PC sales Suffer Biggest Slump in years

[Graham]

Originally Posted by Dulin's Books

pl001 is correct. you cant have 3 vertical columns in a group. this may change with the blue update but cant confirm that. for now she'll have to organize in columns with 2 apps side by side i.e. top left>topright> middle left>middle right>bottom left>bottom right or however many rows she has.

She was trying to organise by row, rather than by column, and this may well be the problem. I'll see if this information helps keep things more static.

Originally Posted by Dulin's Books

of more concern is that you say you cant sign in now. with either account? the live or newly associated email?

and to kept the thread on track i'd understand if you answer in pm.

She had another crack at it this morning, and still couldn't get what she wanted, but I don't know the latest details. Before, it was that she could only log in with the original email address not the one she changed it to online. She had to change it back to be able to get into the laptop. When she gets home from work I'll see where she's got to now. I don't want to burden you with this, and hopefully I can figure out the problem, but if I do need a little pointer I'll PM you. Many thanks.

Graham

[Ken Maltby]

Originally Posted by taustin

While that is entirely true, it's hard to ignore the largest quarterly drop in PC sales in the history of the industry. Microsoft is in trouble, and it's more trouble than they were in when Vista bombed.

Microsoft can afford an occasional OS roll-out flop, especially now.

Its stock remains ~$30 a share and its dividend continues to rise.

All this "Win8 will destroy the PC industry" is total nonsense. That there is
from time to time a slow down in PC purchasing by the large players, is not
at all uncommon. This is only logical when a new OS is announced, which
might have a large impact on the business world. If you are buying one or
two it's no big thing, but if you buy them by the thousands you might want
to see how things work out (in house) before you make your next major
acquisition. A lot of companies doing that at the same time can have an
effect on quarterly figures.

Luck;
Ken

[JAcheson]

Originally Posted by BeccaPrice

oohhh - is this offer still good? do you have a link to the page?

The Acrobat one seems to be available here:

http://www.techspot.com/downloads/46...at-8-free.html

And the Photoshop one is here:

http://www.techspot.com/downloads/36...oshop-cs2.html

[K. Molen]

When I wrote this post I put the following paragraphs at the bottom, but I decided to put it at the top as a kind of pre-emptive strike:

Basically, my beef is with people who make comparisons to Windows 7, and claim that it's either more convoluted to do things in Windows 8 or that you can't do them at all. Button-click for button-click, I've yet to find something that has more steps in Windows 8 than 7. Sometimes it's fewer, sometimes it's the same.

I'm sure there's probably some feature, somewhere where Windows 8 has indeed made it more difficult or removed it altogether, that seems to always be the case when new OSes are released, but overall I just don't see it.

Anyway, on to the body of your post:

Originally Posted by pl001

It's not just being different that makes it more convoluted and difficult, it's the incompleteness. As I mentioned before Modern is not a complete interface that can stand on its own. As a touch interface, it is missing key components of what has made Android successful including but not limited to interactive widgets, centralized notifications, multiple store options, and personalization.

I've not yet used Windows 8 on a touch-only computer, so I can't really commet on this. You may very well have a point, but to me this is comparing Windows 8 to Android and others, and not Windows 7. I don't claim that Windows 8 is perfect, nor do I claim that it's better than Android. My primary claim is that it is not more complex to do things in Windows 8 than it is in Windows 7.

Originally Posted by pl001

As a PC interface, it can't do windows which is a huge omission, and it also can't do most of the advanced configuration. Windows 8 relies on the desktop for a lot of its shortcomings, but even that isn't quite what people are used to in 7.

I'm assuming by "can't do windows" you mean inside the Metro interface? I don't have a problem with that. It can do windows just fine in the desktop interface. And what advanced configurations are you talking about? As for it not being what people are used to in 7, that's true. I don't see anything wrong with that. Windows 95 wasn't what people were used to with Windows 3.1.

Originally Posted by pl001

Another example of a frustration is how the Windows Store installs apps on multiple profiles. In short, it doesn't. You have no option to install an app on anything other than the profile you are in at the time. To get it on the other profiles you have to go into each profile and install it, and in one case I even got charged twice for the same app because of this and have yet to get a refund. The store is very poorly done, by far the worst one out there. If you know the name of what you are looking for you can find it easily enough. If not, or if you want to find similar alternative apps, well, good luck.

You seem to know more about this than I do, I don't doubt that this is a problem, but Windows 7 didn't even have a Windows Store... so I don't see this as being a knock on Windows 8 vs. 7...

Originally Posted by pl001

How about side swipes to select multiple mail items? Completely hidden feature and different than selecting anything else in Modern. Not to mention the mail app as a whole feels about 4 years out of date.

Ever try getting the contents of an SD card to be seen in Modern apps in an RT device? Something automatic on other OSs that you almost certainly won't be figuring out without Google and some technical savvy.

Try opening the Photos app, select your Facebook or other online picture account, then try to copy a picture from there onto the PC. Can't be done. something that started as a great idea and then not finished.

As I said earlier, I could go on and on and on about these little frustrations...

Again, these are concerns about new things in Windows 8, things you couldn't do on Windows 7... I don't have any comments on that.

[K. Molen]

Originally Posted by taustin

How about "It's different than before in ways that actively prevent me from doing stuff that was easy to do in Win7"?

Give me an example.

[K. Molen]

Originally Posted by Katsunami

I'm not even going to start typing a complete answer to this, because it would take me half a week, and MobileRead's server would possibly explode when I post that manuscript into the forums. I'll limit myself to Metro and the Start-menu.

Windows 8 just prevents me from doing things the way I want to do them. I *hate* the Start-screen. I *don't* want a full screen start-menu that blanks out my desktop when I want to start a program. The Start-screen can't do some of the things the old Start-menu could. And being thrown out of the desktop into that damned Start-screen each time I hit the Windows-key (which is a lot, since I do many things using the keyboard to avoid having to reach for the mouse), a Start-screen that's half an OS by itself with it's own programs, gives me the feeling that Windows 8 is schizophrenic.

In other words, it's different and you don't like it. Nothing wrong with that, but it doesn't make it harder to use any more than Windows 95 is harder to use than Windows 3.1.

Look, I have no problems with people who dislike Windows 8 because they think Microsoft went overboard and changed too many things. But any time you try to make a new OS behave in ways the old one did, you're likely to have a bad time. People should either embrace the changes and learn the new logic and methodolgy, or stick with the previous version as you yourself have done.

But I won't buy claims that it's somehow worse and more complex, just because it's different.

[pl001]

Originally Posted by K. Molen

...Again, these are concerns about new things in Windows 8, things you couldn't do on Windows 7... I don't have any comments on that.

That's the thing though. Microsoft has made it clear that Metro/Modern is the future. The desktop is to support old legacy apps only. New programs will all be Modern, and only available through the Microsoft Store. That is their vision and they have not backed down from it. And it's not even close to being fully functional.

[K. Molen]

I can tell I struck a nerve with my claim that I've yet to see a complaint about Windows 8 that isn't somewhere rooted in "it's different than before and I don't like it." I have no wish to engage in a lengthy debate with multiple people, so instead of responding to similar comments from different posters, here's a breakdown of my point of view:

- I think of the change from Windows 7 to Windows 8 as similar to the change from Windows 3.1 to Windows 95, only not as severe. Yes, things now work differently. No, that doesn't make them worse or more convoluted. I'm sure people who liked having their screen filled with Windows like in 3.1 were unhappy with the clean desktop look of Windows 95, but that didn't make Windows 95 more difficult to use.

- By and large, doing things in Windows 8 takes about the same number of clicks and button presses as in Windows 7. Again, it looks different, it behaves differently, doesn't make it more complex.

- If you try to make a new OS behave in ways the old OS did, chances are very good you'll only get frustrated. Either embrace the new thought process and learn the new way of doing things, or remain with the old OS.

- If you really like Windows 7 but for some reason have to use Windows 8, just treat the Metro screen like the start screen. Yes, it's full screen instead of just a popup, but in exchange you get a much faster way of launching programs by simply hitting the first letter of the program name. Trade offs, it's all about trade offs.

[K. Molen]

Originally Posted by pl001

That's the thing though. Microsoft has made it clear that Metro/Modern is the future. The desktop is to support old legacy apps only. New programs will all be Modern, and only available through the Microsoft Store. That is their vision and they have not backed down from it. And it's not even close to being fully functional.

Hmm... this is news to me. Are you saying they're moving to an iTunes App Store kind of format, where if manufacturers want to release programs on the Windows 8 platform, then they have to get them certified via Microsoft and can only do so if it's in the new Metro style?

If not, what's to prevent Adobe from ignoring that and simply release their programs the way they used to?

[jersysman]

I usually don't comment on things that questions that wants and likes of other readers, but I will make an exception this time.

It is not up to someone else to buy claims on anyone but themselves. If a person has a problem with a software package or hardware, however trivial it may be, to them, that is a real problem. Being more complex is not in and of itself bad. But, when it becomes a detriment to how someone uses a product, it can be an issue.

As for me, I am in the market for a new PC. I have always been one who had to be one of the first to upgrade to the new operating system. However, this time I shall not. Windows 8 just does not offer me what I want to do with a computer. It may be quicker or it may be a better OS (not to me). But, I will not be getting it. I shall stick with Win 7. Maybe there are more people like me out there (especially with the latest sales figures). As I said, Windows 8 may be the best operating system on the planet, but if a lot fewer people are using it, then Microsoft does have a problem.

Now I shall retire and go back to enjoying the comments on the rest of this thread.

[Katsunami]

Originally Posted by K. Molen

In other words, it's different and you don't like it. Nothing wrong with that, but it doesn't make it harder to use any more than Windows 95 is harder to use than Windows 3.1.

In the Start-screen, I can't call up a jump list of an application by hitting Arrow-Right. That jump-list often includes useful stuff, such as launching a private browsing window for Firefox. The Start-screen shows me everything, instead of only only the 10 most used programs. It blots out my entire desktop. It doesn't show me a Documents or Pictures or Downloads link that's guaranteed to be always in the same spot. When you install programs that have many parts, each with their own launch icon, your screen gets cluttered and needs to be cleaned up, where in the Start-menu, all those icons sat in their own folder. And so on.

It does make it harder (a better word would be, less comfortable) to use, for me.

Of course I don't like that. I'll show you a change that's also different, not really more difficult to use (it takes about 2 minutes to figure out), but it's much, much less comfortable.

As I said, in another thread, I play the Hammond organ. A modern incarnation looks like this. Meet the XK3 (there is also a newer XK3C with some more MIDI-functions, but it looks the same):



Look closely and note the THREE sets of drawbars in the midde and the twelve inverted preset keys to the left of the two manuals for a total of 24.

Most other controls needed for playing have their own dedicated buttons. as did the old Hammonds.

Everybody who has played a Hammond at some time since 1936 can turn this thing on, sit down, and play, without noting anything strange, as all of the playing controls are in roughly the same spot as where you would expect them to be on a vintage Hammond. (Except they're a bit smaller.)

So, even if you're 85 years old, your vintage 1957 Hammond catches fire and burns down, you can get this baby here as a replacement. You can use about 90% of this instrument within 5 minutes after turning it on. And if you want to, you can ignore the rest of it and just use it as if the thing was 60 years old. To do so, you'll just have to ignore the display and its associated settings in the upper left corner. It changes the sound and setup of the instrument, if you wanted to.

(On the XK3C's big brother, the New B3, they actually stuck the display and it's buttons into a slide-out drawer under the lower manual, but this instrument is out of the financial range of many people.)

Now meet one of its successors: The Hammond SK2. It can do the same stuff as the XK3C; it can even do more.



See what I mean? No 2x 12 preset keys right on the left, with the same size as the normal keys. It now has 10 small preset keys just under its LCD display. No large Vibrato/Chorus rotating knob. It now has a few small buttons on the left. But even more important: only one set of drawbars. So you select Upper, and set your upper manual. Then you select Lower, and set your lower manual. And then select Pedal, and set your pedal. In the end, the physical drawbars will be set to the setting of the part you set last, and you've lost the setting for the other two parts, making it impossible to change them without hassle while playing.

On the XK3C, I just set my pedals with the two drawbars in the middle, and then set upper and lower at the same time, using both hands, while someone using the SK2 is still pushing buttons and shoving drawbars. In addition, the XK3C preserves all three settings.

On top of that, I can have 24 presets instead of only 10, and reach them easier while playing because the keys are much larger, and positioned closer to the left hand. Last but not least, ALL of the controls are in different spots (and sometimes, even in the menu) as compared to the XK3C.

Yes, the SK2 can do *more* than the XK3C, and you can use it, after getting used to it, but if you want to "just play a Hammond organ", in the same way a Hammond organ has been played for nearly 80 years, the XK3C is the MUCH better choise.

Not surprisingly, the XK3C is still in production (release in 2007) and selling like never before. IMHO, they can keep selling this instrument as it is, changing only things like the MIDI-implementation, if they need to should it change in the future. (And that's even more true for the New B3, being a perfect digital replica of the vintage 1955-1975 Hammond B3 organ.)

The SK2 has turned out to be a cheaper alternative for people who want more functions (like a Rhodes-piano, and Clavinet sound), while the XK33C is preferred by anyone who wants a Hammond Organ. Do I like the SK2? With regard to its organ sound and functionality? Yes. With regard to usability as a Hammond organ? No, absolutely friggin' not.

To many Hammond Organ players, the SK2 is like Windows 8 is to veteran Windows users: usable, but frustrating, because it just does not work the way people want or expect it to work, and while it has some new functions, it looses functions people have come to expect. Many people just want to use a "better Windows", not a "different Windows". Change for the sake of change is BAD.

===

I wouldn't have had a problem with Windows 8, if Microsoft had decided to leave the desktop as it is, and tack Metro on top of it, with its own programs, for use on Touch-devices, but with the option to disable it. And of course, keep the Start-menu. How difficult could it have been?

Which interface do you want to use?
[ ] The new Windows 8 interface with Metro UI and modern, flat colors.
[ ] The old Windows 7 interface with Start-menu and Aero. Disable Metro UI.

I would have probably upgraded already, because there's bound to be some internal improvements that I can appreciate in the same way as there were improvements between Vista and 7.

[pl001]

Originally Posted by K. Molen

Hmm... this is news to me. Are you saying they're moving to an iTunes App Store kind of format, where if manufacturers want to release programs on the Windows 8 platform, then they have to get them certified via Microsoft and can only do so if it's in the new Metro style?

If not, what's to prevent Adobe from ignoring that and simply release their programs the way they used to?

Yes, that is how I understand it.

Adobe could do that for a legacy desktop app of course since the Windows 8 desktop is backwards compatible, but they could not release a Modern/Metro app anywhere other than the Windows Store. Well, technically they could, but buyers would need a special sideload license and jump through a bunch of hoops, so essentially it needs to be sold through the store.

I can tell you with absolute certainty the only way to download apps on my Surface RT is through the store or jailbreaking.

[Katsunami]

Originally Posted by JAcheson

The Acrobat one seems to be available here:
<snip>

Normally, it works like this:

- You download the trial version and install it.
- You buy a serial in the Adobe Store.
- Then you enter the serial, and the software activates by checking the authenticity of the serial using an Adobe server.

Now, as CS2 is quite old, Aobde disabled the activation servers and has released some serials that do NOT need activation. See here:

http://www.adobe.com/downloads/cs2_downloads/

This software is not freeware. Officially, you will need a license to use it:

The serial numbers below should only be used by customers who legitimately purchased CS2 or Acrobat 7 and need to maintain their current use of these products.

(I doubt it if Adobe cares, assuming this stuff doesn't even run on Vista or Windows 7. It seems to, if you install it outside "C:\Program Files" and run it as Administrator, but I don't know the details as I've been running CS5.1. I doubt you'll get into problems as a home user, but I don't think you should be doing this as a company.)

[pl001]

Originally Posted by Katsunami

I wouldn't have had a problem with Windows 8, if Microsoft had decided to leave the desktop as it is, and tack Metro on top of it, with its own programs, for use on Touch-devices, but with the option to disable it. And of course, keep the Start-menu. How difficult could it have been?

Which interface do you want to use?
[ ] The new Windows 8 interface with Metro UI and modern, flat colors.
[ ] The old Windows 7 interface with Start-menu and Aero. Disable Metro UI.

I would have probably upgraded already, because there's bound to be some internal improvements that I can appreciate in the same way as there were improvements between Vista and 7.

Rumor has it that 8.1 (Blue), due to release this fall, will give you the option to boot directly to the desktop and bring back the start menu.

[Katsunami]

Originally Posted by K. Molen

- If you really like Windows 7 but for some reason have to use Windows 8, just treat the Metro screen like the start screen. Yes, it's full screen instead of just a popup, but in exchange you get a much faster way of launching programs by simply hitting the first letter of the program name. Trade offs, it's all about trade offs.

I've been launching programs like that since Vista.

You keep stating that "Windows 8 is not more convoluted". So you find having 2 browsers (IE for the desktop, IE for Metro), two email programs, a blanked out desktop, no folders and hundreds of icons in the Start-screen and full screen apps on a 24+ inch monitor handy features?

I don't. I find two default browsers uneccesary, switching between Metro and Desktop irritating to work with, I find the Start-screen messy, and using full screen or at most 2 apps at once on a large monitor not particularly user friendly, seeing how much white space the new UI uses.