Re: Is Surface really failing? (tangent # 99)
You'll likely find the reason they arent supporting the migration forward has to do with the whole RT reset matrix. In that if your target market for the near future is both RT Pro experiences having the old dragging along for the ride is still in the same problem space as it is with deskstop. The Win8 team made a concious decision to put a line in the sand with its release by basically jettison the entire .NET current in way of the new and whilst Surface Pro still allows you to sneak your WPF/SL/Other solutions into the tablet space it's pretty much and will always be a case of you making your own way through that technical challenge alone. With Win8 came new namespaces on a lot of existing IP :) so with that all roads point to new namespaces or bust. --- Regards, Scott Barnes http://www.riagenic.com On Sun, May 12, 2013 at 5:19 PM, Ian Thomas il.tho...@iinet.net.au wrote: This must be the most divergent tangent from the original topic, but here goes: It is not related to HTML support (would that have changed, I wonder?) but my guess is that it is because the legacy 3rd-party add-ins for Office would be largely VBA add-ins or perhaps C++ COM add ins (not ever written as .NET with the aid of the PIAs for the various Office releases). Meski’s short response was sufficient explanation. It is hard to move forward when you are forced to support quite old legacy applications. If some small business or individual is used to running (for example) an Outlook add-in from 4Team, which may have been updated to support Outlook 97 through to Outlook 2013 – but not the 64-bit versions of Office - then what would you expect Microsoft (or software publisher X – eg, Apple) to do? In my view, it would be helpful to suggest that the 32-bit version may be preferable, if that is what Microsoft recommends somewhere. Those with more technical advice or knowledge would make a judgement whether the 64-bit version of say Excel might be better suited for their use - perhaps to support huge spreadsheets? But many users would be pleased enough with 32-bit versions. I’m not sure what you mean by stupid HTML crap. Do you mean XML-based object model in the .docx, .xlsx (etc) file formats? Personally, I wouldn’t complain about Microsoft’s ,NET support for Office development, in the 2009 to 1013 time frame. I think it’s pretty good. -- **Ian Thomas** Victoria Park, Western Australia ** ** ** ** *From:* ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [mailto: ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com] *On Behalf Of *Katherine Moss *Sent:* Sunday, May 12, 2013 12:40 AM *To:* ozDotNet *Subject:* RE: Is Surface really failing? ** ** Oh LOL. I never thought of that. I mean, Microsoft has just ruined NET Framework support in Office by touting their stupid HTML crap, so it’s almost like it matters not anymore. ** ** *From:* ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [ mailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com] *On Behalf Of *mike smith *Sent:* Saturday, May 11, 2013 1:13 AM *To:* ozDotNet *Subject:* Re: Is Surface really failing? ** ** Because there are a lot of legacy addons for Office that haven't been compiled for x64 Office. They will not work together (inProc calls) On Sat, May 11, 2013 at 6:09 AM, Katherine Moss katherine.m...@gordon.edu wrote: Oh funny. But in light of what somebody said about Office, why do you recommend 32 bit office on a 64 bit platform? I don’t get that. And before today, I had never heard of it before. I’m in the market for Office 2013, so which to get and why? I’d rather go for the 64 bit version, but if that’s going to cause headaches for me later, then oh well.
RE: Is Surface really failing? (tangent # 99)
If you don’t like the ribbon UI (the vast majority of people I know, techie or otherwise, don’t) the only real option is sticking with Office 2003. If you do anything that involves add-ins or custom macros, Office has been a relative pain in the ass to work with since 2007. From more of a ‘power user’ perspective, if you prefer to work with virtualised environments a complete and snappy XP + Office 2003 will cost you 2-3Gb at most and can be stripped down to under 700Mb total without too much work, while a basic Win8 install with Office 2013 will set you back roughly 10Gb. If you use Powerpoint and Access extensively your mileage may vary but other than for a few minor niceties in Outlook I can’t think of a single ‘killer feature’ added to the core Office programs (ie Word, Excel and Outlook) between Office 2003 and Office 2013 which even remotely compels me to upgrade if the licenses weren’t included anyway with my MSDN subscription (maybe faster large file handling in 64 bit versions?). The only significant reason that I upgrade is OneNote. Other than for that I’d be perfectly happy sticking with 2003, ‘supported’ or not (and when’s the last time Microsoft consumer-level support provided anything of value anyway?) Speaking solely from a user perspective, it’s not that dissimilar to the Win8 situation. Why expect people to re-learn what they already know how to do more efficiently for the sole sake of ‘keeping up’? Where’s the benefit to the user? *disclaimer – if not for multi-core CPUs, 4Gb RAM and most hardware vendors not maintaining (or releasing at all) relevant XP drivers, I’d also be happy to continue using Windows XP. That apparently makes me a luddite? I just figure if it ain’t broke… From: ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [mailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com] On Behalf Of Katherine Moss Sent: Monday, 13 May 2013 3:52 PM To: ozDotNet Subject: RE: Is Surface really failing? (tangent # 99) Say that again? There are still people using Office ’03? We have to get them out of the dark ages and get them up to supported Office levels! From: ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.commailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [mailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com] On Behalf Of mike smith Sent: Sunday, May 12, 2013 10:05 PM To: ozDotNet Subject: Re: Is Surface really failing? (tangent # 99) THis is just for Office-in-the-cloud, right? There's a lot of customers out there that use and love Office 2003. On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 11:53 AM, Katherine Moss katherine.m...@gordon.edumailto:katherine.m...@gordon.edu wrote: I mean the new office model using what’s it called, Napa or something like that? That doesn’t use .net at all, and they are calling the existing development model legacy already. So Microsoft seems to prefer that folks now do all of their development for office via HTML instead of via .net. From: ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.commailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [mailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.commailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com] On Behalf Of Ian Thomas Sent: Sunday, May 12, 2013 3:20 AM To: 'ozDotNet' Subject: RE: Is Surface really failing? (tangent # 99) This must be the most divergent tangent from the original topic, but here goes: It is not related to HTML support (would that have changed, I wonder?) but my guess is that it is because the legacy 3rd-party add-ins for Office would be largely VBA add-ins or perhaps C++ COM add ins (not ever written as .NET with the aid of the PIAs for the various Office releases). Meski’s short response was sufficient explanation. It is hard to move forward when you are forced to support quite old legacy applications. If some small business or individual is used to running (for example) an Outlook add-in from 4Team, which may have been updated to support Outlook 97 through to Outlook 2013 – but not the 64-bit versions of Office - then what would you expect Microsoft (or software publisher X – eg, Apple) to do? In my view, it would be helpful to suggest that the 32-bit version may be preferable, if that is what Microsoft recommends somewhere. Those with more technical advice or knowledge would make a judgement whether the 64-bit version of say Excel might be better suited for their use - perhaps to support huge spreadsheets? But many users would be pleased enough with 32-bit versions. I’m not sure what you mean by stupid HTML crap. Do you mean XML-based object model in the .docx, .xlsx (etc) file formats? Personally, I wouldn’t complain about Microsoft’s ,NET support for Office development, in the 2009 to 1013 time frame. I think it’s pretty good. Ian Thomas Victoria Park, Western Australia From: ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.commailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [mailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com] On Behalf Of Katherine Moss Sent: Sunday, May 12, 2013 12:40 AM To: ozDotNet Subject: RE: Is Surface really failing? Oh LOL. I never thought of that. I mean, Microsoft has just ruined NET
Re: Is Surface really failing? (tangent # 99)
Sarchasm? :) I really wish they'd goto '07 at least. On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 3:51 PM, Katherine Moss katherine.m...@gordon.eduwrote: Say that again? There are still people using Office ’03? We have to get them out of the dark ages and get them up to supported Office levels! *** * ** ** *From:* ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [mailto: ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com] *On Behalf Of *mike smith *Sent:* Sunday, May 12, 2013 10:05 PM *To:* ozDotNet *Subject:* Re: Is Surface really failing? (tangent # 99) ** ** THis is just for Office-in-the-cloud, right? There's a lot of customers out there that use and love Office 2003. On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 11:53 AM, Katherine Moss katherine.m...@gordon.edu wrote: I mean the new office model using what’s it called, Napa or something like that? That doesn’t use .net at all, and they are calling the existing development model legacy already. So Microsoft seems to prefer that folks now do all of their development for office via HTML instead of via .net. *From:* ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [mailto: ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com] *On Behalf Of *Ian Thomas *Sent:* Sunday, May 12, 2013 3:20 AM *To:* 'ozDotNet' *Subject:* RE: Is Surface really failing? (tangent # 99) This must be the most divergent tangent from the original topic, but here goes: It is not related to HTML support (would that have changed, I wonder?) but my guess is that it is because the legacy 3rd-party add-ins for Office would be largely VBA add-ins or perhaps C++ COM add ins (not ever written as .NET with the aid of the PIAs for the various Office releases). Meski’s short response was sufficient explanation. It is hard to move forward when you are forced to support quite old legacy applications. If some small business or individual is used to running (for example) an Outlook add-in from 4Team, which may have been updated to support Outlook 97 through to Outlook 2013 – but not the 64-bit versions of Office - then what would you expect Microsoft (or software publisher X – eg, Apple) to do? In my view, it would be helpful to suggest that the 32-bit version may be preferable, if that is what Microsoft recommends somewhere. Those with more technical advice or knowledge would make a judgement whether the 64-bit version of say Excel might be better suited for their use - perhaps to support huge spreadsheets? But many users would be pleased enough with 32-bit versions. I’m not sure what you mean by stupid HTML crap. Do you mean XML-based object model in the .docx, .xlsx (etc) file formats? Personally, I wouldn’t complain about Microsoft’s ,NET support for Office development, in the 2009 to 1013 time frame. I think it’s pretty good. -- Ian Thomas Victoria Park, Western Australia *From:* ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [ mailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com] *On Behalf Of *Katherine Moss *Sent:* Sunday, May 12, 2013 12:40 AM *To:* ozDotNet *Subject:* RE: Is Surface really failing? Oh LOL. I never thought of that. I mean, Microsoft has just ruined NET Framework support in Office by touting their stupid HTML crap, so it’s almost like it matters not anymore. *From:* ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [ mailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com] *On Behalf Of *mike smith *Sent:* Saturday, May 11, 2013 1:13 AM *To:* ozDotNet *Subject:* Re: Is Surface really failing? Because there are a lot of legacy addons for Office that haven't been compiled for x64 Office. They will not work together (inProc calls) On Sat, May 11, 2013 at 6:09 AM, Katherine Moss katherine.m...@gordon.edu wrote: Oh funny. But in light of what somebody said about Office, why do you recommend 32 bit office on a 64 bit platform? I don’t get that. And before today, I had never heard of it before. I’m in the market for Office 2013, so which to get and why? I’d rather go for the 64 bit version, but if that’s going to cause headaches for me later, then oh well. ** ** -- Meski http://courteous.ly/aAOZcv Going to Starbucks for coffee is like going to prison for sex. Sure, you'll get it, but it's going to be rough - Adam Hills -- Meski http://courteous.ly/aAOZcv Going to Starbucks for coffee is like going to prison for sex. Sure, you'll get it, but it's going to be rough - Adam Hills
Re: Is Surface really failing? (tangent # 99)
On 13/05/2013 4:38 PM, mike smith meski...@gmail.com wrote: Sarchasm? :) Sarchasm - The abyss created when people are sarcastic?
Re: Is Surface really failing? (tangent # 99)
On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 4:38 PM, mike smith meski...@gmail.com wrote: Sarchasm? :) I like it. I just walked into a colleague's office, wrote that on the whiteboard and walked out. David Connors da...@connors.com | M +61 417 189 363 Download my v-card: https://www.codify.com/cards/davidconnors Follow me on Twitter: https://www.twitter.com/davidconnors Connect with me on LinkedIn: http://au.linkedin.com/in/davidjohnconnors
RE: Is Surface really failing? (tangent # 99)
a) Threaded comments are a killer feature for me, and auto-object spacing in Visio. I guess one person’s killer feature is another person’s ‘meh’. I’m sure that Jensen Harris posted some usage stats from Office 2003 that showed that beyond the first 10 or so features, the next 100 are only used by 1-2% of the population, but different 1%s, so eliminating a feature isn’t really possible b) In terms of surfacing features to the user, the Ribbon is pretty good. Much better and scalable than the toolbars, menus, task panes and all the other stuff that pre-dated it. I’m pretty sure Jensen also had some graphs showing the growth in features (and the concurrent increase in toolbars etc and how unsustainable it was going to be) http://blogs.msdn.com/b/jensenh/archive/2008/03/12/table-of-contents.aspx makes for fascinating reading (showing the depth of analysis and work that went into rethinking the UI) http://blogs.msdn.com/b/jensenh/archive/2006/04/04/568249.aspx feature bloat in Office Cheers Ken From: ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [mailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com] On Behalf Of Nathan Chere Sent: Monday, 13 May 2013 4:20 PM To: ozDotNet Subject: RE: Is Surface really failing? (tangent # 99) If you use Powerpoint and Access extensively your mileage may vary but other than for a few minor niceties in Outlook I can’t think of a single ‘killer feature’ added to the core Office programs (ie Word, Excel and Outlook) between Office 2003 and Office 2013 which even remotely compels me to upgrade if the licenses weren’t included anyway with my MSDN subscription (maybe faster large file handling in 64 bit versions?). The only significant reason that I upgrade is OneNote. Other than for that I’d be perfectly happy sticking with 2003, ‘supported’ or not (and when’s the last time Microsoft consumer-level support provided anything of value anyway?) Speaking solely from a user perspective, it’s not that dissimilar to the Win8 situation. Why expect people to re-learn what they already know how to do more efficiently for the sole sake of ‘keeping up’? Where’s the benefit to the user?
RE: Is Surface really failing? (tangent # 99)
http://blogs.msdn.com/b/jensenh/archive/2006/04/07/570798.aspx - the post on the most used commands in Office From: ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [mailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com] On Behalf Of Ken Schaefer Sent: Monday, 13 May 2013 5:17 PM To: ozDotNet Subject: RE: Is Surface really failing? (tangent # 99) a) Threaded comments are a killer feature for me, and auto-object spacing in Visio. I guess one person’s killer feature is another person’s ‘meh’. I’m sure that Jensen Harris posted some usage stats from Office 2003 that showed that beyond the first 10 or so features, the next 100 are only used by 1-2% of the population, but different 1%s, so eliminating a feature isn’t really possible b) In terms of surfacing features to the user, the Ribbon is pretty good. Much better and scalable than the toolbars, menus, task panes and all the other stuff that pre-dated it. I’m pretty sure Jensen also had some graphs showing the growth in features (and the concurrent increase in toolbars etc and how unsustainable it was going to be) http://blogs.msdn.com/b/jensenh/archive/2008/03/12/table-of-contents.aspx makes for fascinating reading (showing the depth of analysis and work that went into rethinking the UI) http://blogs.msdn.com/b/jensenh/archive/2006/04/04/568249.aspx feature bloat in Office Cheers Ken From: ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.commailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [mailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com] On Behalf Of Nathan Chere Sent: Monday, 13 May 2013 4:20 PM To: ozDotNet Subject: RE: Is Surface really failing? (tangent # 99) If you use Powerpoint and Access extensively your mileage may vary but other than for a few minor niceties in Outlook I can’t think of a single ‘killer feature’ added to the core Office programs (ie Word, Excel and Outlook) between Office 2003 and Office 2013 which even remotely compels me to upgrade if the licenses weren’t included anyway with my MSDN subscription (maybe faster large file handling in 64 bit versions?). The only significant reason that I upgrade is OneNote. Other than for that I’d be perfectly happy sticking with 2003, ‘supported’ or not (and when’s the last time Microsoft consumer-level support provided anything of value anyway?) Speaking solely from a user perspective, it’s not that dissimilar to the Win8 situation. Why expect people to re-learn what they already know how to do more efficiently for the sole sake of ‘keeping up’? Where’s the benefit to the user?
RE: Is Surface really failing? (tangent # 99)
This must be the most divergent tangent from the original topic, but here goes: It is not related to HTML support (would that have changed, I wonder?) but my guess is that it is because the legacy 3rd-party add-ins for Office would be largely VBA add-ins or perhaps C++ COM add ins (not ever written as .NET with the aid of the PIAs for the various Office releases). Meski’s short response was sufficient explanation. It is hard to move forward when you are forced to support quite old legacy applications. If some small business or individual is used to running (for example) an Outlook add-in from 4Team, which may have been updated to support Outlook 97 through to Outlook 2013 – but not the 64-bit versions of Office - then what would you expect Microsoft (or software publisher X – eg, Apple) to do? In my view, it would be helpful to suggest that the 32-bit version may be preferable, if that is what Microsoft recommends somewhere. Those with more technical advice or knowledge would make a judgement whether the 64-bit version of say Excel might be better suited for their use - perhaps to support huge spreadsheets? But many users would be pleased enough with 32-bit versions. I’m not sure what you mean by stupid HTML crap. Do you mean XML-based object model in the .docx, .xlsx (etc) file formats? Personally, I wouldn’t complain about Microsoft’s ,NET support for Office development, in the 2009 to 1013 time frame. I think it’s pretty good. _ Ian Thomas Victoria Park, Western Australia From: ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [mailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com] On Behalf Of Katherine Moss Sent: Sunday, May 12, 2013 12:40 AM To: ozDotNet Subject: RE: Is Surface really failing? Oh LOL. I never thought of that. I mean, Microsoft has just ruined NET Framework support in Office by touting their stupid HTML crap, so it’s almost like it matters not anymore. From: ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [mailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com] On Behalf Of mike smith Sent: Saturday, May 11, 2013 1:13 AM To: ozDotNet Subject: Re: Is Surface really failing? Because there are a lot of legacy addons for Office that haven't been compiled for x64 Office. They will not work together (inProc calls) On Sat, May 11, 2013 at 6:09 AM, Katherine Moss katherine.m...@gordon.edu wrote: Oh funny. But in light of what somebody said about Office, why do you recommend 32 bit office on a 64 bit platform? I don’t get that. And before today, I had never heard of it before. I’m in the market for Office 2013, so which to get and why? I’d rather go for the 64 bit version, but if that’s going to cause headaches for me later, then oh well.
RE: Is Surface really failing? (tangent # 99)
I mean the new office model using what’s it called, Napa or something like that? That doesn’t use .net at all, and they are calling the existing development model legacy already. So Microsoft seems to prefer that folks now do all of their development for office via HTML instead of via .net. From: ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [mailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com] On Behalf Of Ian Thomas Sent: Sunday, May 12, 2013 3:20 AM To: 'ozDotNet' Subject: RE: Is Surface really failing? (tangent # 99) This must be the most divergent tangent from the original topic, but here goes: It is not related to HTML support (would that have changed, I wonder?) but my guess is that it is because the legacy 3rd-party add-ins for Office would be largely VBA add-ins or perhaps C++ COM add ins (not ever written as .NET with the aid of the PIAs for the various Office releases). Meski’s short response was sufficient explanation. It is hard to move forward when you are forced to support quite old legacy applications. If some small business or individual is used to running (for example) an Outlook add-in from 4Team, which may have been updated to support Outlook 97 through to Outlook 2013 – but not the 64-bit versions of Office - then what would you expect Microsoft (or software publisher X – eg, Apple) to do? In my view, it would be helpful to suggest that the 32-bit version may be preferable, if that is what Microsoft recommends somewhere. Those with more technical advice or knowledge would make a judgement whether the 64-bit version of say Excel might be better suited for their use - perhaps to support huge spreadsheets? But many users would be pleased enough with 32-bit versions. I’m not sure what you mean by stupid HTML crap. Do you mean XML-based object model in the .docx, .xlsx (etc) file formats? Personally, I wouldn’t complain about Microsoft’s ,NET support for Office development, in the 2009 to 1013 time frame. I think it’s pretty good. Ian Thomas Victoria Park, Western Australia From: ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.commailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [mailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com] On Behalf Of Katherine Moss Sent: Sunday, May 12, 2013 12:40 AM To: ozDotNet Subject: RE: Is Surface really failing? Oh LOL. I never thought of that. I mean, Microsoft has just ruined NET Framework support in Office by touting their stupid HTML crap, so it’s almost like it matters not anymore. From: ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.commailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [mailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com] On Behalf Of mike smith Sent: Saturday, May 11, 2013 1:13 AM To: ozDotNet Subject: Re: Is Surface really failing? Because there are a lot of legacy addons for Office that haven't been compiled for x64 Office. They will not work together (inProc calls) On Sat, May 11, 2013 at 6:09 AM, Katherine Moss katherine.m...@gordon.edumailto:katherine.m...@gordon.edu wrote: Oh funny. But in light of what somebody said about Office, why do you recommend 32 bit office on a 64 bit platform? I don’t get that. And before today, I had never heard of it before. I’m in the market for Office 2013, so which to get and why? I’d rather go for the 64 bit version, but if that’s going to cause headaches for me later, then oh well.
Re: Is Surface really failing? (tangent # 99)
THis is just for Office-in-the-cloud, right? There's a lot of customers out there that use and love Office 2003. On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 11:53 AM, Katherine Moss katherine.m...@gordon.eduwrote: I mean the new office model using what’s it called, Napa or something like that? That doesn’t use .net at all, and they are calling the existing development model legacy already. So Microsoft seems to prefer that folks now do all of their development for office via HTML instead of via .net. ** ** *From:* ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [mailto: ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com] *On Behalf Of *Ian Thomas *Sent:* Sunday, May 12, 2013 3:20 AM *To:* 'ozDotNet' *Subject:* RE: Is Surface really failing? (tangent # 99) ** ** This must be the most divergent tangent from the original topic, but here goes: It is not related to HTML support (would that have changed, I wonder?) but my guess is that it is because the legacy 3rd-party add-ins for Office would be largely VBA add-ins or perhaps C++ COM add ins (not ever written as .NET with the aid of the PIAs for the various Office releases). Meski’s short response was sufficient explanation. It is hard to move forward when you are forced to support quite old legacy applications. If some small business or individual is used to running (for example) an Outlook add-in from 4Team, which may have been updated to support Outlook 97 through to Outlook 2013 – but not the 64-bit versions of Office - then what would you expect Microsoft (or software publisher X – eg, Apple) to do? In my view, it would be helpful to suggest that the 32-bit version may be preferable, if that is what Microsoft recommends somewhere. Those with more technical advice or knowledge would make a judgement whether the 64-bit version of say Excel might be better suited for their use - perhaps to support huge spreadsheets? But many users would be pleased enough with 32-bit versions. ** ** I’m not sure what you mean by stupid HTML crap. Do you mean XML-based object model in the .docx, .xlsx (etc) file formats? Personally, I wouldn’t complain about Microsoft’s ,NET support for Office development, in the 2009 to 1013 time frame. I think it’s pretty good. -- **Ian Thomas** Victoria Park, Western Australia ** ** ** ** *From:* ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [ mailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com] *On Behalf Of *Katherine Moss *Sent:* Sunday, May 12, 2013 12:40 AM *To:* ozDotNet *Subject:* RE: Is Surface really failing? ** ** Oh LOL. I never thought of that. I mean, Microsoft has just ruined NET Framework support in Office by touting their stupid HTML crap, so it’s almost like it matters not anymore. ** ** *From:* ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [ mailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com] *On Behalf Of *mike smith *Sent:* Saturday, May 11, 2013 1:13 AM *To:* ozDotNet *Subject:* Re: Is Surface really failing? ** ** Because there are a lot of legacy addons for Office that haven't been compiled for x64 Office. They will not work together (inProc calls) On Sat, May 11, 2013 at 6:09 AM, Katherine Moss katherine.m...@gordon.edu wrote: Oh funny. But in light of what somebody said about Office, why do you recommend 32 bit office on a 64 bit platform? I don’t get that. And before today, I had never heard of it before. I’m in the market for Office 2013, so which to get and why? I’d rather go for the 64 bit version, but if that’s going to cause headaches for me later, then oh well. -- Meski http://courteous.ly/aAOZcv Going to Starbucks for coffee is like going to prison for sex. Sure, you'll get it, but it's going to be rough - Adam Hills
RE: Is Surface really failing? (tangent # 99)
Say that again? There are still people using Office ’03? We have to get them out of the dark ages and get them up to supported Office levels! From: ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [mailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com] On Behalf Of mike smith Sent: Sunday, May 12, 2013 10:05 PM To: ozDotNet Subject: Re: Is Surface really failing? (tangent # 99) THis is just for Office-in-the-cloud, right? There's a lot of customers out there that use and love Office 2003. On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 11:53 AM, Katherine Moss katherine.m...@gordon.edumailto:katherine.m...@gordon.edu wrote: I mean the new office model using what’s it called, Napa or something like that? That doesn’t use .net at all, and they are calling the existing development model legacy already. So Microsoft seems to prefer that folks now do all of their development for office via HTML instead of via .net. From: ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.commailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [mailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.commailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com] On Behalf Of Ian Thomas Sent: Sunday, May 12, 2013 3:20 AM To: 'ozDotNet' Subject: RE: Is Surface really failing? (tangent # 99) This must be the most divergent tangent from the original topic, but here goes: It is not related to HTML support (would that have changed, I wonder?) but my guess is that it is because the legacy 3rd-party add-ins for Office would be largely VBA add-ins or perhaps C++ COM add ins (not ever written as .NET with the aid of the PIAs for the various Office releases). Meski’s short response was sufficient explanation. It is hard to move forward when you are forced to support quite old legacy applications. If some small business or individual is used to running (for example) an Outlook add-in from 4Team, which may have been updated to support Outlook 97 through to Outlook 2013 – but not the 64-bit versions of Office - then what would you expect Microsoft (or software publisher X – eg, Apple) to do? In my view, it would be helpful to suggest that the 32-bit version may be preferable, if that is what Microsoft recommends somewhere. Those with more technical advice or knowledge would make a judgement whether the 64-bit version of say Excel might be better suited for their use - perhaps to support huge spreadsheets? But many users would be pleased enough with 32-bit versions. I’m not sure what you mean by stupid HTML crap. Do you mean XML-based object model in the .docx, .xlsx (etc) file formats? Personally, I wouldn’t complain about Microsoft’s ,NET support for Office development, in the 2009 to 1013 time frame. I think it’s pretty good. Ian Thomas Victoria Park, Western Australia From: ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.commailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [mailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com] On Behalf Of Katherine Moss Sent: Sunday, May 12, 2013 12:40 AM To: ozDotNet Subject: RE: Is Surface really failing? Oh LOL. I never thought of that. I mean, Microsoft has just ruined NET Framework support in Office by touting their stupid HTML crap, so it’s almost like it matters not anymore. From: ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.commailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [mailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com] On Behalf Of mike smith Sent: Saturday, May 11, 2013 1:13 AM To: ozDotNet Subject: Re: Is Surface really failing? Because there are a lot of legacy addons for Office that haven't been compiled for x64 Office. They will not work together (inProc calls) On Sat, May 11, 2013 at 6:09 AM, Katherine Moss katherine.m...@gordon.edumailto:katherine.m...@gordon.edu wrote: Oh funny. But in light of what somebody said about Office, why do you recommend 32 bit office on a 64 bit platform? I don’t get that. And before today, I had never heard of it before. I’m in the market for Office 2013, so which to get and why? I’d rather go for the 64 bit version, but if that’s going to cause headaches for me later, then oh well. -- Meski http://courteous.ly/aAOZcv Going to Starbucks for coffee is like going to prison for sex. Sure, you'll get it, but it's going to be rough - Adam Hills
RE: Is Surface really failing?
Oh LOL. I never thought of that. I mean, Microsoft has just ruined NET Framework support in Office by touting their stupid HTML crap, so it’s almost like it matters not anymore. From: ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [mailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com] On Behalf Of mike smith Sent: Saturday, May 11, 2013 1:13 AM To: ozDotNet Subject: Re: Is Surface really failing? Because there are a lot of legacy addons for Office that haven't been compiled for x64 Office. They will not work together (inProc calls) On Sat, May 11, 2013 at 6:09 AM, Katherine Moss katherine.m...@gordon.edumailto:katherine.m...@gordon.edu wrote: Oh funny. But in light of what somebody said about Office, why do you recommend 32 bit office on a 64 bit platform? I don’t get that. And before today, I had never heard of it before. I’m in the market for Office 2013, so which to get and why? I’d rather go for the 64 bit version, but if that’s going to cause headaches for me later, then oh well. From: ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.commailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [mailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.commailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com] On Behalf Of David Kean Sent: Friday, May 10, 2013 12:44 PM To: ozDotNet Subject: RE: Is Surface really failing? What makes you say it’s not “Google”? Try searching for something obscure a lot of on Google (say door handles), notice that YouTube will showing you ads related to it. From: ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.commailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [mailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com] On Behalf Of Katherine Moss Sent: Friday, May 10, 2013 9:25 AM To: ozDotNet Subject: RE: Is Surface really failing? I don’t trust anything with the name “Google” in it. All data miners who need to be put down. I watch and upload to YouTube because YouTube is owned by google, but it’s not Google. From: ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.commailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [mailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com] On Behalf Of David Connors Sent: Friday, May 10, 2013 1:58 AM To: ozDotNet Subject: Re: Is Surface really failing? On Fri, May 10, 2013 at 3:52 PM, Stephen Price step...@perthprojects.commailto:step...@perthprojects.com wrote: I've stopped installing office on my machines now for some years. On the odd occasion I do need to access a document of some kind, I put it in my Google drive and open it in Google docs. It even gives me a nice way to save as PDF if I need to. My work machines usually have office as part of the SOE so use whatever is installed. So my personal usage of Office is pretty much zero. I use Office all the time at Codify. Every plan, doc, report, etc is heavily invested in office. I can't imagine putting together a 100 page report full of cross-references and stuff in anything other than Word. Google Docs is still a bit shit for things like vector graphics (PDFs end up with bitmaps in them) and the presentations they generate are horrible last time I checked. Google Spreadsheets is very, very solid though. I am constantly amazed by it. -- Meski http://courteous.ly/aAOZcv Going to Starbucks for coffee is like going to prison for sex. Sure, you'll get it, but it's going to be rough - Adam Hills
RE: Is Surface really failing?
I don’t trust anything with the name “Google” in it. All data miners who need to be put down. I watch and upload to YouTube because YouTube is owned by google, but it’s not Google. From: ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [mailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com] On Behalf Of David Connors Sent: Friday, May 10, 2013 1:58 AM To: ozDotNet Subject: Re: Is Surface really failing? On Fri, May 10, 2013 at 3:52 PM, Stephen Price step...@perthprojects.commailto:step...@perthprojects.com wrote: I've stopped installing office on my machines now for some years. On the odd occasion I do need to access a document of some kind, I put it in my Google drive and open it in Google docs. It even gives me a nice way to save as PDF if I need to. My work machines usually have office as part of the SOE so use whatever is installed. So my personal usage of Office is pretty much zero. I use Office all the time at Codify. Every plan, doc, report, etc is heavily invested in office. I can't imagine putting together a 100 page report full of cross-references and stuff in anything other than Word. Google Docs is still a bit shit for things like vector graphics (PDFs end up with bitmaps in them) and the presentations they generate are horrible last time I checked. Google Spreadsheets is very, very solid though. I am constantly amazed by it.
RE: Is Surface really failing?
What makes you say it’s not “Google”? Try searching for something obscure a lot of on Google (say door handles), notice that YouTube will showing you ads related to it. From: ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [mailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com] On Behalf Of Katherine Moss Sent: Friday, May 10, 2013 9:25 AM To: ozDotNet Subject: RE: Is Surface really failing? I don’t trust anything with the name “Google” in it. All data miners who need to be put down. I watch and upload to YouTube because YouTube is owned by google, but it’s not Google. From: ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.commailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [mailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com] On Behalf Of David Connors Sent: Friday, May 10, 2013 1:58 AM To: ozDotNet Subject: Re: Is Surface really failing? On Fri, May 10, 2013 at 3:52 PM, Stephen Price step...@perthprojects.commailto:step...@perthprojects.com wrote: I've stopped installing office on my machines now for some years. On the odd occasion I do need to access a document of some kind, I put it in my Google drive and open it in Google docs. It even gives me a nice way to save as PDF if I need to. My work machines usually have office as part of the SOE so use whatever is installed. So my personal usage of Office is pretty much zero. I use Office all the time at Codify. Every plan, doc, report, etc is heavily invested in office. I can't imagine putting together a 100 page report full of cross-references and stuff in anything other than Word. Google Docs is still a bit shit for things like vector graphics (PDFs end up with bitmaps in them) and the presentations they generate are horrible last time I checked. Google Spreadsheets is very, very solid though. I am constantly amazed by it.
RE: Is Surface really failing?
Oh funny. But in light of what somebody said about Office, why do you recommend 32 bit office on a 64 bit platform? I don’t get that. And before today, I had never heard of it before. I’m in the market for Office 2013, so which to get and why? I’d rather go for the 64 bit version, but if that’s going to cause headaches for me later, then oh well. From: ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [mailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com] On Behalf Of David Kean Sent: Friday, May 10, 2013 12:44 PM To: ozDotNet Subject: RE: Is Surface really failing? What makes you say it’s not “Google”? Try searching for something obscure a lot of on Google (say door handles), notice that YouTube will showing you ads related to it. From: ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.commailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [mailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com] On Behalf Of Katherine Moss Sent: Friday, May 10, 2013 9:25 AM To: ozDotNet Subject: RE: Is Surface really failing? I don’t trust anything with the name “Google” in it. All data miners who need to be put down. I watch and upload to YouTube because YouTube is owned by google, but it’s not Google. From: ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.commailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [mailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com] On Behalf Of David Connors Sent: Friday, May 10, 2013 1:58 AM To: ozDotNet Subject: Re: Is Surface really failing? On Fri, May 10, 2013 at 3:52 PM, Stephen Price step...@perthprojects.commailto:step...@perthprojects.com wrote: I've stopped installing office on my machines now for some years. On the odd occasion I do need to access a document of some kind, I put it in my Google drive and open it in Google docs. It even gives me a nice way to save as PDF if I need to. My work machines usually have office as part of the SOE so use whatever is installed. So my personal usage of Office is pretty much zero. I use Office all the time at Codify. Every plan, doc, report, etc is heavily invested in office. I can't imagine putting together a 100 page report full of cross-references and stuff in anything other than Word. Google Docs is still a bit shit for things like vector graphics (PDFs end up with bitmaps in them) and the presentations they generate are horrible last time I checked. Google Spreadsheets is very, very solid though. I am constantly amazed by it.
Re: Is Surface really failing?
Because there are a lot of legacy addons for Office that haven't been compiled for x64 Office. They will not work together (inProc calls) On Sat, May 11, 2013 at 6:09 AM, Katherine Moss katherine.m...@gordon.eduwrote: Oh funny. But in light of what somebody said about Office, why do you recommend 32 bit office on a 64 bit platform? I don’t get that. And before today, I had never heard of it before. I’m in the market for Office 2013, so which to get and why? I’d rather go for the 64 bit version, but if that’s going to cause headaches for me later, then oh well. ** ** *From:* ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [mailto: ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com] *On Behalf Of *David Kean *Sent:* Friday, May 10, 2013 12:44 PM *To:* ozDotNet *Subject:* RE: Is Surface really failing? ** ** What makes you say it’s not “Google”? ** ** Try searching for something obscure a lot of on Google (say door handles), notice that YouTube will showing you ads related to it. ** ** *From:* ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [ mailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com] *On Behalf Of *Katherine Moss *Sent:* Friday, May 10, 2013 9:25 AM *To:* ozDotNet *Subject:* RE: Is Surface really failing? ** ** I don’t trust anything with the name “Google” in it. All data miners who need to be put down. I watch and upload to YouTube because YouTube is owned by google, but it’s not Google. ** ** *From:* ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [ mailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com] *On Behalf Of *David Connors *Sent:* Friday, May 10, 2013 1:58 AM *To:* ozDotNet *Subject:* Re: Is Surface really failing? ** ** On Fri, May 10, 2013 at 3:52 PM, Stephen Price step...@perthprojects.com wrote: I've stopped installing office on my machines now for some years. On the odd occasion I do need to access a document of some kind, I put it in my Google drive and open it in Google docs. It even gives me a nice way to save as PDF if I need to. My work machines usually have office as part of the SOE so use whatever is installed. So my personal usage of Office is pretty much zero. ** ** I use Office all the time at Codify. Every plan, doc, report, etc is heavily invested in office. I can't imagine putting together a 100 page report full of cross-references and stuff in anything other than Word. ** ** Google Docs is still a bit shit for things like vector graphics (PDFs end up with bitmaps in them) and the presentations they generate are horrible last time I checked. ** ** Google Spreadsheets is very, very solid though. I am constantly amazed by it. ** ** ** ** -- Meski http://courteous.ly/aAOZcv Going to Starbucks for coffee is like going to prison for sex. Sure, you'll get it, but it's going to be rough - Adam Hills
Re: Is Surface really failing?
On Fri, May 10, 2013 at 1:04 PM, Unicorn.Consulting unicorn.consult...@gmail.com wrote: On 10/05/2013 10:03 AM, Fredericks, Chris wrote: Hi Matt, ** ** I have to use Office as it is a part of my employer’s standard operating environment. So I have grown accustomed to it – warts and all. ** ** I now really regret posting that dumb car analogy of mine. Everyone is most welcome to come and drive in my neighbourhood! You will recognise me by the large foot in my mouth. LMAO it was to good to resist. ** ** I don’t use the Windows 8 Mail app – I am a lost cause and use Outlook (Office 2013). So I guess I have dodged a bullet. Or is there something lurking there with Outlook that I just haven’t encountered yet? Nothing you have missed that will bit outlook, but the native app only supports exchange activesync and IMAP and it is something that may bite you if your the unfortunate tech support for family and friend. The ISPs of the world are not in the habit of handing out IMAP, it costs to much to support and consumes way more bandwidth. Very few are paying the activesync tax except mobile phone makers and then it really only works with Outlook.com. Seems to work with Android, but maybe they are paying it. I get all my serverside stuff email/calendar onto my Nexus4 - very happy. Not so good for composing lengthy replies on. My point is that there are consumer unfriendly decisions in Windows 8. I have not installed my copy, I freely admit that. I am looking for a good reason to upgrade and I really have yet to see one. It used to be I wanted the latest version for some feature or other. These days there are no such features. Where are all the good features that were dropped from Vista, instead we get a unified interface across devices Agreed. On that note, I'll stop kicking W8 and MS for the moment. I'm happier with VS12 than I thought I'd be (mono UI and all) so Kudos for that, MS. -- Meski http://courteous.ly/aAOZcv Going to Starbucks for coffee is like going to prison for sex. Sure, you'll get it, but it's going to be rough - Adam Hills
RE: Is Surface really failing?
So, in all the below, who actually needs to access Office apps, and how often, and why? From: ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [mailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com] On Behalf Of mike smith Sent: Friday, 10 May 2013 11:55 AM To: ozDotNet Subject: Re: Is Surface really failing? On Fri, May 10, 2013 at 10:16 AM, Ken Schaefer k...@adopenstatic.commailto:k...@adopenstatic.com wrote: From: ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.commailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [mailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.commailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com] On Behalf Of mike smith Sent: Thursday, 9 May 2013 11:49 PM To: ozDotNet Subject: Re: Is Surface really failing? Office. Seriously?!? I could understand why you might want to run Win2k12 as a desktop and have office. But generally when you remote into a server, it’s not your desktop – it’s an actual server you wouldn’t be running Office on it. And yes. We've got servers set up to do builds, which run tests after, some of which are office integration. Because you don't want it, doesn't mean everyone doesn't. Seriously. And running your integration tests involves someone manually logging onto a server using RDP and running Office apps? That doesn’t seem to be very efficient to me. Surely this can be automated using your testing suite? It is automated. don't jump to conclusions. I can understand that you might have to configure Office (assuming you don’t have a build system that does this for you), but surely that’s a one-off type operation? THe integration requires Outlook to be present. And in Production (rather than your test environment) this is going to be even less common. But if you seriously need to use Office interactively often on your server, then I suspect it’s not a common case (so I don’t think it really detracts from the point I was making that the Start screen isn’t really that important on Win2k12), but if you need to do it, pin the Office apps to the Task Bar. To reiterate, getting to the Start screen isn’t really something that needs to be done often on Win2k12. I’m not saying “no one needs to do this, ever” More often than you'd imagine.
Re: Is Surface really failing?
On Fri, May 10, 2013 at 3:52 PM, Stephen Price step...@perthprojects.comwrote: I've stopped installing office on my machines now for some years. On the odd occasion I do need to access a document of some kind, I put it in my Google drive and open it in Google docs. It even gives me a nice way to save as PDF if I need to. My work machines usually have office as part of the SOE so use whatever is installed. So my personal usage of Office is pretty much zero. I use Office all the time at Codify. Every plan, doc, report, etc is heavily invested in office. I can't imagine putting together a 100 page report full of cross-references and stuff in anything other than Word. Google Docs is still a bit shit for things like vector graphics (PDFs end up with bitmaps in them) and the presentations they generate are horrible last time I checked. Google Spreadsheets is very, very solid though. I am constantly amazed by it.
Is Surface really failing?
Hello all, It seems there is no shortage of Surface.bashing : http://www.zdnet.com/windows-8-microsofts-new-coke-moment-714779/ Are there people really proposing to not to have Metro interface on tablets? Is it really that hard for windows 7 fanatics to click on a tile to see Windows 7 Desktop? Having used Android, IPad and Surface ( in that orders ), Can not imagine why anyone prefer any other tablet to Surface. Is Surface really failing? or is it just the usual trolls cooking up the stats? Anyone has any comments from horses mouth (MS) regarding this? Any news on what is next after Surface from MS? Any rumors for Surface II ? Thank you
RE: Is Surface really failing?
Surface RT wasn't doing particularly well, but IDC estimates that Surface (RT Pro) shipped around 900,000 units, making Microsoft the #5 tablet vendor worldwide: http://www.engadget.com/2013/05/01/idc-tablet-share-q1-2013/ I'm believe that the 100m odd Windows 8 licenses that MS has sold is roughly the same as Win 7. That all said, I'm not sure I see the value of running Windows 8 on a non-touch device, or even on a touch-enabled laptop. On a tablet - yes. On a regular device, not so sure. It's just a hassle to reach out to touch the screen, and much more work than just keeping your hands on your keyboard and mouse. Cheers Ken From: ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [mailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com] On Behalf Of Arjang Assadi Sent: Wednesday, 8 May 2013 6:15 PM To: ozDotNet Subject: Is Surface really failing? Hello all, It seems there is no shortage of Surface.bashing : http://www.zdnet.com/windows-8-microsofts-new-coke-moment-714779/ Are there people really proposing to not to have Metro interface on tablets? Is it really that hard for windows 7 fanatics to click on a tile to see Windows 7 Desktop? Having used Android, IPad and Surface ( in that orders ), Can not imagine why anyone prefer any other tablet to Surface. Is Surface really failing? or is it just the usual trolls cooking up the stats? Anyone has any comments from horses mouth (MS) regarding this? Any news on what is next after Surface from MS? Any rumors for Surface II ? Thank you
RE: Is Surface really failing?
Really? The knackers? Apple (iPad) Samsung (Galaxy’s I assume) Asus Amazon (Kindle Fire) Microsoft I don’t think Microsoft’s in the Surface game to be a major hardware vendor. They’re just going it to spur the market, and encourage more hardware vendors to come out with good product. Given that they’re beating Lenovo, HP, Dell etc. (everyone except Asus), I’d say they’re doing alright. I think of more concern to Microsoft is whether overall Win8 licenses are selling or not. Cheers Ken From: ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [mailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com] On Behalf Of mike smith Sent: Wednesday, 8 May 2013 8:03 PM To: ozDotNet Subject: Re: Is Surface really failing? It's what you'd have to call a distant 5th (1.8%). If it was a horse race I'd be ringing the knackers yard. On Wed, May 8, 2013 at 6:40 PM, Ken Schaefer k...@adopenstatic.commailto:k...@adopenstatic.com wrote: Surface RT wasn’t doing particularly well, but IDC estimates that Surface (RT Pro) shipped around 900,000 units, making Microsoft the #5 tablet vendor worldwide: http://www.engadget.com/2013/05/01/idc-tablet-share-q1-2013/ I’m believe that the 100m odd Windows 8 licenses that MS has sold is roughly the same as Win 7. That all said, I’m not sure I see the value of running Windows 8 on a non-touch device, or even on a touch-enabled laptop. On a tablet – yes. On a regular device, not so sure. It’s just a hassle to reach out to touch the screen, and much more work than just keeping your hands on your keyboard and mouse. Cheers Ken From: ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.commailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [mailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.commailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com] On Behalf Of Arjang Assadi Sent: Wednesday, 8 May 2013 6:15 PM To: ozDotNet Subject: Is Surface really failing? Hello all, It seems there is no shortage of Surface.bashing : http://www.zdnet.com/windows-8-microsofts-new-coke-moment-714779/ Are there people really proposing to not to have Metro interface on tablets? Is it really that hard for windows 7 fanatics to click on a tile to see Windows 7 Desktop? Having used Android, IPad and Surface ( in that orders ), Can not imagine why anyone prefer any other tablet to Surface. Is Surface really failing? or is it just the usual trolls cooking up the stats? Anyone has any comments from horses mouth (MS) regarding this? Any news on what is next after Surface from MS? Any rumors for Surface II ? Thank you -- Meski http://courteous.ly/aAOZcv Going to Starbucks for coffee is like going to prison for sex. Sure, you'll get it, but it's going to be rough - Adam Hills
Re: Is Surface really failing?
It isn't the order that counts, its % of market. And 1.8% against Apple's 39.6% and Samsung's 17.9% ? Come on, its even beaten by others. If it wasn't Microsoft, it'd be included with others. If you look at it by OS, the results look even worse. The only thing that looks good is the YoY growth. And that's because it's starting off a low base. Android and iOS YoY are better, when you consider the previous year's base they are growing off. IMO, its overpriced for a new entrant. Apple can get away with overpriced models because they have the 'style' market. Android have the budget market, and some of the flagship market. MS don't have style or a good price. Look at the Touchpad for a lesson. (I'm not going to say a lot about that, cos of where I work:) Mike On Wed, May 8, 2013 at 8:13 PM, Ken Schaefer k...@adopenstatic.com wrote: Really? The knackers? ** ** Apple (iPad) Samsung (Galaxy’s I assume) Asus Amazon (Kindle Fire) Microsoft ** ** I don’t think Microsoft’s in the Surface game to be a major hardware vendor. They’re just going it to spur the market, and encourage more hardware vendors to come out with good product. ** ** Given that they’re beating Lenovo, HP, Dell etc. (everyone except Asus), I’d say they’re doing alright. ** ** I think of more concern to Microsoft is whether overall Win8 licenses are selling or not. ** ** Cheers Ken ** ** *From:* ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [mailto: ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com] *On Behalf Of *mike smith *Sent:* Wednesday, 8 May 2013 8:03 PM *To:* ozDotNet *Subject:* Re: Is Surface really failing? ** ** It's what you'd have to call a distant 5th (1.8%). If it was a horse race I'd be ringing the knackers yard. ** ** ** ** On Wed, May 8, 2013 at 6:40 PM, Ken Schaefer k...@adopenstatic.com wrote: Surface RT wasn’t doing particularly well, but IDC estimates that Surface (RT Pro) shipped around 900,000 units, making Microsoft the #5 tablet vendor worldwide: http://www.engadget.com/2013/05/01/idc-tablet-share-q1-2013/ I’m believe that the 100m odd Windows 8 licenses that MS has sold is roughly the same as Win 7. That all said, I’m not sure I see the value of running Windows 8 on a non-touch device, or even on a touch-enabled laptop. On a tablet – yes. On a regular device, not so sure. It’s just a hassle to reach out to touch the screen, and much more work than just keeping your hands on your keyboard and mouse. Cheers Ken *From:* ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [mailto: ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com] *On Behalf Of *Arjang Assadi *Sent:* Wednesday, 8 May 2013 6:15 PM *To:* ozDotNet *Subject:* Is Surface really failing? Hello all, It seems there is no shortage of Surface.bashing : http://www.zdnet.com/windows-8-microsofts-new-coke-moment-714779/ Are there people really proposing to not to have Metro interface on tablets? Is it really that hard for windows 7 fanatics to click on a tile to see Windows 7 Desktop? Having used Android, IPad and Surface ( in that orders ), Can not imagine why anyone prefer any other tablet to Surface. Is Surface really failing? or is it just the usual trolls cooking up the stats? Anyone has any comments from horses mouth (MS) regarding this? Any news on what is next after Surface from MS? Any rumors for Surface II ?*** * Thank you ** ** -- Meski http://courteous.ly/aAOZcv Going to Starbucks for coffee is like going to prison for sex. Sure, you'll get it, but it's going to be rough - Adam Hills -- Meski http://courteous.ly/aAOZcv Going to Starbucks for coffee is like going to prison for sex. Sure, you'll get it, but it's going to be rough - Adam Hills
Re: Is Surface really failing?
On Thu, May 9, 2013 at 7:22 AM, Scott Barnes scott.bar...@gmail.com wrote: I think once Surface Pro hits the retail shelves you can then start weighing up what success/fail looks like. Right now Windows RT isn't doing that great and to be clear if i was a ACME company and my product was Surface Pro RT i'd be smiling and driving a new sports car ... I agree. Surface Pro looks great and I want one. Calling a spade a spade, however, it is a laptop replacement. I don't think it is just point-of-sale/retail. RT has zero chance in the market place as it breaks all the rules about product differentiation vs the PC. What's the RT value prop? Give up all notion of compatibility for battery life? whatevs. I saw some thing in the press the other day where some lady from MS was saying it was a customer education problem ... mate ... if your target audience can't see the value prop immediately the problem is YOU, not THEM. I often wonder how many RT's get returned when little johnny tries to install CoD. Outside of the laptop space, it is a race to the bottom on price. Android is always going to win that battle as Google are turning the OS into a low/zero value commodity and funding it from their willy wonka ad machine that prints infinity dollars ( http://i2.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/174/619/honey-badger-poster.jpg ). They really turned a corner with Android 4. It is no longer something that only a Linux dork could love. Jump on to Google Play and have a look at how much MS software is out on Android now. Lync, One Note, etc (i.e. the majority use case for being on the go) are there ( https://play.google.com/store/apps/developer?id=Microsoft+Corporation). The MS apps have very high audience ratings. They are pushing quality apps to Android, not just some sort of lame half-arsed attempt like the Microsoft of a decade would have done. David.
RE: Is Surface really failing?
Since I obviously was not making my point clear: Microsoft’s not aiming to be a hardware vendor. So, for them, 1.8% is probably exceeding all expectations. As a company. they are not aiming to dethrone anyone. What they are probably more worried about is overall Win 8 sales. Remember, Microsoft’s a software company - not a hardware vendor. They have Dell, Acer, HP, Asus, Lenovo, Fujitsu etc. etc. etc. to make and ship hardware. Personally, I’m kinda surprised that Lenovo, Dell and HP aren’t higher up the rankings. I suppose it just goes to show how many Android tablets are actually being shipped. Cheers Ken From: ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [mailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com] On Behalf Of mike smith Sent: Thursday, 9 May 2013 1:24 AM To: ozDotNet Subject: Re: Is Surface really failing? It isn't the order that counts, its % of market. And 1.8% against Apple's 39.6% and Samsung's 17.9% ? Come on, its even beaten by others. If it wasn't Microsoft, it'd be included with others. If you look at it by OS, the results look even worse. The only thing that looks good is the YoY growth. And that's because it's starting off a low base. Android and iOS YoY are better, when you consider the previous year's base they are growing off. IMO, its overpriced for a new entrant. Apple can get away with overpriced models because they have the 'style' market. Android have the budget market, and some of the flagship market. MS don't have style or a good price. Look at the Touchpad for a lesson. (I'm not going to say a lot about that, cos of where I work:)
Re: Is Surface really failing?
I have to say, I'm really surprised anyone could ask this. I don't know a single person that likes windows 8. I don't mean they think yeah its ok but windows 7 is better, I mean they think hate, loath, detest. It is one of the worst user interfaces I've seen, second only to itunes. When I first tried windows 8, I intentionally made sure I didn't read anything about it. I literally was unable to use it for a full 30 minutes! I could click on enormous, 20 cm buttons to run an app and that was it. I eventually gave up and went to google, only to discover there is a magical, invisible button about 5 pixels wide in the corner. Really!? Who thought that was a good idea? Go to Android or iOS and a child could figure them out in minutes. My two year old was confidently using both in minutes. I have no doubt he would have gotten stuck in windows 8 in seconds. Regardless of your opinion on the style (I personally don't like the style formally known as metro), it is not a UI that a person could figure out just by looking at it. People have to be told how to use it. Consequently, it will always fail in comparison to the others. David If we can hit that bullseye, the rest of the dominoes will fall like a house of cards... checkmate! -Zapp Brannigan, Futurama On 8 May 2013 18:15, Arjang Assadi arjang.ass...@gmail.com wrote: Hello all, It seems there is no shortage of Surface.bashing : http://www.zdnet.com/windows-8-microsofts-new-coke-moment-714779/ Are there people really proposing to not to have Metro interface on tablets? Is it really that hard for windows 7 fanatics to click on a tile to see Windows 7 Desktop? Having used Android, IPad and Surface ( in that orders ), Can not imagine why anyone prefer any other tablet to Surface. Is Surface really failing? or is it just the usual trolls cooking up the stats? Anyone has any comments from horses mouth (MS) regarding this? Any news on what is next after Surface from MS? Any rumors for Surface II ? Thank you
Re: Is Surface really failing?
On Thu, May 9, 2013 at 9:45 AM, Arjang Assadi arjang.ass...@gmail.comwrote: On 9 May 2013 07:22, Scott Barnes scott.bar...@gmail.com wrote: Ie Walk into a JB HIFI / Harvey Norman and spend some time trying to find the Windows RT surface tablet from all the others...then ask the sales people which is better.. Microsoft Surface tablet or others... do that for a few stores and you walk back to your car with a sense of ahh, now i get it... Specifically, Apple have their own table... they have the devices clearly spaced out from one another, and they spend a lot of time/money making sure that happens at any store that sells them. At JB HiFi its just placed on a shelf with all the others that compete for your individual attention amongst a sea of black clones. That is absolutely true, for some reason the sale stuff will suggest everything but Surface, I had the same experience with Windows Phone as every shop I went to tried to flog me a Galaxy or IPhone. Only one shop sells them and they too were still paddling IPhone after asking them for Nokia 920! When I bought a new custom built machine, had to insist on Windows 8, they warned me about Windows 8 and for the same price wanted me to get Windows 7! If the Windows 9 started with Windows 7 interface and a button to click to switch Windows 8 interface mode, then all the rants would go away. For a desktop machine, its easy enough to revert it to W7 appearance with applets like startisback. I'd very much like Microsoft to do this as an option, rather like you could turn aero off with the performance controls. When I get a new work machine, it'll probably have 8 on it, and I'll probably leave it there, for improvements in areas other than UI. And then use StartisBack to get a usable UI. How about it, Microsoft? A SP that allows this? -- Meski http://courteous.ly/aAOZcv Going to Starbucks for coffee is like going to prison for sex. Sure, you'll get it, but it's going to be rough - Adam Hills
RE: Is Surface really failing?
I've been using windows 8 since the RTM bits became available: it has grown on me, but honestly I still rarely ever use the start screen tiles. That's mainly because I use predominantly desktop apps, combined with relative poor quality metro apps for the day to day tasks. For example: (1) mail: It just doesn't have the features I'm used to, such as how do you search multiple folders. If I have to use something other than outlook, I'd much prefer google or outlook.com. And Outlook of course doesn't have live tiles (not that they'd really do much for me other than show number of new/unread mail items (2) Calendar: I do use this, mainly for a google calendar from another organisation. Problem is if I update mail app, apparently I loose the google calendar sync. Other problem is no integration with outlook (3) Photos: uhm, what the ? I can view my photos and that's about it. If I select a couple of photos I can't see any way to do anything with them.. no Share, no upload, no retouch... Nothing. (4) People : Looks potentially promising but because Mail is lame, it suffers from complete lack of integration in my day to day because it doesn't integrate with Outlook. Ironically, Outlook 2013 has trouble synching my people list from @Live, yet People doesn't. One of the reasons I'm stuck using Outlook 2010 alongside Office 2013. I guess one day if the Office and Windows teams work together (coughanti-trust/cough), then this along with the mail and calendar issues may be fixed, but until then .. And because I don't use the live tiles for my day to day, I really don't get into or explore the whole app store thing. So in regard to surface pro, I don't think that will change the way people perceive it much at all. They'll basically be using it a lot like I do. The dream of the seamless integration with Windows Phone experience will still just be a teaser at this stage. I'm hoping blue will take a lot of my windows 8 blues away (there's still hope ;) ) |-Original Message- |From: ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [mailto:ozdotnet- |boun...@ozdotnet.com] On Behalf Of Jason Roberts |Sent: Thursday, 9 May 2013 9:32 AM |To: ozDotNet |Subject: RE: Is Surface really failing? | |Hi David, well now you know person that likes it :) I have been using since |previews, it has a few niggling things but overall I like it. In terms of |affordances/discoverability once you know about the corners you're pretty much |set. How long have you been using win8 out of interest? | |Doesn't like the iPad have things like 4 finger swipes, how do users discover those |gestures without being told? | | |From: David Richards mailto:ausdot...@davidsuniverse.com |Sent: 9/05/2013 7:12 AM |To: ozDotNet mailto:ozdotnet@ozdotnet.com |Subject: Re: Is Surface really failing? | | |I have to say, I'm really surprised anyone could ask this. I don't know a single |person that likes windows 8. I don't mean they think yeah its ok but windows 7 |is better, I mean they think hate, loath, detest. It is one of the worst user |interfaces I've seen, second only to itunes. | |When I first tried windows 8, I intentionally made sure I didn't read anything |about it. I literally was unable to use it for a full 30 minutes! I could click on |enormous, 20 cm buttons to run an app and that was it. I eventually gave up and |went to google, only to discover there is a magical, invisible button about 5 pixels |wide in the corner. Really!? Who thought that was a good idea? | |Go to Android or iOS and a child could figure them out in minutes. My two year |old was confidently using both in minutes. I have no doubt he would have gotten |stuck in windows 8 in seconds. | |Regardless of your opinion on the style (I personally don't like the style formally |known as metro), it is not a UI that a person could figure out just by looking at it. |People have to be told how to use it. Consequently, it will always fail in |comparison to the others. | | |David | |If we can hit that bullseye, the rest of the dominoes will fall like a house of |cards... checkmate! | -Zapp Brannigan, Futurama | | | |On 8 May 2013 18:15, Arjang Assadi arjang.ass...@gmail.com wrote: | | | Hello all, | | It seems there is no shortage of Surface.bashing : | http://www.zdnet.com/windows-8-microsofts-new-coke-moment- |714779/ | | Are there people really proposing to not to have Metro interface on |tablets? Is it really that hard for windows 7 fanatics to click on a tile to see |Windows 7 Desktop? | | Having used Android, IPad and Surface ( in that orders ), Can not imagine |why anyone prefer any other tablet to Surface. | | Is Surface really failing? or is it just the usual trolls cooking up the stats? |Anyone has any comments from horses mouth (MS) regarding this? Any news on |what is next after Surface from MS? Any rumors for Surface II ? | | Thank you | | |
RE: Is Surface really failing?
The subject line is “Is the Surface really failing?” to which the answer is “no” – I think it’s widely exceeded Microsoft’s expectations. A more relevant question for Microsoft would be “Is Windows 8 failing?” Given that they’ve shipped 100m licenses, and that’s not much below the Win7 trajectory, then the performance would be disappointing, but not disastrous. Lastly, it’s pointless comparing every random tablet out there to Windows 8. It’s just as pointless as looking at every embedded system, or any other random category. Windows 8 isn’t going to compete with Samsung Note II or the Kindle (well Windows RT might, but I think we all know that this has been a failure to-date). Microsoft has Windows Phone, Windows Embedded, and a bunch of other offerings to those other markets. Cheers Ken From: ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [mailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com] On Behalf Of mike smith Sent: Thursday, 9 May 2013 9:18 AM To: ozDotNet Subject: Re: Is Surface really failing? On Thu, May 9, 2013 at 9:04 AM, Ken Schaefer k...@adopenstatic.commailto:k...@adopenstatic.com wrote: Since I obviously was not making my point clear: Microsoft’s not aiming to be a hardware vendor. So, for them, 1.8% is probably exceeding all expectations. As a company. they are not aiming to dethrone anyone. What they are probably more worried about is overall Win 8 sales. Remember, Microsoft’s a software company - not a hardware vendor. They have Dell, Acer, HP, Asus, Lenovo, Fujitsu etc. etc. etc. to make and ship hardware. Even when you look at the OS breakdowns on that link you provided.
Re: Is Surface really failing?
Um, people, as Ken so rightly points out, when you open the desktop, the quickest way back to the start screen is the Window Key. Give it a quick press and you're there. It's just like the Apple key in the Apple world. Stop looking for the tiny pixel area in the bottom left corner - it's a rookie mistake. The issue I have with Windows 8 is the mental contextual shift between what you are doing (whether it's in Environment 1/Desktop or Environment 2/Win 8 RT) and what you want to achieve next. Say I have a Word document open. I'm working on something and I now want to do a calculation. Oh, ok, just click on the Window Key and select the... oh the phone just rang...talking...off the phone now. Now I'm still on the start screen. Now what was it I was doing? At least if the Word doco was still on the screen you would figure it out quickly. But with the start screen, I now have to say, that's right, I was writing a word document. So Window Key to the desktop, then figure it out. Hmmm. Very easy to find yet another distraction. I am a also a prolific user of apps. I have about 24 open at once (yes, right now there are 24 apps in my task bar right now). Win 8 is not helping me every time I lose where I was because my screen is completely wiped and replaced when I click the Window Key to display the start screen. I also can't keep track of WinRT apps that I might have a need to use because they aren't integrated well into the desktop environment. So I now don't use any WinRT apps. I just use desktop equivalents of the same thing. That said, because of the power consumption benefits of RT, I can see that the future is with RT applications, and not desktop apps. But geez they could do with a few usability pointers. On Thu, May 9, 2013 at 2:49 PM, Ken Schaefer k...@adopenstatic.com wrote: Caller: Hello. I can't find my Windows desktop Helpdesk: Press the Windows Key and the letter D at the same time ** ** Caller: No, I can't see my start menu. Helpdesk: Press the Windows Key ** ** You should try managing server 2012 via RDP sometime. It really is just 1 pixel in the bottom left which is nearly impossible to click on unless your RDP is full screen. ** ** What do you need on the Start screen on Windows Server 2012? ** ** Cheers Ken ** ** *From:* ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [mailto: ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com] *On Behalf Of *David Connors *Sent:* Thursday, 9 May 2013 2:13 PM *To:* ozDotNet *Subject:* Re: Is Surface really failing? ** ** On Thu, May 9, 2013 at 1:58 PM, David Burstin david.burs...@gmail.com wrote: I am neutral about Windows 8, but what I do find annoying is that when people voice their opinions they get labeled as 'haters'. While it's a convenient way to dismiss other people's concerns, what you are basically saying is this doesn't bother me so it can't be legitimate and therefore only reason you are saying it is because you are a troll/hater. Not a great basis for a productive discussion imho. I agree. I have this game I play as a part of mentoring people working for me on usability. I call it The Level 1 Helpdesk Test. Whenever I see something that is batshit crazy, I ask them to run it past The Level 1 Helpdesk Test which involves: 1. Sitting at your PC pretending you're on level 1 helpdesk. 2. Imagine you've just answered the phone and someone is ringing up about the feature you've just shown off. 3. Imagine the conversation with that person as you describe how to use the feature. Windows 8 fails the level 1 help desk test in style. ** ** Caller: Hello. I can't find my Windows desktop Helpdesk: Can you see a picture of Seattle or a mountain with desktop written on it? Caller: Ummm... no, I think ... I can see a picture of Julia Gillard and the weather in Paris, but I'm in Brisbane. Should I click on the purple box about Victoria Beckham? Helpdesk: No, keep looking for a box with desktop written on it in tiny writing. Caller: Oh, I've found a flower with desktop written on it. Helpdesk: That's your desktop. Click on that. BTW it is a flower today but it might be a mountain or seattle tomorrow. Caller: That's better, I can see Windows now. Helpdesk: Is that all? Caller: No, I can't see my start menu. Helpdesk: Oh, you were just at the start menu. Caller: The boxes with Victoria Beckham? Helpdesk: Yes, that's it. Caller: Where is it? Helpdesk: It is in the bottom left single pixel of your monitor. Caller: What's a pixel? Helpdesk: Nevermind, just move your mouse to the bottom left and you'll see a start menu pop up. Caller: Oh, I see. But when I move my mouse over the button it disappears. Helpdesk: Oh, you're not meant you click on it, you just move your mouse to make it appear and then click on it without actually moving your mouse over
Re: Is Surface really failing?
On Thu, May 9, 2013 at 2:53 PM, David Richards ausdot...@davidsuniverse.com wrote: Caller: I don't have a keyboard. Strangely enough, I bet real help desk calls are much worse :) David If we can hit that bullseye, the rest of the dominoes will fall like a house of cards... checkmate! -Zapp Brannigan, Futurama On 9 May 2013 14:49, Ken Schaefer k...@adopenstatic.com wrote: Caller: Hello. I can't find my Windows desktop Helpdesk: Press the Windows Key and the letter D at the same time ** ** Caller: No, I can't see my start menu. Helpdesk: Press the Windows Key ** Caller: My keyboard doesn't have that (noobs don't necessarily realise that a wavy icon is a windows key, or a weird representation of a menu is a ... ?) ** You should try managing server 2012 via RDP sometime. It really is just 1 pixel in the bottom left which is nearly impossible to click on unless your RDP is full screen. ** Edge based mouse gestures are great *unless* your edge is in a window. ** What do you need on the Start screen on Windows Server 2012? ** Control panel? File Explorer? Browser? Office? ** Cheers Ken ** -- Meski http://courteous.ly/aAOZcv Going to Starbucks for coffee is like going to prison for sex. Sure, you'll get it, but it's going to be rough - Adam Hills
Re: Is Surface really failing?
On Thu, May 9, 2013 at 3:03 PM, Tony Wright tonyw...@gmail.com wrote: Um, people, as Ken so rightly points out, when you open the desktop, the quickest way back to the start screen is the Window Key. Give it a quick press and you're there. It's just like the Apple key in the Apple world. Stop looking for the tiny pixel area in the bottom left corner - it's a rookie mistake. It's the second key I disable (the first is caps lock) Why? Hitting it in the middle of a game gets you killed. :^) The issue I have with Windows 8 is the mental contextual shift between what you are doing (whether it's in Environment 1/Desktop or Environment 2/Win 8 RT) and what you want to achieve next. Say I have a Word document open. I'm working on something and I now want to do a calculation. Oh, ok, just click on the Window Key and select the... oh the phone just rang...talking...off the phone now. Now I'm still on the start screen. Now what was it I was doing? At least if the Word doco was still on the screen you would figure it out quickly. But with the start screen, I now have to say, that's right, I was writing a word document. So Window Key to the desktop, then figure it out. Hmmm. Very easy to find yet another distraction. I am a also a prolific user of apps. I have about 24 open at once (yes, right now there are 24 apps in my task bar right now). ANd many RDP's Win 8 is not helping me every time I lose where I was because my screen is completely wiped and replaced when I click the Window Key to display the start screen. I also can't keep track of WinRT apps that I might have a need to use because they aren't integrated well into the desktop environment. So I now don't use any WinRT apps. I just use desktop equivalents of the same thing. That said, because of the power consumption benefits of RT, I can see that the future is with RT applications, and not desktop apps. But geez they could do with a few usability pointers. It's first generation. THe question is, will it make it to a second? Windows 8 will, but RT is only a perhaps. On Thu, May 9, 2013 at 2:49 PM, Ken Schaefer k...@adopenstatic.com wrote: Caller: Hello. I can't find my Windows desktop Helpdesk: Press the Windows Key and the letter D at the same time ** ** Caller: No, I can't see my start menu. Helpdesk: Press the Windows Key ** ** You should try managing server 2012 via RDP sometime. It really is just 1 pixel in the bottom left which is nearly impossible to click on unless your RDP is full screen. ** ** What do you need on the Start screen on Windows Server 2012? ** ** Cheers Ken ** ** *From:* ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [mailto: ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com] *On Behalf Of *David Connors *Sent:* Thursday, 9 May 2013 2:13 PM *To:* ozDotNet *Subject:* Re: Is Surface really failing? ** ** On Thu, May 9, 2013 at 1:58 PM, David Burstin david.burs...@gmail.com wrote: I am neutral about Windows 8, but what I do find annoying is that when people voice their opinions they get labeled as 'haters'. While it's a convenient way to dismiss other people's concerns, what you are basically saying is this doesn't bother me so it can't be legitimate and therefore only reason you are saying it is because you are a troll/hater. Not a great basis for a productive discussion imho. I agree. I have this game I play as a part of mentoring people working for me on usability. I call it The Level 1 Helpdesk Test. Whenever I see something that is batshit crazy, I ask them to run it past The Level 1 Helpdesk Test which involves: 1. Sitting at your PC pretending you're on level 1 helpdesk. 2. Imagine you've just answered the phone and someone is ringing up about the feature you've just shown off. 3. Imagine the conversation with that person as you describe how to use the feature. Windows 8 fails the level 1 help desk test in style. ** ** Caller: Hello. I can't find my Windows desktop Helpdesk: Can you see a picture of Seattle or a mountain with desktop written on it? Caller: Ummm... no, I think ... I can see a picture of Julia Gillard and the weather in Paris, but I'm in Brisbane. Should I click on the purple box about Victoria Beckham? Helpdesk: No, keep looking for a box with desktop written on it in tiny writing. Caller: Oh, I've found a flower with desktop written on it. Helpdesk: That's your desktop. Click on that. BTW it is a flower today but it might be a mountain or seattle tomorrow. Caller: That's better, I can see Windows now. Helpdesk: Is that all? Caller: No, I can't see my start menu. Helpdesk: Oh, you were just at the start menu. Caller: The boxes with Victoria Beckham? Helpdesk: Yes, that's it. Caller: Where is it? Helpdesk: It is in the bottom left single pixel of your monitor. Caller: What's
RE: Is Surface really failing?
I suspect the Office Ribbon wouldn’t have passed the The Level 1 Helpdesk Test either – but Office hasn’t been a ‘fail’. And I am sure that most of the initial ‘issues’ with Windows 8 will pass in time as users learn it’s nuances. Sometimes people have to make some effort to move out of their comfort zone, embrace change and learn something new instead of expecting everything to be obvious. The first time someone sits behind the steering wheel in a car, it is not very intuitive on how to use the clutch to change gears, or to even start the engine. Almost everyone needs to be taught how to drive a car – does that mean that a motor vehicle is a ‘fail’? Everything I have read about why Windows 8 is a ‘fail’ seems a bit emotive and most of the problems listed are very easily addressed with a little research and learning. I suspect that safely driving a motor vehicle requires more effort, learning and concentration than what is required for Windows 8. If you can’t cope with Windows 8, please avoid driving a car anywhere near me or my family. ☺ Just my 2c worth and I am most definitely not trying to offend anyone. Cheers, Chris From: ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [mailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com] On Behalf Of Ken Schaefer Sent: Thursday, 9 May 2013 2:49 PM To: ozDotNet Subject: RE: Is Surface really failing? Caller: Hello. I can't find my Windows desktop Helpdesk: Press the Windows Key and the letter D at the same time Caller: No, I can't see my start menu. Helpdesk: Press the Windows Key You should try managing server 2012 via RDP sometime. It really is just 1 pixel in the bottom left which is nearly impossible to click on unless your RDP is full screen. What do you need on the Start screen on Windows Server 2012? Cheers Ken From: ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.commailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [mailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com] On Behalf Of David Connors Sent: Thursday, 9 May 2013 2:13 PM To: ozDotNet Subject: Re: Is Surface really failing? On Thu, May 9, 2013 at 1:58 PM, David Burstin david.burs...@gmail.commailto:david.burs...@gmail.com wrote: I am neutral about Windows 8, but what I do find annoying is that when people voice their opinions they get labeled as 'haters'. While it's a convenient way to dismiss other people's concerns, what you are basically saying is this doesn't bother me so it can't be legitimate and therefore only reason you are saying it is because you are a troll/hater. Not a great basis for a productive discussion imho. I agree. I have this game I play as a part of mentoring people working for me on usability. I call it The Level 1 Helpdesk Test. Whenever I see something that is batshit crazy, I ask them to run it past The Level 1 Helpdesk Test which involves: 1. Sitting at your PC pretending you're on level 1 helpdesk. 2. Imagine you've just answered the phone and someone is ringing up about the feature you've just shown off. 3. Imagine the conversation with that person as you describe how to use the feature. Windows 8 fails the level 1 help desk test in style. Caller: Hello. I can't find my Windows desktop Helpdesk: Can you see a picture of Seattle or a mountain with desktop written on it? Caller: Ummm... no, I think ... I can see a picture of Julia Gillard and the weather in Paris, but I'm in Brisbane. Should I click on the purple box about Victoria Beckham? Helpdesk: No, keep looking for a box with desktop written on it in tiny writing. Caller: Oh, I've found a flower with desktop written on it. Helpdesk: That's your desktop. Click on that. BTW it is a flower today but it might be a mountain or seattle tomorrow. Caller: That's better, I can see Windows now. Helpdesk: Is that all? Caller: No, I can't see my start menu. Helpdesk: Oh, you were just at the start menu. Caller: The boxes with Victoria Beckham? Helpdesk: Yes, that's it. Caller: Where is it? Helpdesk: It is in the bottom left single pixel of your monitor. Caller: What's a pixel? Helpdesk: Nevermind, just move your mouse to the bottom left and you'll see a start menu pop up. Caller: Oh, I see. But when I move my mouse over the button it disappears. Helpdesk: Oh, you're not meant you click on it, you just move your mouse to make it appear and then click on it without actually moving your mouse over it. etc etc etc Fkn fail. Don't even start me on the Charms Nothing can be shared right now bar. You should try managing server 2012 via RDP sometime. It really is just 1 pixel in the bottom left which is nearly impossible to click on unless your RDP is full screen. What did they do in previous versions of Windows? Helpdesk: If you want a document or program, click start. Caller: Thanks! *click* David.
