supported for many years.

Dave Lehnert
01-17-2016, 12:17 AM
Windows 8, but not Windows 8.1, which is a free upgrade and will still be supported for many years.

Two more years, January 9th, 2018.

Brian Elfert
01-17-2016, 12:46 AM
Mainstream support for Windows 8.1 ends in 2018. Extended support doesn't end until 2023. Mainstream support means that Microsoft will fix bugs and add new features along with security patches. Extended support is generally security patches only.

It seems crazy that Microsoft ended all Windows 8 support already since manufacturers are allowed to sell new PCs with Windows 8 pre-installed until June of this year. (I can't imagine any manufacturer still shipping Windows 8 PCs at this point.)

Jim Koepke
01-17-2016, 3:29 AM
It seems crazy that Microsoft ended all Windows 8 support already since manufacturers are allowed to sell new PCs with Windows 8 pre-installed until June of this year. (I can't imagine any manufacturer still shipping Windows 8 PCs at this point.)

In some organizations there are either technophobes or others who have no idea of the breakneck speed of technological advances. I have been employed even by technology companies who had engineers who didn't understand what we were building.

One of the insane clauses I have seen in procurement specifications is that any technology or software must have been in use and reliable no less than 5 years.

So when you go into some tech dependent facility and see them running old machines or old operating systems, someone in purchasing likely made such a specification in a purchase agreement.

jtk

Curt Harms
01-18-2016, 8:38 AM
But there are also companies that really prefer O.S.s in extended support. No new 'upgrades' or 'enhancements' to break perfectly functioning systems.

roger wiegand
01-18-2016, 9:14 AM
I'm running 7 on my Windoze machines, and that's the OS you will see most commonly at all the "high tech" companies around here. I didn't detect any improvement from XP when we made the switch. The newer OS's seem to be optimized for poking at with your fingers and seamlessly running cat videos while keeping up with twitter, instagram, etc. The newer interfaces seem designed to appeal to the ADHD set, I haven't seen an improvement in actual function in a long, long time. Why back in my day... grump grump grump.......

Art Mann
01-18-2016, 10:38 AM
I never understood why Microsoft wants to dumb down the user interface and software selection (apps instead of programs) to the point it works like a smart phone. I guess it is just Google envy. If they try to compete on Google's territory, they will lose.

Larry Browning
01-18-2016, 11:02 AM
.....I haven't seen an improvement in actual function in a long, long time. Why back in my day... grump grump grump.......
So Roger, what would it take for you to consider something an "improvement"? What and when was the last one? Just wondering.

Larry Browning
01-18-2016, 11:07 AM
I never understood why Microsoft wants to dumb down the user interface and software selection (apps instead of programs) to the point it works like a smart phone. I guess it is just Google envy. If they try to compete on Google's territory, they will lose.

In my mind, this is what the younger set understands and considers the way things should work. Personally, I don't like it, but I do understand why they are moving in that direction.
Personally I prefer to print out emails I get that are requests for me to do something here at work. The younger folks think I am weird.

roger wiegand
01-18-2016, 1:59 PM
So Roger, what would it take for you to consider something an "improvement"? What and when was the last one? Just wondering.

Good question. Probably the spotlight search on the Mac that allows me to instantly find documents no matter where I've mis-filed them based on either file names or content (last time I tried this on a Win 8.1 PC it took many minutes just to search file names). This has freed me from the tyranny of the hierarchical file system, for better or worse. I'm also very enamored of the "hot corner" that pops open mini versions of all the documents I have open at any given time, giving me a quick way to switch between tasks.

I think MS Word (the program I use the most) actually peaked at version 3.1 back in 1987 -- it did everything I ever wanted to do while writing (adding niceties like subscripts and automated bullet points, as I recall) and very little extra. A very clean, uncluttered, functional program that never required going through tabs and sub-menus to get a common task done.

A huge improvement in Windows, yet to be implemented, would be if it would stop popping windows it deemed to be important up in front of the task I'm actively working on. It is constantly frustrating to be typing along and then find that Windows has opened some dialog box about an update or some such thing it thinks is important and the last three sentences you wrote are gone. How hard could it be to prioritize the window that the user is actively working in? Or at the very least not lose the work done in the meantime?

Brian Henderson
01-18-2016, 2:14 PM
I never understood why Microsoft wants to dumb down the user interface and software selection (apps instead of programs) to the point it works like a smart phone. I guess it is just Google envy. If they try to compete on Google's territory, they will lose.

Because that's what the majority of computer users want. They want something that just works, that they never have to look at or think about, that will let them be as shallow as they want seamlessly. That's what Microsoft's customers want, that's what they're trying to give them.

glenn bradley
01-18-2016, 2:14 PM
I never understood why Microsoft wants to dumb down the user interface and software selection (apps instead of programs) to the point it works like a smart phone. I guess it is just Google envy. If they try to compete on Google's territory, they will lose.


In my mind, this is what the younger set understands and considers the way things should work. Personally, I don't like it, but I do understand why they are moving in that direction.
Personally I prefer to print out emails I get that are requests for me to do something here at work. The younger folks think I am weird.

Old Guys Unite! Starting my career when a "computer" system took up about 5000 square feet (including room for 'tape apes' and 'paper runners') I have lived through a few "quality drops" when it comes to hardware and software. Most of that 5000 square feet now fits on your desk and the software development curve/ QA is similarly different.

Yes, it troubles me that I swear more at sloppy bloated applications than I ever did at L.A. freeway drivers. Hardware is nearly disposable the day it comes off the line and programmers have lost their edge in what seems to be a "why bother" culture. I long for the days when an application ran reliably, failed elegantly and was repaired in a somewhat reasonable time . . . of course time heals all wounds . . . let's not forget those pesky PDP-11's . . . IBM and Amdahl (we lost Gene just this last November) never looked so good. There is no changing the fact that our parents hated Rock-n-Roll and we hate computers that look and act like big phones :D

Larry Browning
01-18-2016, 2:28 PM
Old Guys Unite! Starting my career when a "computer" system took up about 5000 square feet (including room for 'tape apes' and 'paper runners') I have lived through a few "quality drops" when it comes to hardware and software. Most of that 5000 square feet now fits on your desk and the software development curve/ QA is similarly different.

Yes, it troubles me that I swear more at sloppy bloated applications than I ever did at L.A. freeway drivers. Hardware is nearly disposable the day it comes off the line and programmers have lost their edge in what seems to be a "why bother" culture. I long for the days when an application ran reliably, failed elegantly and was repaired in a somewhat reasonable time . . . of course time heals all wounds . . . let's not forget those pesky PDP-11's . . . IBM and Amdahl (we lost Gene just this last November) never looked so good. There is no changing the fact that our parents hated Rock-n-Roll and we hate computers that look and act like big phones :D

I'm with you brother! I too have programmed every single one of the computers you mentioned and then some! My first job in about 1975 was on a IBM 360. We wrote all our programs on coding pads, gave them to the keypunch department. Any changes or corrections we made ourselves on an IBM 026 then later 029 keypunch machine. We kept printout of all the programs in a file cabinet room. Hmm, I think we may have it a bit better these days.
I used to be able to do hexadecimal math in my head too. But no more.

Ken Fitzgerald
01-18-2016, 2:34 PM
Glenn...of course when I started.... Dec RKO-05s were the current largest hard drives and weighed over 200lbs. The RK-05 stored a huge whopping 5 MB on a removable 10" platter. At chest height, it was impossible to change a HD by yourself. Annually we replaced the batteries to retract the heads in case of a power failure. We replaced the heads in the event of a head crash and used an alignment disk to align the heads. With two on board, we stored operating software on one and image data on the other. Memory boards were 19" x 22" and stored a whopping 4K.

They have come a long ways baby!

BTW....we used Dec PDP-1134's!

Kev Williams
01-19-2016, 3:21 AM
The only appreciable improvement between XP and 7 that I like is 7's search function. Aside from that, nothing. And I'm still trying to figure out why my 8.1 computer takes EIGHT full seconds to bring up a folder- ANY folder- on my 'common' network computer, when all of my XP's and even my 98se computer displays the same folders INSTANTLY.

It is seriously frustrating, when trying to get work done, to have a computer go: >click< 1001-1002-1003-1004-1005-1006-1007-1008-Folder...

All my other computers, >click<-Folder.

The ONLY reason I use this computer is because it was a Xmas gift. And for some reason, it browses the net okay. Otherwise I would've sold it 3 Xmas's ago...

Gerry Grzadzinski
01-19-2016, 10:38 AM
And I'm still trying to figure out why my 8.1 computer takes EIGHT full seconds to bring up a folder- ANY folder- on my 'common' network computer

I have an XP PC on my home network in the garage (CNC). When I had mapped a drive on it, I saw the same thing. Removing mapped drives from XP machines got rid of the delay. Now when I want to send files to the XP machine, I go through the Network section in Explorer. A little less convenient, but no more delay.

Art Mann
01-19-2016, 7:33 PM
Windows 8 was a complete failure. Everyone I know who upgraded to it either immediately went back to Win 7 or cursed the day they "upgraded". Microsoft then tried a clumsy patch job to 8.1 but it still had the cell phone interface as the default. It was almost as unpopular as 8. Win 10 doesn't give you the smartphone user interface by default anymore and it is much more popular than 8 or 8.1. I would say the smart phone style interface was not what Microsoft customers wanted. They already had the most popular operating system on earth. Why change it? Why not spend the effort adding useful new features and restoring old ones that were previously eliminated?


Because that's what the majority of computer users want. They want something that just works, that they never have to look at or think about, that will let them be as shallow as they want seamlessly. That's what Microsoft's customers want, that's what they're trying to give them.

Gerry Grzadzinski
01-19-2016, 8:26 PM
Microsoft then tried a clumsy patch job to 8.1 but it still had the cell phone interface as the default.

If you have ever read anything about Windows 8 or 8.1, it takes 5 minutes to download and install one of many Start Menu add-ons and you never need to see the Metro interface again.
I find Windows 8.1 much faster than Windows 7, and I use both daily (Pro versions of both)


Win 10 doesn't give you the smartphone user interface by default anymore and it is much more popular than 8 or 8.1.

It's more popular because they gave it to everyone for free.


They already had the most popular operating system on earth. Why change it

To make more money.

Jim Becker
01-19-2016, 8:30 PM
Art, my suspicion is that Microsoft, for some reason, felt that folks would be moving to tablets and touch screen computers much faster than reality and forgot that many home users run computers into the ground before they upgrade. Or along the same line, they knew that, but were trying to force the market to move to touch interfaces. The bottom line is as you state...Win8.x really didn't make the grade with the public. Win10 is a breath of fresh air in that respect. It retains the ABILITY to support touch interface, but doesn't assume you have it or force you to move to it. Most folks who understand Win7 can get along fine with Win10 after a short learning curve around a few things that are formatted a little differently. Professor Dr. SMWBO is doing that this week...I bought her a new computer for New Years and she's getting it setup "her way" as we speak...

Curt Harms
01-20-2016, 11:01 AM
The biggest knock I've heard about Win10 is the amount of personal/private data that could be sent to Microsoft and still be in compliance with the EULA. I'm not sure anybody outside Microsoft know what's being sent and stored.