Originally Posted by cybrsage
I disagree that the shift from a command line interface to a gui interface was a gradual change. It was just as jarring as moving to metro. The only question is whether metro will cause a surge in happiness for the majority like the gui did (many gnashed there teeth but learned to accept and eventually like the gui) or fail and burn like BOB did.
It's natural that people who like and are comfortable with what they are using now resist change. But you are absolutely correct. When we moved from DOS to Windows, those who had memorized all the commands they needed to know complained that MS was just dumbing things down and that the computer literate didn't need a GUI which would just get in the way, bog down their system, eat up disk space, and make things more difficult.
Yeah, right. Gee, I wish I could go back to command line computing, or maybe even punch cards and writing code for every simple task.
I knew people who insisted on using Worderfect compatibility mode in Office for years rather than simply taking a little time to use the new (and much better) interface.
I have no idea whether W8 will be well crafted and implemented or not, but this notion of "I don't want anything to change from what I have today" is both unrealistic and counterproductive to progress and improvement. The real question is how well it works.
The biggest problem over the past 20 years is that Intel's incredible rate of advancement in processors has allowed a lot of companies to simply write bloated, kluged, inefficient code because leaps in processing power and storage capacity covered it up. But MS has been far from the worst offender. Especially in both W2000 and W7 it wrote fast, efficient, stable code. It's going to take some time for people to get used to the new layout, and it's possible that the design is simply not very good, but that remains to be seen, and the reality is that it's going to become the standard regardless because in about six months most new home computers are going to come with W8 installed. It's not like people are going to start buying Macs in droves or buying new home pcs with Linux. (Besides, Apple is far more guilty of the "our way or the highway" approach than MS.)
As an aside, MS has already extended twice its planned date for ending support of XP, and it was only a few months ago when W7 finally overtook XP in the installed base. If we consider Vista essentially dead, I wonder whether MS is going to continue to support three live ongoing new-install OSs in XP, 7 and 8 simultaneously, or if XP will actually die, finally, soon.