The End of Windows XP--Now What?

Yea, my best friend has a Windows phone and he loves it; I've never heard anything particularly bad about them except for the aforementioned lack of apps and small developer base. I just don't see any reason to switch over *shrug* Android does me well.

There are two elements that define the quality of any computer user interface. One is discoverability: how easy is it to figure out how to accomplish a task that you've never done before/haven't done in so long that you can't remember the method, without resorting to third-party documentation? The other is usability: what kind of fancy things (power user tools, various forms of automation, etc.) can you do with the system once you know it well? Often, the two pull in opposite directions.

Typically, a command-line system is a very usable interface, but sucks in the discoverability category. Most tablet/phone OSs lean in the opposite direction: simple enough that they're highly discoverable once you know a few basic paradigms, but they're so highly constrained that they suck at usability.

Older versions of Windows had found a sort of awkward balance between the two extremes: most things that an end-user would want to do were discoverable, and there was enough automation and different ways of doing things that they scored kinda-sorta-okay on usability. Windows 8, as initially released, had a lot less discoverability than earlier Windows versions, and didn't compensate for this with any kind of improvement in usability (in fact, by all accounts it lost in usability, too, by removing some options). Windows 8.1 fixes some of that, but not all. That (plus the schizophrenic dichotomy between the desktop and not-Metro) is, in a nutshell, why many people act like Win8 is the worst thing since cancer. It isn't unusable, but it is unnecessarily irritating in some ways.

I disagree on both counts. It has discoverability and usability. My son jumped right onto it with no problem.

Win8's main problem was shock -- people hate change. The same things happened when Microsoft introduced Win95. It was a completely different looking interface from the previous incarnation that everyone lashed out in fear.

Hmm... I don't like Win 8 and it has nothing to do with fear. I just don't like it.

I like Windows 8.

But I'm primarily a Mac user, so my opinion probably doesn't count here.

Shadow_Ferret said:

I disagree on both counts. It has discoverability and usability. My son jumped right onto it with no problem.

Win8's main problem was shock -- people hate change. The same things happened when Microsoft introduced Win95. It was a completely different looking interface from the previous incarnation that everyone lashed out in fear.

Click to expand...

In 1995 Microsoft released an OS called Microsoft BOB that even people who knew nothing about computers couldn't break.
This is an actual screen shot of the user interface:



Now while it was kind of cute, it was also dumbed down so much it lost all functionality. It was like creating a Ferrari with only one gear.

This is exactly how windows 8's new interface feels. They have designed an OS around the limitations of a Phone/tablet, while completely ignoring the strengths of a PC. It's like they made all the food in their tuckshop for the one vegetarian in the class. Why do all the metro apps have to launch in full screen mode when you are using a 23" monitor that can handle multiple widows? Why focus 90% of your user interface on apps that will occupy 10% of your time? It's just bizarre.

If you just want to surf the net, watch movies and listen to Mp3's then it's probably okay, but for business purposes metro is just an annoying layer that get in the way more than anything else.

Shadow_Ferret said:

I disagree on both counts. It has discoverability and usability. My son jumped right onto it with no problem.

Click to expand...

I never claimed that it had no discoverability or usability--I said it was inferior in those categories to earlier versions of Windows.

The hot corners don't seem to have been discoverable for most people, nor how to get rid of a "Modern UI" window, shutdown options were moved to a difficult-to-find place, the start screen is not hierarchical and wastes massive amounts of space, I've heard a lot of complaints about wireless options . . . do I need to go on? (Yes, I do realize that some of those things have been addressed by 8.1.) I did say it works for some people, and your son seems to be one of them, but that isn't typical.

I'm going to paste what I wrote to a friend who expressed the same concerns:

Friend says: "Leo LaPort thinks there will be a bunch of PC attacks after April 7th when MS stops supporting XP."

Rez (who used to maintain computers for a living) says: This is a load of crap. Attacks are only profitable if they focus on max marketshare. XP is losing marketshare among home users, and most business users (where the majority of XP machines still are) are behind a corporate firewall and not really accessible without social engineering coming into the picture (NO system is safe from the user being talked into doing something stupid.. here, click this link!)

So the majority of forthcoming malware will not be for XP, but rather, for Win7 and Win8.

Second, XP doesn't suddenly become "less secure" the day after support ends. It only means they probably won't issue any more patches. Well, guess what, after 12 years of patches, everything that ANYONE (including malware authors) has found has been fixed. The chances of some new significant vulnerability in Windows XP itself are slim to none.

Little known fact: most exploits actually come out AFTER the patch -- because the easiest way to build an exploit is to reverse-engineer the patch. If there's no patch to tell the bad guys where to look, they might never find the security hole in the first place. Then they look for machines that aren't yet patched for that particular hole. Which incidentally doesn't work very well if it's not a network vulnerability (the only serious access route to most PCs nowadays, since floppy drives are a has-been).

BTW the same applies to Win9x. It's relatively secure nowadays because no one pays any attention to it (and it has no idea how to even run most modern network exploits, so they just stall and do nothing).

And the risk is overblown. Yeah, there are millions of computers infected. But someone did the math, and turns out only about 0.4% of all computers are infected. Yes, less than one half of one percent.

Run a firewall (and a good antivirus -- which means not AVG -- can't hurt), don't let email run scripts, don't run software of unknown origin (or that's been repackaged, like from SoftPedia), don't click random links of unknown provenance, and there's pretty much nothing to worry about. If you want to run XP, run it. I do, and I'm not planning to 'upgrade' in the foreseeable future.

I have no intention of trading out my lovely XP system for something I do not want. All that crap on the internet about the evil munchkins diving into my hard drive on the upcoming day of doom is just propaganda. I have a decent antivirus and I stay away from shady websites. I back up my whole system to an external drive regularly, but probably not as often as I should. I back up my files to three different hard drives every day. YES, I am Paranoid. Please note the capital P. One bad experience several years ago made me the untrusting computer user that I am today.

I will be somewhat relieved when I am free of Microsoft's "updates" which they continue to slip into my system, even though I have automatic updates turned off. OFF, do you hear me MS? They are supposed to "protect" me, but they tend to break things in the process.

Oh shit. I had a whole lot more to say, but I see REZ has beat me to it. Wouldn't ya know?! SO I will leave you with this: Most important of all — no matter what OS you use — BACK UP YOUR WORK.

Rez cheated... this rant is very old and has only needed minor updates across the years. And I'd just updated it only last month.

And I too have auto-updates turned off. They break as much as they fix. I only install those few that actually affect my system. As a general rule, tho, by the time updates become Service Packs, most of the bugs have been worked out. XP SP3 seems to have been pretty clean.

The big point is, USE THE OS YOU LIKE. All OSs have security issues; switching or updating will not prevent this, it only shifts the goalposts. Be sensible, use the obvious preventives, and you'll be about as secure as is practical regardless of your OS.

Incidentally, since most folks on broadband are now using a router (even if it's labeled a 'modem'), the majority of network exploits are stopped anyway.

But most of all, what WM said: BACK UP YOUR WORK. Cuz tho there are a plethora of OSs, there are only two kinds of hard drives: those that have failed, and those that are going to fail.

Shadow_Ferret said:

Win8's main problem was shock -- people hate change. The same things happened when Microsoft introduced Win95. It was a completely different looking interface from the previous incarnation that everyone lashed out in fear.

Click to expand...

This is oft-repeated, but still nonsense. These same people now bitching nonstop about Win8 all have smartphones. They weren't afraid of THAT new interface, so different from anything we'd had before (and nothing like phones of the past)... I think that alone gives the lie to the "hate/fear change" thing about OS interfaces.

Same nonsense went around at the last huge interface change, Win3.x to Win9x -- but because that actually was an improvement, the complaints died a swift death, and Win95 killed off Win3.x very quickly. Among my clients, the remaining complainers were blind or near-blind, which made change difficult for them, or had software that would not run on Win9x. (You'd be shocked how many engineers still use AutoCAD for DOS.)

Nope, people who dislike Win8 dislike it because it annoys the crap out of 'em, or hides stuff they actually USE. Frex, myself -- once I got past the stupid Metro thing and have a desktop of sorts, it's not so different -- til I went to use WinExplorer, which I use ALL the freakin' time. I am going to HURT the person who redesigned it, or more accurately, crippled it, especially the Search function. Hurt him. With big sticks.

The 'discoverability' aspect is probably fine for a brand new user who is just discovering everything -- such as kids. But it's a fundamental change of logic for everyone else, which makes it undiscoverable. Frex, for 20 years we've been taught that taking the mouse pointer to a corner hides it, and now what, it 'discovers' stuff? WTF??

Microsoft has a habit of wanting to adopt new things rather after the fact. Their Win8 logic goes: Touch and tiles have taken over phones, so it must be what should take over the desktop! somehow forgetting that they are not the same device physically (do you really want to have to wave your arm around like that?), and are not uniformly used the same either.

Back in the day, Microsoft Bob was floated not just as an interface for beginners, but as the wave of the future. Well, obviously that didn't fly...

This is oft-repeated, but still nonsense. These same people now bitching nonstop about Win8 all have smartphones. They weren't afraid of THAT new interface, so different from anything we'd had before (and nothing like phones of the past)... I think that alone gives the lie to the "hate/fear change" thing about OS interfaces.

Click to expand...

Oh yes.

Nope, people who dislike Win8 dislike it because it annoys the crap out of 'em, or hides stuff they actually USE.

Click to expand...

Did you know I love you?

I have no idea who you hang out with, but I (and many people I know) complain about each new smartphone interface. But many people might not complain because to them they have to learn an entire new DEVICE, and its generally voluntary. You don't need a smartphone.

Win95, and now Win8, are different because if you want a new PC, most likely you'll have the new interface and be forced to use it. I couldn't stand the look and feel of Win95 and tried to put off having to use it for as long as I could. But eventually, what choice do you have?

And the only smartphone interface I haven't complained about is Win8 because it was an easy transition from my PC.

Shadow_Ferret said:

Win95, and now Win8, are different because if you want a new PC, most likely you'll have the new interface and be forced to use it. I couldn't stand the look and feel of Win95 and tried to put off having to use it for as long as I could. But eventually, what choice do you have?

Click to expand...

But that's not at all the same thing as hate/fear of change.

Rather, it's "your new interface broke my computer!" and yeah, lack of choice. At least in smartphones if you don't like one OS, there are several others equally common to choose from, and if you dislike them all, you can still do well enough with a dumbphone. But in mass-market computers, your choices are extremely limited, and people don't appreciate having something they dislike rammed down their throats. Worse, needlessly rammed down their throats ("My computer worked just fine with my old OS!")

When I was building custom PCs, I always recommended to my clients that they should use the OS that suited them, be that old or new. Some wanted latest and greatest; some wanted old and reliable; others didn't care so long as the damned thing worked right without making them tear their hair out.

Once watched this documentary on cars.
One manufacturer failed to take note of the public's likes and dislikes.
They did their own thing, remaining completely oblivious to their customers needs.
They went bankrupt.

Take note, Microsoft, or you'll be next.

There is already a lot of dissatisfaction, if you haven't noticed.
Perhaps your CEO might try a Google search for starts.
Keywords: "Windows 8 dissatisfaction."

Reziac said:

Frex, for 20 years we've been taught that taking the mouse pointer to a corner hides it, and now what, it 'discovers' stuff? WTF??

Click to expand...

Hot corners ain't a new thing. Mac and Linux have had them for years, and I'm sure there are Windows mods that would add them.

Though I agree there is a discoverability issue, since Mac and Linux use hot corners as conveniences rather than necessities.

That reminds me... I still can't believe Windows hasn't added virtual desktops yet.

kuwisdelu said:

Hot corners ain't a new thing. Mac and Linux have had them for years, and I'm sure there are Windows mods that would add them.

Click to expand...

Neither are tiles a new thing, but the only tile-interface OS I can think of (and the name refuses to come to mind, but I knew someone who ran it) went the way of the niche OS back in the XT/286 era.... despite that it could multitask on minimal hardware and was very stable and competent, for its day.

kuwisdelu said:

That reminds me... I still can't believe Windows hasn't added virtual desktops yet.

Click to expand...

Ahem... from back in the mid-XP era (it was released in 2006):

http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/sysinternals/cc817881.aspx

There probably was little motivation to add it natively when there were already a variety of virtual desktop utils available to Windows users.

Reziac said:

But that's not at all the same thing as hate/fear of change.

Click to expand...

Oh, I see. You're arguing my choice of words. OK. You're right.

If they had a hate/fear of change they wouldn't even have technology. Fair enough.

But I'm not sure what else to call people disliking something before they even give it a chance if not hate/fear of change.

I loathed Win8 when my son got his new computer. I'm sure I have a few rants on here back in late 2012/early 2013. But then my computer died and I was faced with that decision, so I just went ahead and learned about it. Now I like it better than any other OS I've ever used.

Reziac said:

Ahem... from back in the mid-XP era (it was released in 2006):

http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/sysinternals/cc817881.aspx

There probably was little motivation to add it natively when there were already a variety of virtual desktop utils available to Windows users.

Click to expand...

I know that it's possible, but it's still annoying it's not there natively.

Shadow_Ferret said:

But I'm not sure what else to call people disliking something before they even give it a chance if not hate/fear of change.

Click to expand...

I dunno either... but I don't have to try gasoline on my lettuce to know I won't like it as salad dressing. One sniff is sufficient to convince me.

In my observation, it tends to be people with more experience who dislike new OSs, usually for breaking commonly-used functions (if the problem is purely cosmetic, it gets snide remarks, like WinXP's default "Fischer-Price" window style generated, but that doesn't cause hate). Inexperienced people who are still afraid of hurting the computer will put up with whatever is set before them (usually without complaint), and if something doesn't work as expected, will assume they broke it.

kuwisdelu brings up something else -- I'd hazard that most people who like Win8 would also like MacOS, and probably v.v. From past observation -- the split of liking or hating MacOS tends to fall along the divide between image-oriented and text-oriented users. Win8's default interface is rather more image-oriented than its ancestors. To a text-oriented user, that says "Don't use me".

[Me, I hate MacOS with a screaming purple passion -- the interface, the way of working, how it's organized -- can't think of a single thing I like about it. And I don't 'get used to it'; I just dislike it more the longer I use it. -- Tho up thru OS9, the window style and font inherited from the GEM Desktop are always good for a laugh.]

I get the OS-update-familiarity argument. iOS 7, for example, I loathed on sight, but now it's faded into comfortable familiarity for me. I look at earlier versions and think: what?

What bothers me with 8 is, as Reziac said upthread, the degree of change. The charms and hotspots and Metro nonsense is a radical departure from XP, Vista, and 7. I upgraded from XP to 7 a couple of years back and the biggest thing I needed to get my head around was the Libraries idea. There are some fresh UI tweaks that I could either embrace (shaking a window to minimise every other window - awesome) or switch off easily (mousing over the bottom right corner to flick to the desktop. It's minor stuff - mildly useful, or mildly annoying.

8 is just too far from 7 to make the transition to familiarity easy. I am sure if I were forced to use it for a week or two at home it'd become second nature. But then I'd have to go to work on a 7 machine (we only upgraded from XP at work this year) and keep jarring myself mousing for stuff that isn't there.

I'm going to keep on with 7 on this machine for as long as I can. If there's some pressing reason to go to 8, I will, but I can't see that happening for a long while. And indeed the adoption curve of 8 seems a lot shallower than that of 7 - I'm not alone in feeling that way.

Reziac said:

kuwisdelu brings up something else -- I'd hazard that most people who like Win8 would also like MacOS, and probably v.v. From past observation -- the split of liking or hating MacOS tends to fall along the divide between image-oriented and text-oriented users. Win8's default interface is rather more image-oriented than its ancestors. To a text-oriented user, that says "Don't use me".

Click to expand...

I'd argue the opposite: Mac OS is more text-oriented than Windows, and Windows 8 is the most text-oriented Windows so far. The Design Language Formerly Known as Metro — which is the forefront of what is new about Windows 8 — is designed around emphasizing typography over graphics.

I've preferred OS X largely because of its emphasis on text and typography.

Well, it apparently just dropped that Microsoft has a bunch of updates planned for 8/8.1 that will make it much more desktop useable, for those of you stuck on XP through 7 for that reason...including the ability to have to old Start menu (not just the button that was reintroduced/unhidden in 8.1), more "desktop" styled interface, and such. *shrug*

In fact, Win9 is now a glimmer in Microsoft's eye, and the rumors are that it may backtrack the interface. Stay tooned....

Windows 8 soon to be more like Windows 7
http://money.cnn.com/2014/04/04/technology/windows-8-start-menu/index.html?hpt=hp_t3

At its Build developers conference in San Francisco on Wednesday, Microsoft announced a trio of new features for Windows 8.1 that had a decidedly "old-school" feel: First, Windows will get a bunch of tweaks that make it easier to use with a keyboard and mouse. Second, Microsoft announced that Windows 8-style "Modern" apps will run in a window in the traditional desktop interface. Third, the Start menu -- the ultimate signifier of "old" Windows -- is eventually coming back.

Click to expand...