I think the major problem is that the hardware has not exactly caught up with the software. Microsoft has, on occasion, had a history of doing this. The idea of Windows 8 is that one day you'll be able to control your computers with your eyes, with Windows Kinect, and eventually with diodes connected to your brain (seriously). Right now, these technologies exist, but they generally cost thousands, if not tens of thousands of dollars, and are currently being researched for use by the disabled. Once this technology becomes mainstream, people will be able to switch around their OS without much difficulty, just by moving their eyeballs. I know it reads as crazy, but that seems to be the ultimate goal of Windows 8 - stay modern and predict, or even instigate new changes in human interface device (HUD) hardware.
The problem right now seems to be that the market is segregated into "tablets" and "non-tablets". Obviously, the tablet PCs have this touch screen capability. The non-tablet laptops are a lot cheaper for the money you are spending on parts, but don't have touch screen capability yet. For example, I keep looking at the Alienware website for laptops, and am wondering if they will ever release a touch screen enabled gaming system.
I look at Dell's XPS 15, which is one of its best laptop models for visual graphics and HD resolution, and I don't see anything about touch screens. So there is that whole issue.
Someone brought it up quite eloquently here when they said, "How is this Windows" when you are basically going from one full screen application to the next. Well the answer seems to be that these are tiles, and not actual Windows. This is a real problem for the brand, I would say.
However, within the desktop, things work a bit more efficiently than in Windows 7, I would argue. For one, you are promised the latest updates as they become available, you do get better driver support and peripheral detection, the network stack is better designed to handle a variety of different connection types, and overall, the system is really geared for this emphasis on mobile computing.
I think the major issue is that Microsoft, as well as many other companies, likely see where the industry will be in ten years or so. People will still be using desktops for production work, but the horsepower that you used to see on a modern desktop or laptop is now being ported over to mobile devices, and quickly. A good point was made that Intel had a chance to buy ARM Holdings many years ago, which of course, develops the ARM processors on many mobile tablets and cell phones. That company is now with its weight in gold, due to the number of people buying smart phones or tablets. They didn't acquire the company, and now they are developing their own ultra-mobile processors.
I had the opportunity to provide direct feedback to Microsoft during the developer preview and the consumer preview. I urged them to keep the Start Menu option available, to no avail. Someone spent a lot of effort removing the Start Menu between the developer preview and the consumer preview, and I have no idea why this was done, if only to push people to use the infamous Metro UI. I think this counts as a lack of consumer choice, and not an expansion of it. In information technology, or any industry, that's a really bad idea.
As for Windows 7 "folder" issue you are describing, try going to View in Explorer and changing the General Options under Folder Options:
Open each folder in its own window.
Navigation Pane - Show all folders instead of Show Favorites.
You can still make changes to how Windows Explorer (Now File Explorer) displays information using the View and Search tabs.
Overall, I would argue that Windows 8 is definitely a more stable OS. This comes at some expense, and that does include the inclusion of unwanted features for many users who simply prefer the desktop. There are ways to get around this, as you mentioned. Staying with Windows 7 is not an option for some people, as the possibility of losing an upgrade path to future versions is not good... the same way many XP users were stuck being unable to upgrade to 7 without a clean install.
These are all my opinions here, and they may not suit yours, but I think there is a trade-off, as not everyone will be pleased with the new interface. It is clearly an attempt to make inroads in the mobile computing market, which is taking off. Prior to Windows 8, Microsoft had not made much of a dent in this industry, as Android and Apple continue to dominate the marketplace. I would not be surprised if Apple starts to lose its positioning to Microsoft's new hardware and products (their unilateral release of Microsoft Surface seemed to infuriate some hardware manufacturers, who were worried the company would get into the computer hardware business like Apple).
Overall, however, I think Google's control over cell phones and most tablets is currently cemented in stone. It will take a lot more than Windows 8 to break that. Remember, Windows 8 is Microsoft's first real attempt at touch screen computing. I used to set up NVIDIA Quatro systems with quad monitors and these systems used Windows XP with touch screen drivers and custom software for a specific purpose. Microsoft seems to be moving to make Windows a software-as-a-service (SaaS) platform. This means you would pay for upgrades to the OS and simply download them over the Internet. Whether or not that will ever happen, succeed, or fail, is up to conjecture.
If you have lost all faith in Windows 8 as an OS, you may want to hang on and check out the
Windows Blue rumors.