ASUS Radeon RX 7600 STRIX OC review
Corsair RM1200X SHIFT 1200W PSU Review
Intel NUC 13 Pro (Arena Canyon) review
Endorfy Arx 700 Air chassis review
Beelink SER5 Pro (Ryzen 7 5800H) mini PC review
Crucial T700 PCIe 5.0 NVMe SSD Review - 12GB/s
Sapphire Radeon RX 7600 PULSE review
Gainward GeForce RTX 4060 Ti GHOST review
Radeon RX 7600 review
ASUS GeForce RTX 4060 Ti TUF Gaming review
Windows 'Threshold Microsoft's plan to win over Windows 7 users
Over at ZDnet Mary Jo wrote an intersting article on Microsoft's main goals with 'Threshold,' the next major version of Windows, is to win over Windows 7 hold-outs. According her this update arrive around Spring 2015. One of the main goals of this new release, which may or may not be called Windows 9, will be to bring Windows 7 users back to the fold.
Threshold will reportedly have lots of new features specifically aimed at desktops users and will reportedly have a different look based on your hardware type:
And not too surprisingly, one of the Microsoft Operating Systems Group's main goals in designing and developing the coming operating system (OS) release — which may or may not ultimately be branded as "Windows 9" — is to try to make it more palatable to hold-out Windows 7 users.
In order to do this, Microsoft is working on including in Threshold lots of new features specifically aimed at "desktop" users, meaning those who interact primarily with their Windows computing device from a desktop or laptop PC with mouse/keyboard and optional touch.
With Windows 8.1 Update, Microsoft officials designed Windows around a set of profiles based on the hardware specifications of the devices in use. Certain devices running Windows 8.1 Update include Power and Search buttons on the Metro-style Start screen; others don't. Some of those running Windows 8.1 Update have their machines start up by default in the Desktop/Win32 legacy environment, while others on touch/mobile-first devices start up in the Metro-Style Start Menu by default.
According to my sources, Microsoft will continue in this vein with Windows Threshold. The Threshold OS will look and work differently based on hardware type.
Users running Threshold on a desktop/laptop will get a SKU, or version, that puts the Windows Desktop (for running Win32/legacy apps) front and center. Two-in-one devices, like the Lenovo Yoga or Surface Pro, will support switching between the Metro-Style mode and the Windowed mode, based on whether or not keyboards are connected or disconnected.
The combined Phone/Tablet SKU of Threshold won't have a Desktop environment at all, but still will support apps running side by side, my sources are reconfirming. This "Threshold Mobile" SKU will work on ARM-based Windows Phones (not just Lumias), ARM-based Windows tablets and, I believe, Intel-Atom-based tablets.
One of Microsoft's primary missions with Threshold is to try to undo the usability mistakes made with Windows 8 for those who prefer and/or are stuck with devices that are not touch-first and for which keyboard/mouse use is of central importance.
The Desktop/laptop SKU of Threshold will include, as previously rumored, the Mini-Start menu — a new version of the traditional Microsoft Start menu, an early concept of which Microsoft showed off at the company's Build developers conference in April. It also will include the ability to run Metro-Style/Windows Store apps in windows on the Desktop. Will it turn off completely the Metro-Style Start screen with its live-tile interface, as Neowin is reporting, and make the tiled Start screen a toggleable option from the Mini Start menu? I'm not sure, but I wouldn't be surprised.
(Update: It's worth pointing out the Mini Start menu is expected to be customizable. Users will be able to include Metro-Style apps or remove all Metro Style apps/tiles from the menu so that only Desktop apps are included in the Mini Start menu — either as tiles or in list form.)
Between now and Threshold: What's next?
Before Threshold is released next spring, Microsoft is expected to deliver a public preview of the Threshold release, most likely in the fall of 2014, my sources say.
And before that, Microsoft will deliver a second and final update for Windows 8.1. Since Microsoft officials decided earlier this year to make the Mini Start Menu part of Threshold instead of Update 2, there's not a whole lot of new features of note coming in Update 2. There may be some UI adjustments and tweaks, but nothing hugely noticeable, my sources claim.
Windows 8.1 Update 2 should be code complete any time now and will be locked down about two weeks before August Patch Tuesday, my sources say. (August Patch Tuesday is on August 12.) Microsoft may opt to not make a big deal out of Update 2 and just push it out quietly as part of the set of August patches, I hear.
The Microsoft OS team is hoping to get as many Windows 7 users moved to Windows 7 Service Pack 1 and Windows 8 users to Windows 8.1 Update in preparation for (hopefully) getting them to move to Threshold once it is out. It's still early in the Windows development cycle for Microsoft to have decided on packaging, pricing and distribution, but my sources say, at this point, that Windows Threshold is looking like it could be free to all Windows 8.1 Update, and maybe even Windows 7 Service Pack 1, users.
Microsoft is basically "done" with Windows 8.x. Regardless of how usable or functional it is or isn't, it has become Microsoft's Vista 2.0 — something from which Microsoft needs to distance itself, perception-wise. At this point, Microsoft is going full-steam-ahead toward Threshold and will do its best to differentiate that OS release from Windows 8.
Microsoft might disable Live Tiles in a Future Windows Desktop versions - 07/01/2014 08:32 AM
Microsoft would be planning the remove the Live Tiles start screen from Windows for PCs in a future version of Windows. The Windows version for tablets and hybrids would still keep that function of co...
Windows 8.1 Update 2 Could Debut in July - 06/30/2014 08:50 AM
The Russian super-leaker Wzor, who by the way is uncannily correct in his predictions, has pegged announcements on both operating systems coming on July 13-17 at the Worldwide Partner Conference. Th...
Start Menu May Arrive in Windows 8.1 Update 3 - 06/27/2014 08:57 AM
Read .. more delays. Microsoft’s Terry Myerson revealed that the beloved Start Menu would return to the Windows platform in the near future, but didn’t specify an actual release d...
Point of View launches Intel Atom Based Windows 8.1 tablets - 06/24/2014 03:01 PM
Point of View launches a new tablet line based on the latest Intel Atom platform and Microsoft Windows 8.1 Operating system. In the new Mobii Windows tablet line there are three models available: The ...
Windows 8.1 Update 2 Coming - 06/23/2014 08:21 AM
Windows 8.1 Update 2 is getting close to a release and may hit the RTM (release-to-manufacturing) phase in July already, so Microsoft could launch it in August or September. The new update will bring ...
Denial
Senior Member
Posts: 14092
Joined: 2004-05-16
Senior Member
Posts: 14092
Joined: 2004-05-16
#4864067 Posted on: 07/03/2014 05:34 PM
I just don't see the logic in this. I mean yes I agree that Microsoft probably should have provided an option for people who like the start menu to use it. But the entire industry is moving towards touch oriented devices. Look at Gnome/KDE/Unity/Cinnamon/iOS/Android every single major desktop environment are all being redesigned to be used across a wide variety of devices.
Matias Duarte went on a like a 20 minute speech about how he foresees Android and his newly created Material Design as an approach to be taken across a wide range of screens. From TV, to PC/Laptop, to Phones, to Watches.
This is the way design is going. Microsoft followed suit not directly because they wanted "globs of money" but because if they didn't they would be the only major OS that didn't follow that trend.
Blackberry is an example of a company who didn't follow the trend. At the start no one cared. Now, in hindsight, people are saying "Blackberry should have innovated" "Blackberry should have switched over to modern design principles". Well it's too late for them now. The ship has sailed and they missed the boat. Microsoft has thus far avoided this by changing their design principle and moved towards a unified approach.
Obviously there is a very vocal minority of users who will complain about this approach and hate it. But I still think they are making the correct choices. The vast majority of people that I know that use Windows 8 love it. They don't have issues with the Start Screen, most don't even seem to care. The only place I hear people bicker is on enthusiast forums. And their complaints are often not followed up by any real argument.
You can 't just say "I hate this UI because it was designed for touchscreens!" Like why do you hate it? Is there a particular workflow that was impeded by the redesign? Did it cause an unreasonable amount of extra work to complete that task? What was the time before what was the time after? Is there a new or alternative workflow that could help you complete that task even quicker?
So many people love to **** on it yet I still haven't seen any single particular problem fleshed out. It always just turns into "I hate it because it's different".
This is a perfect example of what I'm talking about. There is nothing here. "I don't like it because it's a sick joke that was designed to be as annoying as possible". Like what does that even mean? Why is it annoying? Why is it a joke? Why is it worse on your laptop? Do you find that navigating the interface is more difficult on a touchpad because it requires more movement now that the start takes up the full screen? How often are you diving deep within the application hierarchy that this becomes a problem? Have you tried using the search function more often to complete the tasks you are attempting? Can you think of ways that may keep the same touch-oriented functionality that the Start Screen provides while maintaining the ease of flow on a touchpad? Would a touch screen on said laptop provide a viable alternative to this issue? Would display built into the touch pad that started when you hit start be a unique solution to solving this problem while providing the benefits to a tablet device?
But no, nothing, devoid of thought and reason. It sucks because it sucks and there is no way to fix it. It provides nothing for me and thus I don't want it.
And the thing that drives me insane is that Microsoft is clearly listening and iterating it's design with each update. Like ok the initial problem was that Windows sucked on touchscreen devices. Microsoft fixed this problem with Windows 8. But in the process of that they kind of hampered the interface with traditional desktop and laptop users. So with each update they slowly started progressing through and fixing the problems that users had.
While I understand his reasoning of doing this, which was of course to make gobs and gobs of money, his way of going about it damaged his company incredibly.
I just don't see the logic in this. I mean yes I agree that Microsoft probably should have provided an option for people who like the start menu to use it. But the entire industry is moving towards touch oriented devices. Look at Gnome/KDE/Unity/Cinnamon/iOS/Android every single major desktop environment are all being redesigned to be used across a wide variety of devices.
Matias Duarte went on a like a 20 minute speech about how he foresees Android and his newly created Material Design as an approach to be taken across a wide range of screens. From TV, to PC/Laptop, to Phones, to Watches.
This is the way design is going. Microsoft followed suit not directly because they wanted "globs of money" but because if they didn't they would be the only major OS that didn't follow that trend.
Blackberry is an example of a company who didn't follow the trend. At the start no one cared. Now, in hindsight, people are saying "Blackberry should have innovated" "Blackberry should have switched over to modern design principles". Well it's too late for them now. The ship has sailed and they missed the boat. Microsoft has thus far avoided this by changing their design principle and moved towards a unified approach.
Obviously there is a very vocal minority of users who will complain about this approach and hate it. But I still think they are making the correct choices. The vast majority of people that I know that use Windows 8 love it. They don't have issues with the Start Screen, most don't even seem to care. The only place I hear people bicker is on enthusiast forums. And their complaints are often not followed up by any real argument.
You can 't just say "I hate this UI because it was designed for touchscreens!" Like why do you hate it? Is there a particular workflow that was impeded by the redesign? Did it cause an unreasonable amount of extra work to complete that task? What was the time before what was the time after? Is there a new or alternative workflow that could help you complete that task even quicker?
So many people love to **** on it yet I still haven't seen any single particular problem fleshed out. It always just turns into "I hate it because it's different".
If it's anything like Windows 8.x I'm not interested. 8.x still seems like a sick joke and I cringe every time I use my laptop which has it, it's as if it was designed to be annoying as possible. "You'll get used to it" they said, no, I never got used to it.
This is a perfect example of what I'm talking about. There is nothing here. "I don't like it because it's a sick joke that was designed to be as annoying as possible". Like what does that even mean? Why is it annoying? Why is it a joke? Why is it worse on your laptop? Do you find that navigating the interface is more difficult on a touchpad because it requires more movement now that the start takes up the full screen? How often are you diving deep within the application hierarchy that this becomes a problem? Have you tried using the search function more often to complete the tasks you are attempting? Can you think of ways that may keep the same touch-oriented functionality that the Start Screen provides while maintaining the ease of flow on a touchpad? Would a touch screen on said laptop provide a viable alternative to this issue? Would display built into the touch pad that started when you hit start be a unique solution to solving this problem while providing the benefits to a tablet device?
But no, nothing, devoid of thought and reason. It sucks because it sucks and there is no way to fix it. It provides nothing for me and thus I don't want it.
And the thing that drives me insane is that Microsoft is clearly listening and iterating it's design with each update. Like ok the initial problem was that Windows sucked on touchscreen devices. Microsoft fixed this problem with Windows 8. But in the process of that they kind of hampered the interface with traditional desktop and laptop users. So with each update they slowly started progressing through and fixing the problems that users had.
Clouseau
Senior Member
Posts: 2811
Joined: 2011-05-17
Senior Member
Posts: 2811
Joined: 2011-05-17
#4864132 Posted on: 07/03/2014 07:06 PM
Microsoft has been changing the interface that 8 brought because no choice was given. That and that alone has been the main ongoing complaint. Windows 98 and forward provided a choice to go full on with the new interface changes or stick with the "classic" look. I originally thought Microsoft was pulling a Coca-Cola move just to get Classic branded on their product. That was not the case. This is the first time since Windows 95 that no choice was given. The market is not the same as it was back then; not as forgiving. The need to adapt an offering closer to what was and is being communicated from their user base had to happen.
The desktop market is becoming a niche market. Like stated so many times before the mass market has evolved to mobile. Microsoft is going to align themselves with the ongoing mobile side before ironing out the quirks for any niche. There is nothing wrong with this approach. Windows 8 was for the mass market and 9, or what ever it will be labeled, is going to address the business side to keep that market in the fold. The unified vision they have will take time, as found out and cannot be done cold turkey without alienating market segments. This is why 9 will be looking at the immediate environment it will be operating in and setting up by default the UI it thinks will be more to the users liking. Like 7 was Vista the way it should have been. 9 will be 8 the way it should have been. Choice is not always the correct item to remove.
Microsoft has been changing the interface that 8 brought because no choice was given. That and that alone has been the main ongoing complaint. Windows 98 and forward provided a choice to go full on with the new interface changes or stick with the "classic" look. I originally thought Microsoft was pulling a Coca-Cola move just to get Classic branded on their product. That was not the case. This is the first time since Windows 95 that no choice was given. The market is not the same as it was back then; not as forgiving. The need to adapt an offering closer to what was and is being communicated from their user base had to happen.
The desktop market is becoming a niche market. Like stated so many times before the mass market has evolved to mobile. Microsoft is going to align themselves with the ongoing mobile side before ironing out the quirks for any niche. There is nothing wrong with this approach. Windows 8 was for the mass market and 9, or what ever it will be labeled, is going to address the business side to keep that market in the fold. The unified vision they have will take time, as found out and cannot be done cold turkey without alienating market segments. This is why 9 will be looking at the immediate environment it will be operating in and setting up by default the UI it thinks will be more to the users liking. Like 7 was Vista the way it should have been. 9 will be 8 the way it should have been. Choice is not always the correct item to remove.
ManofGod
Senior Member
Posts: 1581
Joined: 2004-12-10
Senior Member
Posts: 1581
Joined: 2004-12-10
#4864286 Posted on: 07/03/2014 10:35 PM
since my workstations for audio and video editing are working fast and stable with win7 x64, i don`t see any reason to change to 8 or 9. if there is not a massive improvement in any kind of the relevant features, like hardware support, system stability, driver and 3rd party software compatibility / support there is no reason to buy this.
just because of bling menu`s and fancy social stuff, i wont spend money.
if there is a noticeable speed up in games, i will consider 9 for my gaming rig, noticeable !
Personally, I find Windows 8.1 to be much better than Windows 7. However, for what you use the machine for, I would not mess with it either. Mission critical stuff should not be upgraded unless you know for sure that it will work.
However, I do not see that as a plus for Windows 7 as much as a plus for long term stability. (Patches and updates have made everything work much better over the years.) Also, the drivers and updates will be better on a 5 year old OS compared to something that has not even been out for 2 years yet.
since my workstations for audio and video editing are working fast and stable with win7 x64, i don`t see any reason to change to 8 or 9. if there is not a massive improvement in any kind of the relevant features, like hardware support, system stability, driver and 3rd party software compatibility / support there is no reason to buy this.
just because of bling menu`s and fancy social stuff, i wont spend money.
if there is a noticeable speed up in games, i will consider 9 for my gaming rig, noticeable !
Personally, I find Windows 8.1 to be much better than Windows 7. However, for what you use the machine for, I would not mess with it either. Mission critical stuff should not be upgraded unless you know for sure that it will work.
However, I do not see that as a plus for Windows 7 as much as a plus for long term stability. (Patches and updates have made everything work much better over the years.) Also, the drivers and updates will be better on a 5 year old OS compared to something that has not even been out for 2 years yet.
ManofGod
Senior Member
Posts: 1581
Joined: 2004-12-10
Senior Member
Posts: 1581
Joined: 2004-12-10
#4864302 Posted on: 07/03/2014 10:47 PM
At work, we'll be sticking with Win7 for many years to come.
I'm only just weaning the last XP users off their OS.
The company I work for did take their sweet time migrating to 7, but that is their own fault.
Many companies I know started to get Win7 validated during the Public Beta phase, they knew, we all knew, it was 7 that was going to replace XP.
Win8 in its current form will never replace Win7.
once I explained that the whole workforce would have to go on a course to learn how to use Win8, including me, they looked a little shocked.
They hadn't thought of this.
Personally, I'll be staying on Win7 at home, hoping that game devs remember that OpenGL 4 exists, and that the whole world doesn't revolve around Microsofts bloated arse.
I really only have Windows because the majority of Games are available, only, on it.
I think i'll be installing Linux this summer, and playing with that a bit more.
Anyone I know who had a problem going from XP to Win7 or Win8, went to Ubuntu.
Microsoft won't be winning those people back. ever.
Microsoft is dying, its had its time.
It was nice while it lasted, but they got too cocky, and too sure of themselves.
"Thanks for everything, but don't let the door hit your arse on the way out..."
Rigghhhhtttt..... The first paragraph, I was sort of with you. Then you continued on and showed the world your true colors as a illogical Microsoft hater.
Oh well, enjoy your time with Ubuntu, don't let the door hit you in the butt.
At work, we'll be sticking with Win7 for many years to come.
I'm only just weaning the last XP users off their OS.
The company I work for did take their sweet time migrating to 7, but that is their own fault.
Many companies I know started to get Win7 validated during the Public Beta phase, they knew, we all knew, it was 7 that was going to replace XP.
Win8 in its current form will never replace Win7.
once I explained that the whole workforce would have to go on a course to learn how to use Win8, including me, they looked a little shocked.
They hadn't thought of this.
Personally, I'll be staying on Win7 at home, hoping that game devs remember that OpenGL 4 exists, and that the whole world doesn't revolve around Microsofts bloated arse.
I really only have Windows because the majority of Games are available, only, on it.
I think i'll be installing Linux this summer, and playing with that a bit more.
Anyone I know who had a problem going from XP to Win7 or Win8, went to Ubuntu.
Microsoft won't be winning those people back. ever.
Microsoft is dying, its had its time.
It was nice while it lasted, but they got too cocky, and too sure of themselves.
"Thanks for everything, but don't let the door hit your arse on the way out..."
Rigghhhhtttt..... The first paragraph, I was sort of with you. Then you continued on and showed the world your true colors as a illogical Microsoft hater.
Oh well, enjoy your time with Ubuntu, don't let the door hit you in the butt.
Click here to post a comment for this news story on the message forum.
Senior Member
Posts: 10563
Joined: 2006-02-14
If it's anything like Windows 8.x I'm not interested. 8.x still seems like a sick joke and I cringe every time I use my laptop which has it, it's as if it was designed to be annoying as possible. "You'll get used to it" they said, no, I never got used to it.