Windows 8 non PC OS?

It seems that Windows 8 is more suitable to the touch screen cell phones and not for PCs. MS makes them faster but less user friendly. From what I have seen so far; Win 8 is a definite NO! I will stick with Win 7 (with classic shell installed and classic menus for all ribbon based MS software).

I don't want a desktop cell phone!


Windows Forum Admin
Staff member
Premium Supporter
This is a solid argument, but it is based on an assumption. Because we do not know how the OS will develop just yet, and exactly what features it will have, we can't write off the system for PCs and workstations. Businesses will find it easier to manage already with specialized start UIs using group policy from a Windows Server. (Imagine Worker Bob need only navigate around that Metro UI/Start tabs and not even enter the OS... the security implications are that Bob can never screw up this computer). So for workers, the UI concept alone could be landmark.

Let's see what kind of tricks Microsoft has up its sleeve with Windows 8. Patents were registered for facial recognition technology that would turn a computer on and off depending on when someone enters and leaves a room. This was rumored to be re: Windows. The Kinect sensor for Xbox shows you the type of technology Windows users may be able to look forward to: Motion with your hands to browse up and down a web page.

Let's embrace new ideas, and if they're clunkers and slow down a machine, let's reject them. But first, let's give it a chance. The leaked builds of Windows 8 so far are likely checked builds. They function and are compiled in debug mode and will be slower overall, no matter how stable they are. Microsoft certainly wants to sink ships in the phone and tablet market, and that may not be a bad thing. Competition will drive phone prices down, even if you don't want a Windows Phone.

The idea of knowing that Windows is underneath your phone, and that you could run Photoshop off it, or something, entices me. I know I probably won't use it for that, but it entices me. Because if they achieve this goal, hardware manufacturers for phones and tablets are going to expand what is possible for a chipset. You are going to start seeing some very powerful miniaturization of devices. And when computer hardware gets smaller, the bigger (or standard size) versions usually get even faster.

Windows Vista was a clunker on release. After it was patched with Service Pack 1 it was a solid release. Press wouldn't give it a fair chance since XP was faster. Well as I've said, Windows 98 is faster than XP. Do we all want to use XP? I see the need for a performance OS that features rock solid stability. I want a OS I don't need to reboot when I apply Windows Updates. Look at what consumers wanted all along and they can do it.

Many of us would like robust systems for backup instead of Windows Backup. We want to be able to do bare metal backup and restores. The programs that make this possible like Acronis and Paragon already use the WindowsPE environment. Microsoft can do it better if they give it enough priority. =

With enough internal "no compromises", Windows 8 may well ask sweep past Windows 7. Oddly, Windows 7 was supposed to be a minor release on the road map. It turns out that it is their best OS to date. Windows 8 will have major new features, but we need the OS to be strong, modular, streamlined, and fast. Windows Vista brought the entire industry a computing environment that required sweeping upgrades to hardware. Windows 7 reduces those requirements. If Windows 8's is being geared towards the mobile devices and platforms, their may be a silver lining: the ability for Windows to run on mobile systems will require it to be extremely modular and fast.

This website is not affiliated, owned, or endorsed by Microsoft Corporation. It is a member of the Microsoft Partner Program.