Newell: 'Windows 8 is a catastrophe for everyone in the PC space'

Discussion in 'Industry News' started by MIG-31, Jul 26, 2012.

  1. MIG-31

    MIG-31 Old time Member.. Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2002
    Messages:
    75,755
    Likes Received:
    2,565
    Trophy Points:
    153
    Valve boss man Gabe Newell appears nervous of a closed-platform future for Windows, and calls Windows 8 "a catastrophe for everybody in the PC space".
    ____________
    Source: CVG
     
  2. Erroneus

    Erroneus Get off my lawn!

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2002
    Messages:
    13,727
    Likes Received:
    101
    Trophy Points:
    103
    :D Good guy Gabe sees how it is. I wonder if MS will realize their mistakes soon enough for them to fix it in SP1 or we really have to wait for Windows 9 and then MS is back to "every second windows version must suck" cycle.
     
  3. IvanV

    IvanV HH Assassin Guild Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2004
    Messages:
    11,139
    Likes Received:
    2,413
    Trophy Points:
    138
    I'm not in the loop, how is MS closing Windows 8 as a platform?
     
  4. Mr Cairo

    Mr Cairo Require backup .... NO

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2002
    Messages:
    4,130
    Likes Received:
    1,414
    Trophy Points:
    138
    Possibly the PC is traditionally Keyboard and Mouse and that suits FPS games to a T but if MS go the touchscreen route can FPS games really work that well

    I do get that the option for keyboard mouse is still there but i get the feeling that MS want us to move away from that setup with Win 8

    I am probably way off base though :)
     
  5. cstX

    cstX Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2009
    Messages:
    79
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    8
    I too am wondering about this as this is the first time i heard about it. Anyone care to elaborate?
     
  6. The Captain

    The Captain Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2004
    Messages:
    212
    Likes Received:
    8
    Trophy Points:
    28
    I think Gaben needs to calm down a bit. So what if Windows 8 sucks? Microsoft has had a long history of making every other operating system suck.

    Win95 - bad
    Win98 - good
    WinME - bad
    XP - good
    Vista - bad
    7 - good
    8 - bad
    9 - most likely good

    Worst case scenario? Everyone will stay on Windows 7 until 9 comes around.
     
  7. Jac

    Jac Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2009
    Messages:
    1,501
    Likes Received:
    148
    Trophy Points:
    73
    I think he's talking about the Windows App store and how that will affect developers. How M$ is trying to lock down the system and exercise greater control over what and how people get their software.

    You get the impression that M$ see the future as simplified tablet apps and everyone playing endless Angry Birds casuals instead of proper PC gaming. M$ need to wake up and deliver a proper PC OS otherwise we may well see Linux becoming the OS of choice for real PC users.
     
  8. IvanV

    IvanV HH Assassin Guild Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2004
    Messages:
    11,139
    Likes Received:
    2,413
    Trophy Points:
    138
    @The Captain: I beg to differ.

    The 'bad' 95 was patched pretty well with 95 OSR2.
    The 'good' 98 crashed even on unveiling (Second Edition was significantly more stable).
    ME - I guess everybody hates this one.
    XP - overrated, more bloated and flaky younger brother of (excellent) Windows 2000; made decent by ages of patching.
    Vista - very good
    7 - very slightly improved Vista.
    8 - ??? It doesn't look very good so far.

    So, in my opinion, there is no calendar that tells you in advance which version is going to be good or not. A lot of versions had problems on release. Most were patched into something acceptable over time and one so far was fundamentally crap. Well, it looks like number two is coming.

    @Jac: Thanks. I hope they aren't that crazy, I really don't like Linux. ;)
     
  9. Judas

    Judas Obvious Closet Brony Pony

    Joined:
    May 13, 2002
    Messages:
    39,422
    Likes Received:
    1,396
    Trophy Points:
    138
    wrong... well mostly from a technical perspective...... opinions aside.

    3.1/3.11 was by some thought to be good... windows 95 was a giagantic leap and overall thought to be great change, versions 95/95a/95b/95c, the later 2 became the common standard and stable.

    98 was well... a little shakey, 98se was rock solid.

    ME was picky as hell, either it worked GREAT or it was the worse OS ever, all depended on the machine you were trying to run on, my experience with ME was quite excellent majority of the time.

    XP was by far the WORST launch ever (although 2000 brought made it "easier", it still was a solid year of total chaos and anarchy, even a few years after it's launch it was just barely starting to get support and the SP1a patch made it mostly useable. IT was dubbed for the longest time MEII for good reason. Although everyone can easily blame manufacturers for their lack of driver support, the OS was quite unstable it's first year.

    Vista was and continues to be the most recent super reliable and stable OS launch to date, it's Pre RC and RC builds were ROCK SOLID, trying to crash the OS was difficult, however Manufacturers HATED the complete new OS, and even insisted on making certain it was denied it's excistance right from the get go, they tried everything to make it break badly. The number one complaint was UAC popups, people with new machines were getting plastered with the prompts to the point of going mad, blaming the OS for it and UAC... when in fact it was most of the prebuilders fault, forcing XP related 3rd party software onto the OS and expecting everything to work, Dell users for example getting about 15-30 UAC prompts everytime they started the machine.

    x64 vista... well manufacturers just deciced to throw a fit and ignore the problem for years by not releasing any or even decent support. Bad enough that xp x64 support was just as bad. Sadly we still see some manufacturers insisting on installing win7 32bit and you'll be damn sure to see 32bit win8 in the future too.

    Windows 7's launch was actually a bit shaky, it was actually a wee bit unstable in it's final RC's and at launch there was the remote possibility of BSODs.... while mostly rare, it still happened. Some of the things that should have been fixed for a 2009 launch weren't resulting in failing to even install properly occasionally. However due to the changes in UAC and the previous near 3 year run of vista and manufacturers getting a clue, x64 support was significantly improved. This made win7 "seem" smoother, easier to transition. It can be easily claimed that without Windows vista, win7 would have appeared to be a considerably worse disaster, specially if XP still was doing it's run resulting in it being used for a full 8 years rather than the near 6 years it actually did get used.

    Windows 8.... a total revamp of the user controls which are HEAVILY touch oriented, perfect for tablets and phones and obviously anything that allows for quick touch control. Considering "touch" being generally much easier and quicker interface mode, i'd say most if not all of the PC users, using a keyboard and mouse without a touch enabled monitor, are going to experience the worst and most unfriendly user interface ever, clumsy, confusing and counter intuitive/productive. Requiring more steps to get to certain configuration panels, diagnose panels, and other frequently used portions of the system. Setup does not appear to be as easy as it would seem, and the mess of crap spread all over the screen is as necessary as having every bit of your current desktop covered in icons. A lot of people.. special OCD people are going to go insane. I personally run a desktop clean of all icons excluding recycle bin and computer.

    Organization of the start menu is simple and easy to do, quick, apply additional levels of organization is simply flawless, creating sub folders in order to seperate relatively unused files and such from the critical ones frequently accessed. The Metro interface doesn't appear to have any form of this type of capability, sure you can sit there and attempt to move them around and remove the ones you really have no need to, but their pattern and organization is still a mess and frequently shifts everytime a new program is installed or removed.

    It would greatly help if they allowed us to at least modify the color scheme for metro, but the last time i booted up and made this attempt, it wasn't a possibility. Personally the current color scheme is pretty damn ugly.

    It'll be interesting to see what exactly will occur at the launch and a few months after... how much dislike it will have...

    MS would simply be able to fix it all if they provide a "Classic" windows interface option.
     
  10. Nicu Balmus

    Nicu Balmus Сказочный долбоёб

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2008
    Messages:
    410
    Likes Received:
    17
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Windows 8 doesn't have a classic interface ??:wtf:
     
  11. Jac

    Jac Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2009
    Messages:
    1,501
    Likes Received:
    148
    Trophy Points:
    73
    He means a standard desktop UI. No 'Metro' nonsense. From what I've seem though they've taken steps to really strip back the desktop interface. Removing glass and shadows and everything else. Looks like Windows 3.1!

    Although, like I keep saying, I will reserve judgement until I see the final product. I like a classic, minimal, refined look so this might work for me but stuff I've seen so far doesn't look promising.
     
  12. Calliers

    Calliers Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2004
    Messages:
    56,722
    Likes Received:
    4,223
    Trophy Points:
    139
    Please don't mix this garbage with Windows 3.1. Windows 8 looks far worse and will -never- look as good as Windows 3.1 did. Nor will it have the functionality. Windows 3.1 made sense. Windows 8 with this Metro nonsense doesn't.
     

Share This Page

visited