

HP promotes Windows 7 PCs - hiharryhere
http://www.smh.com.au/digital-life/computers/hp-promotes-windows-7-pcs-20140121-315np.html

======
atonse
What's really interesting to me is the trend that all these OEMs just don't
fear Microsoft anymore. That coupled with the fact that people are using all
kinds of non-MS mobile devices mean that they don't tie their very survival to
the whims of Redmond, so they feel emboldened to really try things that would
be unheard of in the past.

Things like Linux laptops that they actually promote, and actually
acknowledging that Windows 8 is A UI pile of poo publicly, these are all moves
they wouldn't have made back in the day when MS was the scary juggernaught and
Windows was the only option anyone even considered.

------
x0054
Windows 8 suffers from the problem of not knowing what it wants to be. I like
the Apple approach of having a hard division between OSX and iOS, because
touch interface is inherently different from one that’s keyboard and mouse
driven.

Someone once described Windows 8 as a large estate house, with many rooms and
corridors. For the most part, all the rooms look great. You have the west wing
(old windows) and the east wing addition (the new metro UI side). But as you
wonder around the building, you on occasion stumble into a room that has no
paint, the walls are ripped up, and there is an under construction sign.

Now that I think about it, maybe Windows 9 has a chance after all though.
Think about it:

    
    
      Windows 3.0 - bad - quite terrible
      Windows 3.1 - good - worked ok
      Windows 95 - bad
      Windows 97 - good
      Windows Me - terrible
      Windows XP - very good
      Windows Vista - bad, basically Win 7 Alpha
      Windows 7 - good, stable and get’s out of your way
      Windows 8 - bad, has no idea who it’s target market is
      Windows 9 - ????
    

Above is just my opinions, of course, but notice the pattern. Maybe there is a
hope for Windows 9 yet.

~~~
Danieru
Windows 8.1 is Windows 9.

I was at Microsoft over the summer but this is public knowledge. I got a
Windows Blue t-shirt a day before the announcement. Even the existence of the
"start" button was a last minute thing. Windows 8.1 is no service pack. It was
developed by the entire Windows division. Service Packs are only developed by
the Sustained Engineering sub-division.

I've mentioned this to friends but they were not convinced. After all Windows
8.1 adds so little. You must keep in mind that Microsoft was, and may still
be, trying to move Windows to a yearly release cycle. This is why Windows 8's
upgrade was so cheap. They've caught on that time based release schedules
work, and work well. Ubuntu made it popular in open source and things from
your kernel to your browser are on it.

Remember the person responsible for getting Windows 7 out the door? Steven
Sinofsky. He got fired. In his place was promoted Julie Larson-Green, the
women responsible for Windows 8's new interface. She is still in charge.

Windows 8 knows what it is about: managing your computer as Microsoft sees
fit. Windows 8.1 may have given back the start button but in exchange you are
now forced to create and use a Microsoft account.

Those who continue to use proprietary software should be prepared for the
future. If you want to keep control of your computer you must make an effort
because your overlord is not going to do so for you.

Sorry, I suspect my Internship just made me more of a open source zealot.

~~~
MichaelGG
I was under the impression that the first service pack was usually made by the
main engineering team, and subsequent SPs were done by sustained engineering.

Why would you insist that "8.1 is 9", after admitting 8.1 isn't much of an
upgrade?

Windows 8.1. "start button" thing isn't "giving back the start button". No one
was asking for that, they were asking for the start menu, instead of the
annoying new full-screen launcher.

------
chx
Who's surprised? When the Surface / Surface RT line released in 2012 Microsoft
had a decade of sales data for their Tablet PCs to prove that traditional
Windows applications and touch doesn't mesh. As for Metro apps, the obvious
problem is ecosystem size (vs iOS and Android). What Microsoft should have
done (and this is not hindsight, that's still their way forward) instead of
getting into a battle almost impossible to win is to find a good story of why
laptops are still relevant, invent new physical formats which are small to
carry but much larger in usage (think Sony Tablet P or the old, old Thinkpad
with the butterfly keyboard) and stick to its guns. Ultrabooks are not a bad
idea, make them lighter weight but obviously it was not enough. That Google
beaten them with the Chromebook in the laptop arena just highlights the
absolute ineptitude of MS.

~~~
bnolsen
MS opened the door for the chromebook by killing off the netbook market with
their silly limitations on the netbook format. People wanted the devices, just
not the crippled ones. Chromebook just filled the hole intentionally left.

~~~
eli
Chromebook still feels pretty limited to me -- that's just a less malicious
version of crippled... Or do I misunderstand?

My understanding was that the relatively high licensing cost of windows
(relative to the hardware) was a major problem.

~~~
Mikeb85
Activate dev mode, get access to a full Gentoo-based distro....

Chrome alone is pretty capable too, especially with Chrome Native Client...

~~~
pjmlp
> Activate dev mode, get access to a full Gentoo-based distro....

If you have to do that, it is a prof that it doesn't fulfill the needs of the
users.

Plus which normal user is going to do this?!

[https://sites.google.com/site/chromeoswikisite/home/what-
s-n...](https://sites.google.com/site/chromeoswikisite/home/what-s-new-in-dev-
and-beta/developer-mode)

~~~
Mikeb85
Which normal user needs to? I could easily use Chrome alone for any 'normal'
tasks. The only native apps I use are Vim, some specialised content creation
apps, and command line tools. Don't tell me the average user needs these.

Chrome OS' popularity is proof that for many, it is enough. Don't get me
wrong, I'd love to see OEMs shipping Ubuntu or Suse, but Chrome OS is more
capable than it gets credit for.

~~~
pjmlp
> Don't tell me the average user needs these.

The users that use PC as a TV do not, surely.

> Chrome OS' popularity is proof that for many

On US I guess, I am yet to see them anywhere else.

------
r0h1n
>> Repeat after me: An advertising slogan is not news.

>> A few tech journalists need to be reminded of that rule today, after piling
on to the story that HP is bringing Windows 7 back “by popular demand.”

[http://www.zdnet.com/hp-bringing-back-windows-7-pcs-not-
so-f...](http://www.zdnet.com/hp-bringing-back-windows-7-pcs-not-so-
fast-7000025351/)

~~~
andywhite37
This article makes it sound like the slogan is just some marketing gimmick,
but the slogan is actually just a fair description of the sad reality of the
situation. HP is promoting Windows 7 over Windows 8 at this point - the
default PC configurations feature Windows 7, and you can "customize" to get
Windows 8.x. Good or bad, Windows 8 has been out for over a year, and is not
making people want to buy PCs. I don't know if Windows 7 is making people want
to buy PCs these days either, but it came out over 4 years ago, and has
already served its purpose, which has nothing to do with today's PC market. If
Windows 8 is supposed to be greater than Windows 7 in all conceivable ways,
why is there still a demand for Windows 7, and why would a PC manufacturer
need to market both versions, or even go so far as to promote the older
version?

------
greenyoda
Topic already discussed here:

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7092164](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7092164)

------
jamesaguilar
Maybe it's not obvious to the designers at MS, but the ideal touch screen
interface just isn't the same as the ideal mouse and keyboard interface. Sure,
put both modes in the same OS, just let us default to something that makes
sense for the desktop on the desktop. There is no need for the start menu to
be full screen, and there is no need to boot to a touchscreen interface.
That's all there is to it.

Windows 8 isn't that bad. That is, it doesn't get in my way to an unacceptable
degree. It's just that none of the visible additions are helpful versus
Windows 7.

------
ladzoppelin
Windows 8.1 is pretty amazing and its a mistake to install Windows 7 on any
machine that is "made for Windows 8". I have seen multiple instances where
Windows 8.1 handles huge excel files better, makes SSD's faster and runs
snappier than Windows 7 on the same machine. The updating for Windows 7 is
also a pain and has a huge system folder size compared to 8.1. HP actually has
been very good at upgrading drivers to 8.1 so I seriously doubt they are
"promoting" Windows 7. Just another example of reporting a made up story to
get clicks.

~~~
dpe82
You can seriously doubt all you want, but the HP homepage boldly proclaims
"Back by popular demand. Customize a new HP PC with Windows 8 and save up to
$150 instantly."

~~~
dpe82
Derp. I meant to write "Windows 7". What I get for commenting on HN using an
iPad.

------
frogpelt
I use a Windows 8 laptop at home (in addition to a MacBook Pro and Windows 7
at work). I have not had problems with it. I'm not sure the reality of
Microsoft's troubled OS's is as bad as the perception. 7 and Vista seem very
similar to me.

The only problem I've had with Windows 8 was quickly solved once I learned the
shortcut to search for applications. Win-Q to open the search page, type two
or three letters, and hit Enter. It's much simpler than clicking the Start
button and wading through menus.

~~~
seabrookmx
In Windows 7, you simply hit the Windows button (or click the start button)
and start typing. It works the same way, but takes up much less screen real
estate and exposes you to the menus to wade through if you so desire.

I prefer the Windows 7 desktop paradigm. Which is why I install Classic Shell
on Windows 8 machines. It basically converts Windows 8 to Windows 7 with a
flat UI and some extra snappy-ness. A win-win in my book.

~~~
acqq
For me too Classic Shell is actually saving Windows. I don't think I'd even
buy the Windows notebook without knowing that there's Classic Shell. And I
also like "flatness" by the default on the desktop of 8.1. Windows 7 defaults
are weird with all that button background shadings and all that shaded frames.

The next desktop Windows should look like Windows 8.1 desktop plus Classic
Shell. Having different desktop and tablet versions is obviously needed.

------
brudgers
When was the last time HP made the front page of HN? Probably something about
how they should sell their hardware business or spin it off.

But when was the last time they made the front page because of a laptop or
other consumer product?

They're only putting Windows 7 on PC's to get their name in the news.

~~~
aceperry
Funny, I was under the impression that they're installing Windows 7 because
Win8 sucked.

------
baldajan
It's interesting how HP, a loyal Microsoft partner and OEM, is now selling an
old "outdated" OS. I think HP is the first major OEM to do so, and definitely
not the last. Microsoft really screwed up with Windows 8 as they made it to
complex for the average person, coupled with inconsistent UX. Build something
people want, or at least, give people something they want.

------
pa5tabear
I've wondered if Microsoft adopts a sort of "golden path" (a la Dune)
strategy... intentionally make every other operating system unpopular in order
to set the stage for their next version.

You need bad in order to see good.

~~~
gress
The problem with that 'strategy' is that microsoft's bad makes people see the
good in Apple and Google's offerings.

