I don't know. I'm not a dev. You guys would know that stuff better than me.

I'm still ticked off that it has a limit as to how many buttons you can use, thirty. That's not a lot considering what I want to make it do.

This being the internet, I thought he was just trying to be funny.

i am absolutely sure he talked to that support guy. i believe him just as well.

i just do not think a first-level support guy is a valuable source for Microsoft's long-term strategic decisions.

they do that since years with phone operating systems (without much success) or with game consoles (very successful). they gave up on mp3 players and phones (anybody remembers the Kin?).

there is a level playing field on internet browsers now.

there once was a level playing field on office suites.

they compete in search engines.

I can't speak for everyone, but the vast majority of people (forum posters) I have seen complain about W8 either 1)  have made statements clearly indicating they haven't used it at all or 2) haven't learned how to perform a certain task in W8 and thus improperly criticize it...there also have been scathing reviews of W8 that make completely inaccurate statements about W8 functionality, giving many people a false sense of understanding when they discuss W8 without actually using it...

I can understand and respect why someone from a more "production perspective" may not like W8, but judging by the statements many W8 haters have made in this thread and others, most of the critics that really irk me are not coming from that perspective....

That someone doesn't like W8 doesn't bother me, but it is without a doubt quite prevalent to see criticism for W8 coming from people who truly don't know what they are talking about...in essence, there a few legitimate gripes amidst a sea of ignorant complaining....

With a minor few exceptions, you being one of them, most of the people bitching here do fall in to the category of "afraid" or "not tried it properly".

(as was stated in #136)

Oh, on a side note. You can pin a folder to the start screen. The traditional start menu is located at C:\ProgramData\Microsoft\Windows\Start Menu\Programs. I just navigated to C:\ProgramData\Microsoft\Windows\Start Menu\, right clicked on the programs folder and chose pin to start.

Why would you want to?  I find grouping them on the start screen perfectly acceptable since having them in 'folders' would just necessitate an extra click/tap and we're all about eliminating that.

Oh, good show.

Relearning 'functionality'....now that's definitely going to assist productivity....

My main issue behind the whole direction MS has taken with 8 is that after all these generations of MS OS the 'change' is now revolutionary, not evolutionary....and it is ALL at the expense of the computer user in deference to the idiot trinket users of phones and pad interfaces.

Why couldn't the toy-users be made to learn a real OS interface rather than the converse?

The reality of LEGITIMATE complaint re the revolutionary change is plain and evident and hasn't been seen in such vehement diatribe before in any other rendition of a MS OS.

Microsoft has simply said 'fuck you, deal with it' to all its current [and future] customers.  That's fine...they're allowed to.  Just don't classify all who disagree with the process as 'ignorant complainers'.  Just because someones opinion doesn't match YOUR interpretation of reality doesn't make them ignorant.  They may actually have a firmer grip on reality than you.

Once upon a time some clever-dick had the notion of using aircraft-style sticks in a car in place of the conventional steeringwheel.   That went well.

Not every new idea is a good idea.

That's just it though.......evolution in technology is good and all but sometimes it takes revolution within technology to effect real change once one 'evolutionary path' has been maximized.  Win 7 may very well be the 'best' start-button driven OS there ever was.  While there were only desktop computers, and integration with phones (tablets were just a gleam in the nerd's eye) was just for the hardcore nerds to show off, evolving the start-button platform not only made sense, it was the only sound business decision.  Now that integration, cloud-computing, and presence detection are not only the buzzwords of the day an OS revolution is exactly what the doctor ordered!   This tech revolution is telling us (gently.......or not!..hehe) that the 'start-button'  (and its antiquated desktop OS) isn't going to cut it moving forward.  So........in keeping with 'evolution'.......we users must also evolve.......or get left behind.

EDIT:

At this point, I would put forward that more than any other 'choice', the average person is being tasked with choosing an eco-system, not an OS or even hardware platform.  When choosing an eco-system I believe most average people will choose based on 'integration' between devices.  Seems to me that's where MS's focus has gone.......can't really fault them imo......

No, Vista wasn't Revolutionary...it was definitely evolutionary.  Its only failing was it was released half-baked.  Win 7 is simply Vista with the correct lead-time.

It wasn't, which is exactly my point.

Re the_Monk's edit....yes, MS decided it was the current Windows users themselves who would be the ones required to bend to their [new] direction.

Integration and commonality at ALL costs.

I don't know, I think XP is still neck and neck with 7 according to usage statistics.

It being the choices of the greater 'connected world' influencing their future tech plans, I don't believe it matters who or what is required to bend.  The 'world' wants "integration and commonality".......one way or another the world is [going to be] getting what it wants.  Again, one can't exactly blame MS for changing with the world.....