The interface is freaking unusable.
It is like Microsoft decided to exit the desktop market with a bang.
"We are failing, and we are taking Windows with us".
Windows Vista - failure
Windows 7 - success
Windows 8 - potential failure
Just following a pattern.
For a year or two there I was running workstations with both, and didn't see much difference.
I think Vista took the heat for imposing security where none existed.
Vista had teething problems early on which burnt a lot of people. Unfortunately, that's what seems to be stuck in everyone's minds.
Windows 3.1 - Success
Windows 95 - Success
Windows 98 - Success (moderate, whatever)
Windows NT 4 - Success
Windows Me - Failure
Windows 2000 - Success
Here's how I remember it:
3.1 was the first windows GUI for mass consumption, and was successful, and pretty decent for it's time.
95 was also succesful, but I remember it being very, terribly unstable. Moreso than 3.1.. i put it in the bad column based on that.
98 improved on this and added a lot. Good.
ME was utter dogshit.
Kernels changed from ME to XP, so I make the link there. Microsoft did provide a direct upgrade path from ME to XP.
XP was awesome
Vista was horrid.
7 was awesome
Now 8. If they continue the pattern, 8 will suck.
It seems like there's a micro pattern like "new UI paradigm" >> "polish and improve new UI". 98 improved on 95, 7 improved on vista, XP improved on 2K.
Clarification:
I assumed el_cuadrado was refering to metro being "unusable".
Is that true?
Disclosure: MSFT Employee
It's funny that I keep hearing people say this, yet hundreds of thousands of people are using it just fine before it's even released. A large number of them even using it as their daily OS. This indicates to me that it is usable. Perhaps by "unusable", some people really just mean "different than I'm used to"? Because to me, unusable means impossible to use, which we know isn't true.
