Does anyone need Windows 8?

I hope that Linux on the desktop continues to rise in usage and usability, but until it does, plenty of businesses and consumers want, and possibly need, Microsoft. Or to put it another way, are we willing to concede the consumer market to Apple? (Yikes! I hope not!) I personally would like to see Windows 8 on tablets be a big success, and I'd like to see a Linux competitor to Android succeed too (MeeGo seems unlikely now, but hey, Intel may be able to pull it off). Plenty of competition from deep pockets keeps innovation high and prices low. I own Windows, Macs and Linux PCs here, our house has Android, BlackBerry and WP7 phones ... variety is good for everyone.

Julie

Lots of people will be convinced by Microsoft that they need Windows 8.

And perception is reality.

That is all.

variety is good for everyone.

No, that's not true...especially if people don't want or seek it. Maybe competition is good for everyone, hence variety. I can live with that, but variety for the sake of variety?

I haven't varied my operating system in 6 years. To me, "variety" within that scope is just a waste. I don't like or use Mac or Windows for a variety of reasons. What good is variety if you don't want to choose from the variety pool?

Don't forget that in many offices, desktops are still loaded with MS. The mindset would be something like this: "Finally! Something that will allow me to use Exchange and Sharepoint on the road. Win!"

We'll see this until the next generation of cubicle workers replace the current one, and with the economy like that, it's gonna take some time. :(

If the Windows 7 to Windows 8 migration is anything like Windows 3.11 to Windows 95, then almost everyone will be forced to move.

I kind of doubt that MSFT can pull off the kind of stunt that they did in Windows 95, but really, all they have to do is convince "Anti-virus" vendors to quit supporting XP, Vista and Windows 7. The malware people will continue to target that group of OSes, because of the ease of doing so. Note: NOT MARKET SHARE. Windows is so baroque, and has many poorly-thought-out feature that lead to ease of exploitation.

Quite soon, the Windows XP, Vista and 7 folks will have to migrate, otherwise it will be very obvious that their computers are not their own. The malware plague will just overcome them, they'll leave their old computers in the alley or dumpsters, and buy new ones with Windows 8.

And Windows 8 will soon become the virus/malware enabler of choice. It is, after all, a product of that same firm who brought us Windows 98, ME, XP, Vista, 7, MS Office, etc., etc.

http://www.joyoftech.com/joyoftech/joyarchives/1549.html

The idea that consumers want every device they're using to function exactly like a PC is not unique to Microsoft. Canonical has the exact same idea, except a little backwards: they think consumers want all their devices to function exactly like smartphones.

I just watched this video about Windows 8: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p92QfWOw88I&feature=youtu.be

It seems Microsoft is going through an even worse touch screen meltdown than the Ubuntu and Gnome developers...

Quoting:It seems Microsoft is going through an even worse touch screen meltdown than the Ubuntu and Gnome developers...

We must realize that the majority of Windows users are novice and such presentations will impress them at first glance. This type of interface gets tiresome when used continuously and for extended period of time. It literally gets the hands and eyes tired and that is when users will decide to go back to the classic desktop interface.

For occasional use and for small devices and kiosk, this interface is ideal. It will get very popular for its convenience. The best approach to accommodate for all types of devices is by making different interfaces available and let the users choose what is best for them.

The Russian programmer who published an reverse-engineered version of the proprietary Skype VoIP protocols, has said in an interview that the project could lead to a full open soruce version for Linux users "who are waiting impatiently for it"

Not going to happen... M$ owns it, along with the patents. They'll sue anyone cloning it into non-existence, at least where they can use the patents. You have to go with a competing tech, like Ekiga or Google Chat, if you want to play in that market space.

Quoting:Not going to happen...

Are you saying what happened with Samba won't happen with Skype?

Thanks to Jeremy Allison, the EU forced MS to publish the full specification of their SMB protocol implementation for a one time nominal fee, what makes you sure it won't happen again with Skype?

I would think that the value offering for products like this is not the protocol but the client base.

People don't choose Skype/FriendFace/TwitFeatures/etc because of protocols but because of the reach of the service.

Sure, someone could create another "Skype" using their protocols and products, but if your friends/business asssociates aren't using, what's the point?

That's why it's more important to be first than the best a lot of the time.

Quoting:I would think that the value offering for products like this is not the protocol but the client base.

The value I was referring to is the ability of a multi-platform client(e.g. Ekiga) that could inter-operate with Skype server using Skype proprietary protocol the same way Samba client does with MS Domain Controller. In this case, there is no need to have Skype client for Linux.

In general, I don't think users care what client they use as long as it works well for them.

The difference between SMB & Skype is that SMB was developed by or for IBM (if I got my history right), and so is their product. M$ just "extended" it. With M$ buying Skype, I'd wager they own the whole shebang (although there was an issue with the protocol developer a while back,... But I think that got resolved).

Quoting:The difference between SMB & Skype is that SMB was developed by or for IBM...

True and that is why I said "their SMB protocol implementation".

Any ways, MS can sue but won't get them any where since reverse engineering is not illegal every where. I am not sure about the US but according to these links, it is not.

http://www.zdnet.co.uk/news/regulation/2004/03/01/us-court-r...

And more recent court decision

http://mckeeoffice.com/blog2/2009/09/23/is-reverse-engineeri...

@fettoosh, > Any ways, MS can sue but won't get them any where since reverse engineering is not illegal every where.

I don't know for sure about all this either. Seems to me that even though M$ cannot pull the full effects of its assaults against F/OSS EVERYWHERE, it still somehow causes as much as damage as possible to any perceived threats to its acquisitions. Like maybe Skype-clones here?

Don't get me wrong. It would be great if F/OSS Skypies get as popular as or more popular than the original. A bit like OO.org and LO succeeding against the M$ big cashcow, the Awf(ul)ice not-so-$uite. IIRC, M$'s past strategy in B.R.I.C. countries whenever F/OSS projects make inroads is to actually ALLOW a certain degree of software piracy so that reversengineering projects like the Skype clone never get far off the ground. And maybe I'm completely mistaken that Micr$uck$ just doesn't try such stunts any more or else does these with such stealth using various non-disclosure agreements held against foreign programmers' employers' heads (or against heads of government agencies) that few others can ever know for certain about this. Bad tinfoil-hat moi.

In any case, I hope that a good Skype clone emerges and then exponentially increases its client base and reach of service just as skelband explained above. This without M$ or some questionable SCO-like M$ partner somehow managing to constantly breathe down the code-developers' or standards' committees backs!!!

Just my own 2c on all this.