It seems the article might be making fun of Win8 users.
It seems the article might be making fun of Win8 users.
Those users on Windows 8 are just sharing their thoughts after reading the piece. You can check the comments here: https://www.yahoo.com/tech/goodbye-windo...20539.html
The piece feels like someone chasing the "haha windows 8 sucks lol" trend. I've relied on it for over a year as my primary OS, and I really enjoy it. Others noticed the start button and gave up, while others spent about half an hour trying to fix it if they didn’t like it, rather than embracing the perks of Windows 8. Pushing people to jump straight into the Technical Preview seems like a poor strategy either. It looks more like an article crafted to boost views by leaning on a widely accepted opinion. It’s simple enough to sway opinions quickly.
Windows 7 was great. Simple as that, not the point of what I'm about to say. Windows 8 made it harder to... 'get-under-the-hood'. But I find I have to do that FAR less often than I ever did with Win 7. Win 8 sucked for the first week I used it as I tried to get all the settings the way I wanted, but to be honest I haven't ever had issues since that first week. Now I agree, article feels a bit like a hate train.
It isn't always smooth. I personally faced no problems with tablets, finding it quite straightforward. The challenge came when using it on a desktop, especially since Windows 10 is much more intuitive than Windows 7. The biggest issue was installation on my mother's Asus ultrabook—after four factory resets it still wouldn't activate. After two months of back-and-forth with Microsoft and Asus, another $200 was spent to finally get a working version, adding to the original $1800 cost.
I still can't grasp why Windows 8.1 gets such a bad reaction. I've been using Windows since version 3.0, and 8 isn't the worst I've experienced. I'd even say it's better than XP but not top of the list. Anyone claiming 8 is the worst has never run a machine with Windows ME.
The device wasn't overly problematic; just required regular defragmentation (it seemed built for an SSD). Personally, I relied on Windows starting with version 3.1—still had the 5.25" media, though no drives were present. Since 1995, it's remained relatively stable, with features added and removed over time, and the interface updated (including the NT kernel). Apart from Windows 8, which felt excessive at the time, most changes were minor. It would have been better if new options had been optional instead of mandatory.
I believe if 8 had included the desktop boot option from the start rather than adding it later, it would have been more widely accepted. Many tech-savvy users adapt quickly, but others feel overwhelmed and think changes signal the end of their experience.