Quite a few people have written to me expressing surprise at, and in many cases, support for, my rather blunt outburst against Windows 8.1, posted earlier in the week. To recap, here is what I posted on 3 September 2013, on the front page of my site:
Over the last few days I've been quite busy installing and exploring the Windows 8.1 RTM ISO that was recently leaked. I don't normally condone the use of leaked software, but in this case, given it's ultimately a free upgrade, and the fact that I need to get across the changes as soon as possible so I can update the TweakGuides Tweaking Companion for Windows 8, I thought it justified.
My impression of Windows 8.1 can be summed up in two words: extremely disappointing. The march towards tabletizing a Desktop OS continues, as Windows 8.1 hides or completely removes several potentially useful Desktop features, while gussying up the Metro interface. If you're also not vigilant during installation, you will automatically be opted into using Bing ad-driven searches, SkyDrive integration and a Microsoft Account. The only unambiguously positive changes are the addition of options to boot straight to Desktop, and disable the hot corners, neatly hidden away under the Taskbar Properties>Navigation tab I might add. Fortunately, workarounds exist for some of the changes, and of course Start Menu replacement utilities, along with other Windows 8 customization tools, will provide further options.
I don't normally like to post opinions, especially negative ones, on the front page. In this case, I can't resist, as this bastardization of Windows makes me quite angry. Having used every version of Microsoft's operating systems since 1988 (MS-DOS 5.0), this is the first time I truly believe that Microsoft has lost its way. To put it bluntly, Windows 8.1 is a mish-mash of interfaces, and in some cases borderline deceptive options, mainly to serve Microsoft's dubious ambitions in the mobile device arena, rather than consumers and businesses. It will only serve to further confuse and alienate the average PC user, and hasten the PC's demise. I've used Windows 8 as my daily OS since the Preview back in June 2012, and I can honestly say it seems like one step forward, four steps back when compared to Windows 7.
In any case, I am currently detailing all of the changes and attempting to provide revised best practice usage recommendations in an update to the TweakGuides Tweaking Companion for Windows 8. I will release the updated version shortly after the official release of Windows 8.1.
I want to clarify something: I'm not in the habit of blindly criticizing changes in Windows, and this was not just another generic ill-considered anti-Windows 8 rant, which are a dime-a-dozen on the Internet. If all I wanted to do was have a pot-shot at Windows 8, I could have done so over a year ago, when I was using the Release Preview version, and subsequently, when I sat down for several months and wrote the TweakGuides Tweaking Companion for Windows 8 book. I wasn't terribly thrilled with Windows 8 at any time over that period, but I always maintained some faith that Microsoft would set things right, once they saw the widespread negative feedback translate into relatively poor sales.
People should also keep in mind that I don't have a history of attacking Microsoft. Quite the contrary, I was one of the few people defending Windows Vista, when almost everyone else was still cashing in on the anti-Vista craze. I wrote the lengthy Vista Annoyances Resolved article, which not only attempted to debunk many of the silly untruths about Windows Vista, it also went further by providing some practical solutions to common problems.
So what prompted my outburst against Windows 8.1? Allow me to explain in detail.
Windows 8 101
Let's pause for a moment to bring people who don't use Windows 8 up to speed. Windows XP, Vista and 7 users who are reading this article just out of curiosity need to be reminded of the schizophrenic nature of Windows 8's user interface, and the rationale behind it.
In a nutshell, Windows 8 (and 8.1) has two distinctly separate interfaces: one is referred to as the Modern UI by Microsoft, but was originally dubbed Metro, and that name has stuck. As shown above, it's a minimalistic multi-colored interface that is designed primarily with touch interfaces in mind. That is, it's mainly aimed at smartphones, tablets, and similar touch-enabled devices. Instead of icons it has large tiles, and doesn't allow free-floating Windows or complex hierarchical menus, or any fancy visual effects, because these are not touch-friendly, and may also run poorly or use up too much battery life on mobile devices. Any programs in the Metro environment (called Apps) can only be installed or updated via the Windows Store.
The second interface is the normal Windows Desktop which most Windows users would have become accustomed to over the past 15 years or so. It's a bit simpler in appearance in Windows 8 by default, as shown above, since Desktop Gadgets have been removed, Windows Aero Glass effects have been removed, and there is no Start Menu.
These two interfaces are notionally separate, as really they serve two separate needs - mobile devices vs. full-powered PCs. But Microsoft has forcibly joined them together by making some critical options and features unique to each environment. For example, there is no full-featured file browser in the Metro interface, so Metro users on PCs still need to switch to the Desktop to use File Explorer (previously called Windows Explorer). Similarly, users who want to stay in the Desktop environment typically need to use the Metro interface for launching searches using Windows Search. In either case, the user is often shunted from one interface into another for no other reason than because Microsoft wants it to be this way. There is no logical workflow or technical reason for this merging of the two interfaces.
Why has Microsoft really done this? Well, having seen the types of profits that companies like Apple have made with their mobile devices and their Walled Garden environments, Microsoft has decided that it too wants a piece of this pie. It is quite obvious that at some point, the decision was made by Microsoft management that users should not be given the option to isolate themselves on the Desktop, and should instead be given no alternative to using the new Metro environment, in the hopes that they will become accustomed to it through lack of choice. To that end, Windows 8, and now 8.1, constantly tries to force users into the Metro environment, such as by removing the Start Menu, making almost all default file handlers use the relevant Metro apps instead of the Desktop versions, even if a file is launched from the Desktop, and whole host of other - I can't resist saying this - annoying, short-sighted, purely profit-driven, feature and interface changes.
Let's cut to the chase. Having written a book on Windows 8, I can honestly say that I can't find a single significant interface change in Windows 8, and certainly numerous feature changes, that have any basis in logic or the desire to improve the user experience for PC users. There are only two unambiguous feature improvements in Windows 8: the new Windows Task Manager, and the improved file transfer dialog box. The vast majority of the changes in Windows 8, and moreso Windows 8.1, are designed purely to lure people into the Metro environment, so Microsoft can cash in on Windows Store purchases, and associated mobile device sales. It really is as simple as that. And it really is surprising just how blatant Microsoft has been in ignoring user wishes to the contrary.
What's not so surprising is that this rather bold approach to herding desktop PC users onto the same pasture as mobile device users has unequivocally backfired on Microsoft. Despite significant price incentives, particularly in the early days of Windows 8's release, when a copy of Windows 8 Pro Upgrade could be had for as little as $15, the adoption rate for Windows 8 is floundering.
As at September 2013, almost a year after its release, estimates of Windows 8's market share place it at around 7.4%. The graph above shows that Windows 7 and XP still vastly outstrip this, at 45.6% and 33.7% respectively. But more telling is the fact that over the same period since their respective releases, as this article notes, Windows Vista had a 7.3% market share, and Windows 7 had a whopping 17.3% share. So in relative terms, although Windows 8 is hardly an outright flop, it's clear that Microsoft's strategy really isn't working out very well.
Faced with a situation where an OS isn't selling well, and with mounting criticism from all quarters, pointing squarely to the dislike of the Metro interface, what does Microsoft do? It offers up a free Windows 8.1 upgrade to all Windows 8 users, promising to substantially refine the Windows 8 experience. This is welcome news to everyone. Hopefully now we'll have more choice as to how we can configure Windows 8, and for those who want it, a way to get as far away from using Metro as possible.
But that's not how Windows 8.1 has panned out.
The Straw that Broke the Camel's Back
Back to the question I posed earlier, namely what prompted me to suddenly blurt out a rather indelicate criticism of Windows 8 on the front page of my site. The answer is that it was my hands-on experience installing and using the recently leaked finalized version (RTM) of Windows 8.1. That was combined with reading various articles and comments about Windows 8, and 8.1, on the Internet. I was frustrated, disappointed, and angry.
My disappointment came from the fact that I thought Windows 8.1 would be Microsoft's way of listening to valid complaints, and rectifying them. Much the same as they had done with Windows Vista - they listened to the most sensible portions of user feedback, and refined Vista to wind up with one of the most popular versions of Windows to date: Windows 7. I can assure you that this is not what has happened with Windows 8.1. Indeed, I would argue that quite the opposite has occurred, and I'll demonstrate this point with some practical examples shortly.
My frustration was the result of seeing what I consider a dumbing down of the Windows desktop experience via Windows 8, with a confused and confusing interface that frequently fights against what you would naturally want to do, for no other reason than to force you into the Metro environment as often as possible. This is only made worse, not better, by Windows 8.1.
My anger stems from reading page after page of remarks from supposedly expert and inexpert commentators alike, defending the changes in Windows 8 as somehow being "more efficient", and essentially referring to people as luddites for not accepting them.
I felt it was finally time to speak out about the whole debacle, and offer up my own opinion.
So What's the Big Deal About Windows 8.1?
Taking off my tech enthusiast's hat for a moment, I can empathize with readers who must be wondering why the hell so much fury has been directed at Windows 8/8.1. "Surely", they must think to themselves, "people who don't like Windows 8 can just stick with Windows 7." This thought is probably followed by something along the lines of "There can't be that many changes in Windows 8.1, can there? And if there are, they can't be that bad. What's the big deal?"
On the face of it, I would have to agree with both of those statements. Microsoft isn't holding a gun to anyone's head, forcing them to switch to Windows 8. Windows 8.1 is another matter of course; if you're already using Windows 8, the OS will continually nag you to install it as an important update, and I suspect at some point it will become a required update, if only for security purposes. But more importantly, people buying new PCs, particularly laptops, will find that they have Windows 8 or 8.1 pre-installed, which means they face additional effort and cost if they want to revert back to Windows 7.
It's also true to say that Windows 8.1 doesn't radically change Windows 8. I can't provide a detailed rundown of all of the changes in Windows 8.1 here, as that would require several pages, but the most obvious changes can be summarized as follows:
Reading that list, you might still be scratching your head as to why I'm making such a fuss over Windows 8.1. Don't almost all of these things improve Windows 8? I suppose they do, if looked at in abstract, devoid of how and why they've been implemented, as well as many of the changes that are not necessarily as headline-worthy, but certainly worth closer examination. As with most things in life, the devil is in the details.
The fundamental issue I have with Windows 8.1 is the stepping up of a very noticeable agenda by Microsoft to push its Metro interface, and associated services, such as SkyDrive and Microsoft Accounts, onto unsuspecting users, irrespective of whether this is the best choice for an individual user's needs, irrespective of potential privacy or security risks, and of course, with little concern for users on more powerful desktop PCs.
As noted in the introduction, I've been using Microsoft operating systems since the MS-DOS days way back in 1988, and this is honestly the first time I've seen Microsoft so blatantly disregard its customers' welfare through options that border on outright deception, or by removing or hiding features, just to push the Metro interface which they hope will create a better revenue source for them. But accusations are easy to make, so let's look at some practical examples that back up what I'm trying to say.
Choice is Bad?
Henry Ford, founder of the Ford Motor Company and father of the modern mass-produced car, famously said: "Any customer can have a car painted any color that he wants so long as it is black." Obviously, this philosophy never caught on in the marketplace, otherwise we'd all be driving identically colored cars by now. However, there is some wisdom to the concept that too much choice can be just as bad as too little choice. Even though I run a site called TweakGuides, which promotes the notion of greater customization ("tweaking") of software, in my observations, there's usually a happy medium at which there are sufficient options for necessary customization, without it becoming a confusing and overwhelming experience for the average user.
With Windows 8, and now 8.1, Microsoft clearly holds fast to Henry Ford's views. The removal of the Start Menu is the best-known example of the Windows 8 philosophy, which is to deliberately reduce customer choice so as to steer them towards Metro, whether they want it or not.
To this day, I still see people arguing on forums and in comments spread across a variety of sites, even in articles by professional tech authors, that the Metro-based Start Screen is more efficient than the old Start Menu. I can't resolve this debate once and for all, but I can say that this is utterly and completely untrue in my own case. I provide a simple example below. My task involves uploading an image to my server, after some basic editing of it in Windows Paint:
Metro-based Method
First up, we'll complete this task in Windows 8, with default settings, as illustrated in the screenshot above, and explained in the text below, along with the minimum number of mouse button clicks required for each step:
Step 1. Click the default Folder icon in the Taskbar to open File Explorer, and navigate to the directory with the image file. Let's assume the file resides in the base directory in which I opened File Explorer. Result: 1 left-click.
Step 2. Double-click on the image file to view it, to ensure it is the correct image I want to edit. The default Metro-based Photos app opens. There are editing options here that have been added as of Windows 8.1, but not enough to do what I want. Result: 1 double-click.
Step 3. Right-click on the image, select the 'Open With' option that appears in the App Bar at the bottom of the screen, then select Paint from the list that appears. Result: 1 right-lick, 2 left-clicks.
Step 4. Windows Paint opens back on the Desktop, and I complete my editing of the image and save it.
Step 5. I want to launch the Filezilla third party FTP utility so I can upload this newly edited image file to my server. To do this, I need to click Start and type Filezilla on the Start Screen; or right-click Start, select Search, and type Filezilla; or go to the top right corner, select the Search charm and type Filezilla; or if I have Filezilla already pinned on my Start Screen (as in this example), click Start and select the Filezilla tile. Result: at a minimum, 2 left-clicks.
Step 6. Filezilla opens on the Desktop and I upload my image.
Start Menu Method
In the second instance, as shown in the screenshot above, I use the traditional Start Menu, courtesy of the Start8 third party Start Menu replacement utility, and a single setting change: altering my default photo viewer from the Metro-based Photos app to the Desktop-based built-in Windows Photo Viewer:
Step 1. Click the default Folder icon in the Taskbar to open File Explorer, and navigate to the directory with the image file. Let's assume the file resides in the base directory in which I opened File Explorer. Result: 1 left-click.
Step 2. Double-click on the image file to view it, to ensure it is the correct image I want to edit. The Windows Photo Viewer opens on the Desktop. Result: 1 double-click.
Step 3. Right-click on the image, select 'Open With' and select Paint from the context menu that appears. Result: 1 right-click, 1 left-click.
Step 4. Windows Paint opens on the Desktop, and I complete my editing of the image and save it.
Step 5. I want to launch the Filezilla FTP utility so I can upload this newly edited image file to my server. To do this, I need to click Start and type Filezilla on the Start Menu Search Box; or simply select the Filezilla icon already in my Start Menu. Result: at a minimum, 2 left-clicks.
Step 6. Filezilla opens on the Desktop and I upload my image.
The very first thing you might notice when comparing the screenshots above is how the Start Menu method provides a consistent interface appearance, while the Metro method involves shifting back and forth between windowed desktop programs and full-screen Metro interfaces.
In terms of efficiency, the net result in mouse clicks is as follows, not counting the various mouse clicks for Steps 4 and 6, as they're identical in both methods.
Metro-based Method: 5 left-clicks, 1 right-click, and 1 double-click.
Start Menu method: 4 left-clicks, 1 right-click, and 1 double-click.
The Start Menu method uses one left-click less than by the default Metro method. Now understandly, some people might say: "But you don't need to left-click to access the Start Screen, you can press the WINDOWS key!" (the same is true for the traditional Start Menu), or "I would use keyboard shortcuts to get things done much quicker than that!". The reality is that there may be a dozen different ways to do what I've described above, using the Command Line or macros, or Desktop icons or third party utilities. But the above scenario is a realistic, and not unnecessarily padded out, comparison of the method most any average user would probably be familiar with. This quick comparison shows that using the Metro method is definitely not more efficient in this instance. But the numbers don't tell the whole story. Using the Metro method actually involves much larger mouse movements, as the distances between each click is larger. And again, as the screenshot comparison demonstrates, there is a noticeably different interface flow between each step of the Metro method, shunting you between windowed Desktop and fullscreen Metro, which I personally find an unpleasantly disjointed experience.
Ultimately, whether you prefer one method over another is largely a subjective choice based on your own tastes, there is no right or wrong. However, whether using the Metro-based Start Screen and Metro Apps method is objectively more efficient than using the traditional Start Menu and Desktop-based windowed programs method, which is a common argument, the answer in this case is a resounding No. Which provides strong backing for the need for more choice in Windows 8.1, so that people who don't want to deal with the constant jump from Metro to Desktop and back, can do so, without being forced into accomplishing something in a potentially less efficient and annoying manner, or having to resort to third party alternatives.
What did Microsoft do when faced with numerous complaints regarding the Start Menu? Their answer, found in Windows 8.1, is to add back a Start Button. But that's all it is, just a button. It doesn't launch a Start Menu, which is what the complaints were really about. When clicked, it just takes you to the Metro Start Screen, which is precisely the same thing Windows 8 did when you clicked in the same (blank) area of the Taskbar. Except now, there's a Start Button, which can't be disabled through any built-in Windows options, annoying the people who liked the minimalist Start Button-free Desktop prior to Windows 8.1. This basic change is symptomatic of Microsoft's loss of direction, failing to accommodate both customer groups in a single swoop.
The correct move would have been to return the Start Menu in Windows 8.1, in recognition of the very large number of PC users who don't have touch screens, and who don't want to use Metro. Data from back in May 2013 in this article shows that within the first 6 months of Windows 8's release, there were already at least 8 million users, out of a potential maximum of 100 million Windows 8 users, that were using the Start8 or Pokki Start Menu replacement utilities. Given there are several other, quite popular Start Menu replacement utilities, like Classic Shell and StartisBack, it's quite likely that figure of 8 million substantially understates the true proportion of people who can't do without the Start Menu. Again, all for want of a simple option to return a feature that existed in previous versions of Windows, but which Microsoft no longer deems to be in line with their mobile device strategy of forcing Metro upon all Windows 8 users.
Adoption by Deception
Another tactic that is disturbingly prevalent in Windows 8.1 is the way in which people are essentially deceived or forced into using certain Metro or online Microsoft-based features. I encountered this phenomenon virtually from the moment I started doing a clean install of Windows 8.1 64-bit RTM on my freshly formatted drive. The most egregious example is on the 'Sign in to your PC' setup screen, where you create the default user account prior to the first time Windows starts up. By way of background, Windows 8 introduced two types of accounts for signing into Windows: an offline Local Account, which is similar to that used in previous versions of Windows, where all of your account's data is stored on the local drive; and an online Microsoft Account, tied to an email address (usually a Hotmail, Live or Outlook address), which stores some of your data on Microsoft's servers.
On the original Windows 8 sign-up screen, as shown above, you were prompted with a big text box to enter an email address to create an online-based Microsoft Account. However, at the bottom of the screen, although obviously de-emphasized, there was a clear option to 'Sign in without a Microsoft Account'. This was apparently too dangerous an option for Microsoft to allow to remain, as it risked some users who don't have any need for a Microsoft Account actually using a local account. Windows 8.1 improves on this process.
The new Windows 8.1 sign-up screen, as shown above, completely removes the pesky local account option from view. Why risk users making a choice that may not suit Microsoft's purposes? To any average person, the screen above presents only the option to use an existing Microsoft Account, or create a new one if you don't have any. And you can't progress with Windows installation until you've done so.
It turns out that the only way to actually create a local account, and hence sign into Windows 8.1 without using a Microsoft Account, is to counter-intuitively click the 'Create a new account' option on the Microsoft Account sign-up screen. To any normal person, this implies the creation of a new Microsoft Account. Once there, you can click the 'Sign in without a Microsoft Account' link which is unobtrusively tucked away at the bottom of the new Microsoft Account creation form, as shown above.
If that's not close to outright deception, I don't know what is. Accordingly, I guarantee that most unsuspecting users installing Windows 8.1 will wind up using a Microsoft Account, because they won't be able to find the local account option, given it's been been deliberately hidden somewhere unexpected. I was almost tricked into this myself, and several initial professional reviews of Windows 8.1 have been as well, stating incorrectly that the only way to use a local account is to disconnect your Internet connection, or enter a false email address.
Now let's be clear: a Microsoft Account is not an inherently evil thing as such. There are benefits to using a Microsoft Account, such as being able to synchronize your basic Windows settings and apps across multiple Windows-based devices and PCs, or using the newly integrated SkyDrive feature in Windows 8.1 for cloud storage via the File Explorer. But there is absolutely no need for a Microsoft Account if you don't use these features, and indeed it is a security risk to tie your Windows user account to an online Microsoft Account-based email address such as Hotmail or Outlook, given these are regularly hacked. There are also privacy implications, since a Microsoft Account automatically uploads some of your user account data to SkyDrive-based servers. In other words, this is an important decision that users should be prompted to make with some knowledge, without silly shenanigans like hiding the local account link.
Although not quite as bad, but in a similar vein, on the setup screen where you get to customize certain privacy and security-based settings before entering Windows for the first time, Microsoft has decided in its infinite wisdom to automatically enable Bing-based "Smart Searches" in Windows Search. That's right, Windows Search, the primary search feature of Windows, which was already Metro-ized even for Desktop searching, now automatically includes Bing-based search results from the web by default, and this can also include Bing-based advertising, served right on your Desktop for your convenience.
The way it works is this: when you enter a search term in the search box, if you press Enter, a full screen Search screen comes up. On this screen, as pictured above, is a list of any files or Windows settings on your system which match the search string. But also included are some web pages Bing deems relevant to the Search, which can include advertising-driven results. In the screenshot above, I searched for "Honda", and the only result on my system was an entry in my Firefox cache, which is part of my Firefox profile that I archived in the Firefox.zip file shown on the far left. The vast majority of the screen is then taken up with results as though I'd entered a search term in Bing on my browser, some of which may be prioritized because they are paid advertisements. Fortunately, for now you can disable this feature in the Metro-based PC Settings, and you can also avoid it by not pressing Enter after entering a search. But compare it to the very clean and straightforward Windows Search functionality found on the traditional Start Menu, and I think you'd be hard-pressed to suggest that this Smart Search is anything other than smart for Microsoft's financial statements. I didn't pay for Windows 8 expecting to be served ads during Desktop searches, and I don't believe it's fair on the average user to enable it by default during Windows installation.
There are plenty of examples where Windows 8.1 has hidden or removed options, or uses plain misdirection, sometimes in very subtle ways, in an attempt to trick the average user away from the Desktop environment. On the slightly revised Login screen, which appears whether you choose the new Boot to Desktop option, or to boot to the normal Windows 8 Metro Start Screen, there is text shown indicating that new Windows updates are available. In Windows 8, the text used to say "Windows Update - Important updates are ready to be installed". In Windows 8.1, it now says "Important updates are available. Go to PC Settings to install them".
Once again, we come back to the issue of just how (in)efficient using Metro can be. The screenshot above shows how Windows Updates are presented in the revamped Metro PC Settings screen in Windows 8.1. From the Desktop, first you need to open the Settings charm and click 'Change PC Settings'. Then click the 'Update and Recovery' item to get to the first screen on the left above. It doesn't provide much in the way of details, so clicking the 'View Details' link takes you to the second screen shown on the right. It's not terrible, but it's hardly great either.
Compare the Metro method to simply opening up the Windows Control Panel on the Desktop, launching the Windows Updates component, and seeing what is shown in the screenshot above. If more details are required, clicking the update link to see them. The Metro method is in no way better, actually involving at least one or two additional mouse clicks, and doesn't necessarily provide a nicer interface or more details. So why change the Login screen text to direct unsuspecting Desktop users to the Metro-based PC Settings screen? I think you know the answer by now.
There are also some truly bizarre decisions. Take the simplification of the default File Explorer view, as shown above. In Windows 8.1, by default, instead of seeing several categories and folders in the Navigation Pane to the left, there is a basic 'This PC' category, showing your main user folders. It's actually kind of neat, and could be viewed as a positive, particularly as it is quite customizeable if you wish to return to the more traditional view. You can even rename the 'This PC' category header to whatever you wish, a nice touch. But the decision to remove Libraries from the default view leaves me scratching my head, given they're still integrated into several other features in Windows 8.1.
The most notable example of why hiding Libraries is just plain odd comes from yet another Windows 8.1 decision made by Microsoft: the removal of the Windows 7 File Recovery component of Windows Control Panel, along with its automatic Windows Backup feature. This automatic backup feature allowed users to select any folder(s), which would then be automatically backed up on a schedule to a destination drive of their choice. It can be argued that the new File History feature in Windows 8, which is similar, makes the older method redundant. Except that File History doesn't allow a choice of folders to backup. It only backs up the contents of your Desktop, Favorites, Contacts, and Libraries. So the only true automated backup alternative left available in Windows 8.1 depends entirely on users adding files and folders to their Libraries for it to be effective - yet the OS now hides Libraries by default.
As an added bonus, the removal of Windows 7 File Recovery also removes from view ready access to the System Image Backup method, which allows you to make a complete image of your entire system drive for an easy way of getting your system back to exactly the way it was after catastrophic loss. Fortunately, that feature isn't completely lost; it's been hidden as a small link at the bottom left corner of the File History window. It isn't included in any Windows Search results however, so it's definitely been hidden by Microsoft, and not by accident.
Why would Microsoft remove or hide existing backup features in Windows 8, which some of their users have come to rely upon, and which are quite useful as they allow a wider choice of backup strategies to suit a range of users? The answer I believe, and this is based only on speculation, involves the blind push by Microsoft to get people to use Microsoft's cloud-based services, especially SkyDrive, in lieu of storing things and backing them up locally. Privacy concerns aside, it is true that storing data in the cloud does mitigate against data loss if your drive dies, or if you accidentally delete a local copy. But it is not a true backup strategy, as Microsoft provides absolutely no guarantee against loss of any data stored on their SkyDrive servers, and it does not offer proper version control the way Windows Backup did, nor does it allow you to quickly and easy restore your entire drive to its previous state, as the now-de-emphasized System Image Backup utility does. SkyDrive folders are also not backed up by the File History feature. So really, you have to work twice as hard to protect yourself against data loss in Windows 8.1.
Even the few positives included in Windows 8.1, like the newly regained ability to boot straight to Desktop - a basic privilege that all Windows users had heretofore enjoyed without a second thought - has been hidden away in the hopes that the average user won't find it. I spent a few minutes trying to find it before turning to the Internet myself. Turns out it's been stuck under the Navigation tab of Taskbar properties, as pictured above, and has the convoluted description of 'When I sign in or close all apps on a screen, go to the desktop instead of Start'. Personally, I would have called it 'Boot to Desktop', placed it in a prominent location, like the Start Screen options, enabled it by default, and incorporated it as part of the original release build of Windows 8, not almost a year later.
To be fair, there are other changes in Windows 8.1 which can be viewed as positives, particularly if you use Metro, such as increased customization options for the Start Screen. You can now make the background to the Start Screen match your Desktop wallpaper for example, which can help reduce the jarring nature of transitions between the two environments. The Windows Search feature is now unified, so that you don't have to choose between the Apps, Settings or Files categories to see relevant search results. There's now a set of shutdown, restart, sleep or sign out options under the Power User Tasks Menu (also known as the WIN+X menu), which appears when you right-click on the Start Button. But to my mind, these are all just lipstick on a pig. This is not the Windows 8.1 I was expecting to see.
The Thin End of The Wedge
It's at this point I should explain that part of the reason I was driven to write this opinion piece came about while I was reading Paul Thurrott's Hands-On with Windows 8.1: System Recovery article. The article pretty much dismisses the loss of backup features in a rather condescending and ill-considered manner. I became quite angry at seeing Paul legitimize what has become a commonplace attitude among Windows 8 defenders. I've dealt with Paul before, I even wrote an article which he generously published on his site back in 2006. I respect him as a level-headed and (usually) quite fair and informed commentator on all things Microsoft. But when it comes to Windows 8, I hate to say, I think Paul has lost the plot, and has completely swallowed the Microsoft company line in suggesting that this represents a more efficient "new way" of doing things, and that we should all be transitioning to mobile devices. Windows 8 may be preferable for him, and for people who use mobile devices, and perhaps some PC users; that's a matter of personal choice. But it certainly isn't objectively better by any stretch of the imagination, whether in terms of technical advancement, or simply according to best practice computing.
At one point in a response to the comments to the above article, Paul says "It's always so easy to identify the Luddites", which really struck me as an incredibly silly thing to say. Once again, this is a common line from Windows 8 defenders, who want to imply that disagreeing with any of the changes in Windows 8 means that you're not technically proficient, or you're not adapting to necessary changes. And yet, as I've tried to demonstrate, the changes in Windows 8 and now 8.1 are anything but necessary, unless you're a Microsoft shareholder. I've been writing books on every version of Windows since XP, and while I certainly don't present myself as an expert, through research and experience I'm quite familiar with all of the features in each version, and their rationale. In particular, I've been an early and avid adopter of every version of Windows since Windows XP. I'm here to tell you brother that there's virtually nothing in Windows 8 that is truly better than Windows 7. What progress has been made in minor streamlining of things under the hood is more than offset by a pair of clashing interfaces that often fight the way you want to do things. And as has been demonstrated, Metro is certainly no more efficient, and at times, less efficient, in objective terms, than the Windows 7 way of doing things. Sure, I've grudgingly adapted to Windows 8, customizing it to meet my needs, but only because I need to keep across the latest. Otherwise to any average PC user I would strongly recommend Windows 7 over Windows 8.
But let's face it: I could write a million articles attempting logical explanations as to why I don't like the changes in Windows 8, and Microsoft has demonstrated, particularly as of Windows 8.1, that it will plow on regardless. Possibly the odd bone will be thrown to us here and there, such as the Boot to Desktop option which they finally saw fit to include in Windows 8.1, or the Start Button that nobody wanted. But the reality is that Microsoft has hitched its wagon to the mobile device train, and in many regards, is abandoning its desktop PC users. I'm not just saying this for dramatic effect, it really is what appears to be happening, and it is painfully evident in Windows 8.1, the supposed savior of Windows 8.
Conclusion
Whether you want to call it the thin end of the wedge, the tip of the iceberg, or the beginning of the end for PC users, in almost 25 years of using Microsoft operating systems, I've never seen anything like it. Comforted by the ongoing availability of Windows 7, I imagine most PC users won't really care. Worse still, some PC users will continue to defend Windows 8/8.1 as being "necessary for the future", referring to any naysayers as luddites. But make no mistake, if Microsoft continues down this path, a severe marginalization of the desktop PC will be a self-fulfilling prophecy. By taking the desktop operating system that currently has over 90% market share, and gradually stripping it of its ability to utilize the full power and flexibility of the PC platform, forcing a simplistic mobile-centric interface on its users, by deception if necessary, eventually most users will be left wondering why they don't just ditch their PCs and focus on their mobile devices.
I've got nothing against mobile devices. I use an iPad for basic media consumption and browsing, and it's fantastic for that purpose. But I also need a full-powered PC, and I don't want it to be turned into a tablet in terms of interface and functionality. By itself, Windows 8.1 is hardly a catastrophe. It may seem like I'm making a mountain out of a molehill. But the warning signs are clearly there that Microsoft is not listening, that it is not making changes to Windows to improve the experience for all PC users, and in some cases, is forcing users onto Metro and associated products and services by deception. In my opinion, Windows 8.1 does not bode well for anyone who wants the PC to have a productive future, filled with choices and flexibility.
No comments:
Post a Comment