
Windows 8.1 now available - k-mcgrady
http://blogs.windows.com/windows/b/bloggingwindows/archive/2013/10/17/windows-8-1-now-available.aspx
======
jasonkolb
I'm using 8 on my primary desktop right now, haven't upgraded to 8.1 yet.
Typing this comment on my Macbook Pro.

After using 8 for a while, I honestly don't see why people hate it so much. I
don't use the Metro stuff, and the traditional Windows desktop experience is
much faster. As a development environment I quite like it, and prefer it
mightily over OSX as Apple tries to shoehorn that OS into an iOS-like
frankenstein's monster.

I'll be upgrading to 8.1 as soon as I feel like it, but I just came here to
chime in that I really don't get why people abhor 8 so much in the first
place. It kind of feels like piling-on to me with no real substance behind. As
a developer anyway--I can't speak to a non-technical user's experience with
it.

~~~
kstrauser
We bought my junior high-aged son a laptop for Christmas last year, and it
came with Windows 8. He hates it. I promise you I didn't say anything bad
about it (because who wants to convince someone not to like the gift you just
gave them?), but he came to me a few days later asking if I could "upgrade it
to Mac OS". His words, not mine.

I think the reason he doesn't like it is that it's different from any computer
he'd ever used at home or school before, and without any real benefit. He
loves the Windows 7 gaming desktop we have in the living room but sees 8 as
"weird" without a good reason for being so.

I personally didn't have an opinion on it until I tried to install a network
printer and ended up bouncing between the Win 7-style control panel and the
Win 8-style wizard thingy because neither one held all of the settings
required to make it work. After a few minutes of that, I was about ready to
pitch it out the living room window.

TL;DR it radically changed the UI without offering any noticeable advantages
for having done so. That's why we came to not like it.

~~~
alan_cx
Bit worried my experience will also be voted down...

...but I had 2 kids (12 and 14) who also got new laptops and also hated
windows 8. No, they didn't do a PR thing for Apple (ah, the vote down?), they
wanted Windows 7 back. The daughter stopped using the laptop in favor of a
tablet, which in its self is interesting, and boy asked for a Win 7 desk top
for the following birthday, which he got. The two Win 8 laptops are currently
sitting under my desk gathering dust as I type.

In retrospect I asked them both why, and both said it was essentially that Win
8 is an OS for a tablet, not a laptop or desktop. On a tablet, fine, other
wise, not frustrating and close to unuseable.

Later on, I had to rush out and immediately buy a new PC for me. I had zero
choice and had to buy a Win8 PC. I nearly cried. I hated it, and couldn't get
my head round how I could have several application running, switch, and all
that. It was like everything is locked in to full screen, and so on. The one
single thing that saved it, was installing the classic menu thing, which I
could configure to make Win 8 have a start menu, boot to desk top and remove
the hotspot things. Now Win 8 runs like Win7, Vista, etc, Im fairly happy with
it. The only problem for me now is that nagging feeling that a load of un-
necessary Metro stuff is chugging int he back ground.

Lastly, No1 son (20) had to get a new laptop, and was again stuck with Win8.
The classic menu thing has saved his day too. Shame I didnt know about it at
the time for the other two.

No3 son (16), is due a new PC, and he was essentially refusing anything with
win8, and was prepared to go second hand to avoid it. Now he knows he can get
round metro in various ways, he's much happier about the idea of a Win8
machine.

Over all though, the one thing I want to know is why on earth a UI so
obviously designed for a touch screen is being forced on laptop and desk top
users which mice and keyboards and not touch screens. I have not used Win8 on
a touch screen tablet, but I imagine it might work well. Now, Im quite happy
with Win 8 as long as I get straight to the desktop, have a start menu as it
vaguely was before, and can completely avoid metro. Win8 is fine, its just
having this tablet UI forced on to my PC I have areal issues with.

Oh, never found a way for my 2nd screen to work with the metro thing either.

Lets hope my experience is somehow valid enough not to be voted down.

~~~
YeahKIA
Consider getting your kid a touch screen laptop if you are still in the market
for one. I wasn't a bug fan of metro until I got one and now I use it more and
more.

~~~
jasonkolb
I've been thinking about a surface, anyone have any anecdotes about how their
kids responded to that? I selfishly want the Wacom stylus functionality for
myself.

~~~
ppog
A friend's children (aged 6 and 8) use my Surface occasionally, mainly for the
Fresh Paint drawing application. They love it, and have very few problems
using it -- sometimes they misjudge the swipe gestures but they have learned
how to recover in most cases. (They also enjoy ArtRage on the iPad, so it's
not that Surface is the only thing they know.)

------
moron4hire
I didn't miss the start button when jumping to Windows 8, because I use the
Windows 8 start screen in exactly the same way as I use the Windows 7 start
menu: I hit the Windows key and start typing the name of the program I want
and select the program as soon as it appears.

Really, search is the only way to work application choosing now. There are
just too many programs on a system now to make scrolling through a list of
them an efficient use of time. It was fine back on Windows 95 when I only had
an 8gb hard drive, it's awful today when I have two 500gb hard drives.

The other OS' (or rather, their window managers) have the basic implementation
of this feature, but the Windows 7/8 version seems to be better about context.
It seems to know that, if I type in "cursor", I might want to "change how the
mouse pointer looks."

------
optimiz3
Microsoft REALLY wants you use a Microsoft account over a Local account. The
link to chose a Local account during install is gone. It only shows up if you
get the Microsoft account login wrong, and there is no indication that a Local
account is even possible until this happens.

~~~
ratscabies
Tinfoil hat here. Isn't using a Microsoft account just like giving the NSA
your credentials to your machine?

~~~
CurtHagenlocher
We may never know for certain. But it would be weird if a backdoor in Windows
could be disabled in such an easy fashion. It's not like the rest of the OS is
fully transparent. I think a better analogy is probably using a Google account
to log into a Chromebook. In both cases, you can look at the network traffic
to see exactly the extent to which your computer is reporting on you.

Disclaimer: I work for Microsoft. Also, you can't imagine how confusing the
term "Microsoft account" is for those of us who work here. That's why I still
think of it as a "Windows Live account".

------
hanifvirani
What's new in Windows 8.1 can be found here: [http://technet.microsoft.com/en-
us/windows/dn140266.aspx](http://technet.microsoft.com/en-
us/windows/dn140266.aspx)

~~~
randlet
"Improvements have been made to better support users who prefer a mouse and
keyboard experience to access applications."

That's pretty strange wording and makes it sound like desktop users are an
afterthought compared to mobile devices.

~~~
throwawaykf
I wouldn't agree. I haven't tried it recently, but I tried Windows 8 in a VM
on a Mac Mini when it first came out as a preview release. I found it
enjoyable even with just a keyboard and mouse. I could navigate the start
screen extremely rapidly, not only via Win key-search, but using the arrow
keys to traverse tiles. I came away thinking Metro struck the right balance
between touch-only and traditional interfaces.

I used it in a pretty limited and less typical fashion, however. I did some
development to port an AIR/AS application written on OSX to Windows. (We
needed a native installer and creating a Windows installer required the
Windows SDK, and WORA is always a lie, so extra dev was required. So instead
of requisitioning a Windows box, I thought I'd try out Microsoft's latest and
greatest for free.) Edit: Also had to do some Java development, same setup,
different command-line SDK.

I used little more than TextPad and the command prompt (free version of SDK =
no IDE), and didn't really use the Metro apps much. Except maybe IE to search
for stuff. So I did spend more time in the desktop view. However, the time I
spent on Metro was definitely enjoyable.

Another thing that impressed me was that it was still pretty smooth despite
running in a VM on a pretty underpowered Mac Mini. It was nowhere as smooth as
the Ubuntu VM I also had, but I expected W8 to be significantly more bloated.

~~~
e40
_I wouldn 't agree. I haven't tried it recently, but I tried Windows 8 in a VM
on a Mac Mini when it first came out as a preview release. I found it
enjoyable even with just a keyboard and mouse._

Wow. I love how you disagree, but then go on to point out you are anything but
an expert or regular user of it, and only used a preview, which isn't even the
same as what we real users are using. Let me say, as someone that uses Windows
8 every day it is horrible. It pisses me off regularly. I've detailed it here:

[http://envoy510.wordpress.com/2013/07/19/windows-8-worst-
win...](http://envoy510.wordpress.com/2013/07/19/windows-8-worst-windows-
ever/)

~~~
throwawaykf
Well, I did use it regularly for about 3 - 4 months, and since it was a
preview, I assumed it would only get better.

------
jpalomaki
After upgrading to 8.1 some weeks ago I decided to really give the new UI a
change.

And it is not actually that bad. The idea in modern UI is nice. I like the way
you arrange windows and how you can easily split the screen for example
20-40-40 among three apps without having to manually resize the windows (just
start dragging a modern UI app from top of the screen to arrange them). This
also works smoothly with multiple screens.

I also think the start menu is ok, I just had to get rid of the default apps.
I don't really see point on those tiles that are showing photos or news feed.
Start with empty screen and then add applications which you really need.

In multim onitor configuration the start button is handy, since it allows you
to open the Start screen in any monitor.

The major problem is that Microsoft decided to split the world into two. You
have the modern apps. And you have the desktop apps. IMHO this was a mistake.
They should have definitely figured out a way to run existing apps as modern
UI apps. Now my most important apps are destined to live inside the desktop
view.

Even Microsoft seems to have difficulties getting their apps to the modern
side. Outlook is perfect example of app you would expect to exist on the
modern side, but nope. Just on desktop. The Modern UI apps seem to usually
simple apps. I'm wondering if they will ever manage to convert the complicated
Office apps to modern UI.

------
benferris
I still have no use for the full screen (Metro) start menu and apps since I
use Windows 8.1 on a desktop and laptop. Classic start shell and running
everything in desktop windowed mode is still all I need. I often wonder if I
will someday actually want a Windows tablet instead of Android that would make
this full screen stuff necessary. Until then, the full screen stuff is just
annoying and ignored.

~~~
brudgers
I find the Metro start screen makes it very easy to find applications and
[common] files. Hit the `Windows` key and start typing.

I find it also useful for organizing the applications that I use occasionally
in my workflow. Again, just hit the `Windows` key and there they are as big as
grapefruits.

Having used Windows Phone 7 for two years [though I switched to Android
because I got vastly better hardware for the same price], what I miss is how
well Metro keeps crap from piling up in the way it does with WIMP user
interfaces.

Android and the `Windows Classic` mode of Windows 8, just dump lots of little
icons higgeldy-piggeldy onto the screen. The default Windows 8/Windows Phone
behavior of adding new items to an alphabetized list follows the principle of
least surprise - or rather most pleasant surprise since nothing else does it.

The problem with Metro is that it often conflicts with my habits. Android and
Windows 8 Classic mode conform to my expectations - though often my
expectations are for behaviors which could stand improvement.

~~~
vetinari
The vanilla Android also adds new items into alphabetized grid. Samsung's
Touchwiz does not, it will put new items at the end by default (you can change
it though).

------
createaccount0
I tried it on a new computer (Haswell desktop with SSD). But Windows 8.1 is
still slower than XP.

Even though I disabled all animations I can feel some lag between clicks and
response. Probably it's because of this: [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ay-
gqx18UTM](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ay-gqx18UTM) ("Windows 7 GUI
slowness")

I'm going back to XP, but I needed to buy a dedicated graphics card because
Intel HD doesn't have drivers for XP. And there's also 3GB RAM limit.

~~~
k-mcgrady
Does that fact that you prefer a 12 year old OS to the latest from Microsoft
not make you consider switching to Mac or Linux? There's bound to be security
issues using such an old OS (have they not dropped support for it yet?).

~~~
robin_reala
Support drops in April 2014.

~~~
createaccount0
I'll use XP until Chrome and Firefox drop support. At least until April 2015.

------
burpee
Very curious to see how much they've fixed. Last year I bought a brand-new
laptop which came with Windows 7. The first two months the laptop was running
completely perfectly, until Windows 8 came out and I decided to upgrade.

Since then, the experience has been terrible;

\- randomly crashing apps without meaningful error-messages, mostly when one
app would crash it would take down all other apps with it (this was fixed with
an update about half a year ago),

\- the built-in mousepad was not recognized for about 2 months until an update
magically fixed it, but to this day Windows won't accept tap-to-click properly
and all attempts to fix it are reset with each Windows update,

\- the windows 8 installer damaged about 10% of my windows 7 restore partition
from the harddisk, at the same time corrupting the MBR and making it
impossible to either revert to Windows 7 or to switch OS in general without
significantly reworking the entire harddrive,

\- and last but not least, just an incredibly confusing user interface which
has truly weird functions like "drag mouse from bottom left corner to the
right and a mystical menu will pop up.

------
acqq
So do you have to make a "Microsoft account" and log in to their app store
just to download something that was for previous versions a Service Pack,
reachable from the web?

What happens with the existing local accounts then, anybody tried?

I've found only this:

[http://blogs.windows.com/windows/b/bloggingwindows/archive/2...](http://blogs.windows.com/windows/b/bloggingwindows/archive/2013/10/17/windows-8-1-now-
available.aspx)

"Brandon LeBlanc: We're not releasing the ISO images to folks who don't have
MSDN and TechNet subscriptions. Best way for everyone else is to update
through the Windows Store."

------
Surio
Relevant - Couldn't resist leaving this here:
[https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BWyBkY_CUAASUq_.jpg:large](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BWyBkY_CUAASUq_.jpg:large)

:)

------
dereferenced
I can't upgrade Windows 8 -> Windows 8.1 because I've moved my "C:\Users"
folder to "E:\Users" (to move it off the SSD). The 8.1 installer tells me "it
can't install because either the Users or Program Files directory has been
moved to another partition".

Somehow every other program on my machine manages to run thanks to environment
variables like %USERPROFILE% and %APPDATA%.

GG.

------
SaulOfTheJungle
Has anyone been able to download the update via the Windows Store? I'm on the
8.1 Preview and the Windows Store keeps throwing an error about not being able
to connect.

~~~
Achshar
IIRC you cannot upgrade from the preview of 8.1. You will have to do a clean
install. So try getting an iso or some other file download from microsoft
instead of the in-store one.

------
cabbeer
Is a clean install recommended or is an upgrade fine?

------
qwerta
Obligatory question: Is newline handling notepad in finally fixed? Can I
maximize terminal window? Those bugs have been open for 28 years...

------
NKCSS
Update link ( ms-windows-
store:WindowsUpgrade?ocid=GA8-1_O_WOL_Hero_Buy_81Update_Null_01 ) doesn't do
anything for me here :-/

~~~
luchs
Open the link in IE.

~~~
NKCSS
I ment in the Windows Store... it just launches it and does nothing.

------
krambs
No in-place upgrade from 8.1 preview? Ugh.

~~~
joemccall86
I'm upgrading from 8.1 preview now. See [http://windows.microsoft.com/en-
us/windows-8/update-from-pre...](http://windows.microsoft.com/en-
us/windows-8/update-from-preview)

------
chrissmeuk
Been using this for a few days already since it was released to MSDN.
Definitely better than Windows 8.0 and even Windows 7.

If you don't like Metro, it's pretty easy to get rid of now but not entirely
(it occasionally pokes you in the eye). My setup guide:

1\. Use group policy editor to get rid of lock screen.

2\. Set IE to open tiles on desktop.

3\. Set start menu to display apps only and turn off hot corners. Then set to
boot to desktop.

4\. Uninstall all the metro apps that come with it.

You will still get the "start screen" but in apps view and the search stuff
but to be honest it's pretty good. I rarely see it though as everything I use
is pinned to the taskbar.

Use Windows+X as your new start menu afterwards - it rocks. In fact I wish
earlier versions of windows had that!

Reasons to upgrade: faster boot, power management seems more stable, Hyper-V,
explorer UI enhancements, nicer file copying, new task manager, better
Powershell integration.

PuTTY and Firefox still work which is the most important thing for me
though...

Edit: just to add I haven't installed a start menu replacement or metro
killer.

Edit 2: I haven't figured out backups yet. Windows 7 backup was trivial with
an external disk.

Edit 3: to bypass microsoft account login/creation on installation (I did this
on Pro edition):

1\. When it asks you to sign in, click "create a microsoft account".

2\. There is a link at the bottom to "use a local account" on the page this
sends you to.

~~~
e40
You know, right after Windows 8 was released, I noticed something really
interesting. While I was struggling with it [1], there were a lot of people on
reddit and here being extremely positive, and on reddit there were attacks
against anyone that was negative about it. At first, I figured I was just out
of step. Gradually, the number of people complaining about Windows 8 grew to
overshadow the boosters, where finally the boosters were nowhere to be seen. I
believe it was a campaign by Microsoft to try and turn the tide they knew
would be there, against it. It failed because Windows 8 was so horrible.

So, 8.1 comes out and here we have a new account (6 days old) with a glowing
review. Pardon me if I'm a little skeptical. I've been had before.

[1] [http://envoy510.wordpress.com/2013/07/19/windows-8-worst-
win...](http://envoy510.wordpress.com/2013/07/19/windows-8-worst-windows-
ever/)

~~~
AaronFriel
Oh god, not this conspiracy theory paid shill nonsense again. If I had a
dollar for every time I was called a shill for saying anything positive about
Microsoft, well, it still wouldn't make me a paid shill.

There's an alternative to your theory that requires fewer assumptions and only
requires reasoning based on the types of people involved in the discussions
you mention. People who like Windows 8 were comfortable using it in new ways,
people who didn't want to change didn't like it. The people who don't want to
change _still don 't want to change_ and so of course they are still
complaining. Me? I'm tired of debating people on whether or not Windows 8 was
an improvement over 7 or not. Usually it comes down to dogmatic beliefs over
how they think Windows should work and those beliefs are at odds with how
Microsoft thinks it should work. Why argue with dogmatism?

As evidence for the dogmatism of this belief, look no further than your own
comment. You _simply cannot believe_ anyone would think Windows 8 was good, or
that Windows 8.1 is good.

You and the House stenographer would get along.

~~~
e40
_People who like Windows 8 were comfortable using it in new ways, people who
didn 't want to change didn't like it._

Go read the blog entry and tell me that's about change. You can't look at that
large list of problems and tell me it's my problem.

~~~
untog
You're talking about yourself (and repeatedly telling people to go read your
blog post, which they're not required to do) - the other posters are talking
about users in general.

No doubt that you may well be an outlier. Every piece of software has groups
of people who use it differently, including some that are infuriated by it.
That doesn't mean that everyone that posts a positive experience is a paid
shill.

------
Karunamon
Why I won't be upgrading from 7 anytime soon:

* I don't do anything important on 7 anyways since the company publishing the OS admits to giving vulnerabilities to the bad guys

* Metro annoys me, gets in my way, and generally adds negative value.

* GFWL doesn't work right on it (see posts elsewhere in this thread, steam forums, etc)

* The last time I tried upgrading from 7 for the preview, my bootsector was nuked badly enough that I had to use Testdisk to get everything back.

I wouldn't install it in its current state if it was given to me for free, let
alone shell out $100 for the privilege. There is simply nothing compelling or
even remotely interesting to me.

*edit - Into the negatives for an opinion and giving reasons why? Really folks?

~~~
thelettere
I never use metro, but I like it just for the speed improvements. The desktop
experience is basically the same.

~~~
Karunamon
That's just it, you can't "not use metro" unless you either jump through some
GPO hoops (and hope that a future update doesn't break it) or install a paid
third party app (and hope a future update doesn't break that, either).

Still doesn't negate the other concerns, though. 7 is fast enough for my
needs.

------
brokenparser
Once again Microsoft has learned a lesson from Linux: the upgrade comes free
of charge to existing users. Not quite the same yet, but it's getting there.

~~~
publicfig
Hasn't every minor Windows version been free since 95? (I could be wrong on
this)

~~~
mdip
Historically, it's been a lot more complicated than that, however, I can't
recall an update like this being free from Microsoft since prior to Windows
95. They've added features and changed major parts of the user experience.
They've also refrained from point versions for their operating system naming,
but that's really just marketing/branding, since arguably some of the upgrades
to Windows 95 and Windows 98 would have been point versions if they weren't
sticking with the "year" branding.

Prior to Windows 95, I believe all point upgrades were paid upgrades. Though
there wasn't a universal medium to provide free updates like we have today...
it was the "drive to CompUSA and get a box full of disks".

Between Windows 95 and Windows 2000, there were many updates in between that
didn't have a cost difference, but also didn't have a direct upgrade path. I
worked for a company that supplied and supported small business networks, and
I recall that many of the OEM upgrade versions didn't even provide a way for
regular users to get their features. The initial version of Windows 95 was
released without Internet Explorer. When OEM Service Release 1 (OSR1) was
released, it included it. Regular users could install Service Pack 1 and
Internet Explorer separately giving them the upgrade to OSR 1 for free.

Windows 95 OSR2, OSR2+USB and OSR2.x did not have an upgrade path at all, nor
was there a way to purchase the full version outside of the OEM program at
full OEM pricing (regular users could do this by buying enough of the system
components to qualify the purchase as a build, but I believe they only sold
the licenses in quantities of 3). This was a big problem for regular users
since the OSR2.x upgrades added FAT32, USB support, AGP and a few processor
instructions.[1]

The service packs released for Windows 95 didn't add many of the features that
you could get via the OEM Service Releases, but they _did_ provide service
pack upgrades for free.

Windows 98 had two versions, 98 original and SE (second edition). I wasn't
building systems during the late 90s and a brief Wikipedia search yielded no
answers, but I don't think SE was a free upgrade. The naming of this was
annoying, since they started the trend of creating operating system editions
like "Server" and "Advanced Server". Windows 98 and Windows 98 SE weren't
different editions so much as SE was Windows 98 point 1.

Windows 2000 through Windows 7 continued the trend of free service packs. The
"Editions" mess turned from a couple to a litter. Edition upgrades came for a
fee, but they were different than in the past in that they were released at
the same time, but certain features were only available in more expensive
editions.

Microsoft also went back and forth on whether or not Service Packs would "add
features" or just "fix bugs". I remember every time we had an MS rep in and
this topic was brought up, they'd indicate that they didn't like the trend of
adding major features in service packs, but invariably, they would add major
features anyway. Windows Update and major other security features were added
as part of service packs for Windows 2000 and Windows XP. Windows Vista
Service Pack 2 made the operating system _usable_ , with the addition of the
bug fix (or _feature_ ) of being able to copy more than 65536 files using
Explorer per reboot.

Having used Windows 8.1 since it was released to MSDN, my feeling is that
they've greatly improved the operating system. I didn't hate Windows 8, though
I rarely use the Metro apps, however, there are many things about Windows 8.1
that work the way I would have wanted them to work in 8.0. One could argue
that they "fixed bugs with the UI", but really, they overhauled the most
fundamental component of the user experience of their OS, the Start Screen.
Icon behavior and features are different, the search screen works wildly
differently (a plus in some cases, a negative in others). Returning the Start
Button to its original position, was a huge improvement despite my initial
skepticism that it would make all that much of a difference.

[1]
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_95](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_95)
and from memory.

~~~
brokenparser
Windows 98 SE upgrade boxes were sold separately and they looked like this:
[http://i.imgur.com/RfgHpb3.jpg](http://i.imgur.com/RfgHpb3.jpg)

Though registered users could apparently get the CD for free (see elsewhere in
this thread). This site has an overview of most versions (it omits 2003, 2008
and 8): [http://ackadia.com/blog/computers/a-brief-history-of-
microso...](http://ackadia.com/blog/computers/a-brief-history-of-microsoft-
windows/)

