Originally Posted by gearheadslife
no it has the option to have the desktop/etc in the formate of the last windows os.. 95 had the 3.1, 98 had 95, xp has 98/2000, 7 has xp..
That's because those systems had the same basic front end, but it had refinements with each iteration of Windows. To put it another way, an end user would find little difference in the look and operation of Windows 7 over XP or 95 - or even 3.1, although obviously 7 was much more refined in look and feel.
I remember when the large college I worked in did switchovers between a load of old Windows machines that had been kicking around - there were all sorts of variants of Windows running, and the jolly task of the long summer vacation was for me to go around and move them all to Windows NT 3.51 - including quite a lot of Windows XP machines. The idea was to unify everything and make it all work much better with the NT based servers.
What was notable was how little change this involved at the user end. All I had to do was to leave some notes about a few things that changed, like having to logon to the network and how great roaming profiles were.
This in no way applies to Windows 8. There is simply no way to make it work like it's predessor, Windows 7.
Microsoft made the big (and completely wrong) decision that it would force everyone to go over exclusively to Metro. Now I can see why. They wanted to have a single front end for everything, whether it was a Windows phone, a Surface or a laptop or a PC, it would look and feel the same. Metro. And they didn;t want to effectively double the support load for Windows 8 by having to go on supporting a Windows 7 and Metro front end.
But the real world doesn;t work like that.
People resented Microsoft acting in a high-handed fashion. They didn;t want to be forced to use Metro, which is designed for a touch environment, mostly because the bulk of Microsoft's users are using desktops and stuff like Office - they don;t have touch screens, which are expensive and mostly pointless for such users. They felt that Microsoft was acting in a "we know best" mode and was essentially telling it;s core user base it didn't care about them.
Metro is too big a change and certainly too big a one to be imposed
Users felt they had a limited cxhoice - either Windows 8 and Metro, or Windows 7. And many of them chose 7 (or even earlier versions) because Metro is 8's biggest and most obvious selling point (even though it has plenty or worthy improvements underneath)
In a corporate or large user base of any kind moving from 7 to 8 would have filled any IT department with dread. Can you imagine the retraining involved and all those phone calls for days? "Where's the Start button?" "Why have you forced me to use this thing which is a pain in the ass with a mouse and keyboard?"
Loads of corporates still stick with XP because Windows 7 doesn;t offer any incentive to move. With Windows 8 that "incentive" is for the most part Metro.
It's all like the disaster that was New Cola. You can't make
your consumer like something no matter how much you think they should because it's technically clever. The more you keep trying the more they will resist, or more likely, vote with their wallets.
And no, there's no way to tell Metro to look and feel like Windows 7. Even with the latest patches, in which Microsoft is being dragged, kicking and screaming, towards what t's users actually want