Normally, a Windows upgrade would mean new features for applications.  Thus, a need for an upgrade.  The problem with Windows 8 is that all the major benefits of the new platform are for Metro applications.  Otherwise there aren't a lot of major enhancements that users will be amazed by.

Having said that...there are some nifty features to Windows 8. 

This is what confuses me. I thought even in the consumer version of Win 8, the classic desktop layout was just one click away and you could completely ignore the Metro interface if you like.

What's the truth?

I've never upgraded my OS and don't see any reason to do it now. I'm typing on my win xp laptop, still works great. My desktop runs win 7 (came with the pc) configured to look like windows NT. All bells and whistles disabled, fast with a bunch of shortcuts, folders, basically everything directly on the desktop 1 click away (ok 2 clicks in windows)
Windows 7 runs great, though too much overhead for my laptop with 1gb memory. I only wish more programs would make use of the 64bits and multiple cores. No reason to upgrade yet.

Anyway I'm old, I still use TotalCommander, formerly known as Windows Commander, before that Norton Commander.

Well, at least Ballmer didn't throw chairs at them. Not that I know of. But he's still in time to improvise a disapproval dance and rap against them.   

Two things could be particularly harmful for MS:


1) Windows RT closed marketplace is the opposite of what every Windows user, except the minority of Windows Phone ones, expect from Windows and PC in general

2) Trying to merge PC, Phone and Tablet markets with a version of Windows not particularly well received could open a door to disruption from competing well established Phone and Tablet OS'.

Microsoft without bill gates will tumble

The traditional desktop is only one click away, though it lacks the traditional start menu. however there are a heap of free apps to return the start menu. At first the new windows UI irritated me and slowed me down considerably but once I basically wiped every default app off the start screen and put all the apps I use the majority of the time plus a few of the usual windows admin tools and powershell etc on there and learnt all the window key shortcuts it has actually become faster to use on my desktop, though I still find it somewhat awkward on my non touchscreen laptop.

New windows sales have never been very frontloaded (I'm talking about the stand alone system). You need to make sure everything works fine before you change OS. Normally they push the system on the market with new PCs and notebooks, then people starts to appreciate it and upgrade.

I think what may disappoint them are the sales of the new tablets. Maybe their hopes were too high for surface and Windows RT in general. But Windows RT is not Windows, you can't run windows software on RT, for most people this fact alone kills the purchase. On the other side the price of touch enabled notebooks ad tablets, with the real windows 8 inside, are still too high compared to the previous generation. And they are also hard to find. You have to wait until this stuff become more affordable before you can draw a conclusion.

Msft not only made w8 significantly cheaper than previous OS but they are also advertising a lot more. If true, then it could point to a lack of confidence in their own product, but I don't see any viable alternative, msft has to adapt to the growth of tablets

Also, I don't see why msft was so self congratulatory the first week, citing historical sales, etc when they've had to cut windows prices to around half of what they were, and massively advertise over a billion dollars worth of it, a lot more money spent on that than ever before.  Sure, if Sony did that to the vita and ps3 then their sales would be great, but it is horrible on the profitability.

From my understanding is that the Start menu is available in the Enterprise edition for those customers who desire the standard Windows look.  You might need to talk to Microsoft in order to find out how to enable it, but supposedly it is there.

The reason for this is corporate users really aren't going to care about access to Metro apps.  They're more concerned with compatibility with their current applications, and the least amount of impact on users.  The Metro interface really doesn't offer too many benefits, though it could offer some.

I didn't have a problem with the Start screen, but it was clunky.  The one thing you could count on with Windows, prior to Windows 8, is that there was always more than one way to do something.  To some that may sound like a drawback, but it allowed Windows users to tailor how they used the OS to themselves, rather than learn how the OS worked.  These were also skills that once learned, could be used from one generation of OS to the next.

Keyboard shortcut users are finding the OS just as useful, but people who were proficiant with the mouse are finding it clumsy.  Even still, there are seriously bad UI design missteps that make it a challenge to use.  The fact that the Task Switcher for Metro apps and for Desktop apps is completely separate.  The fact you need to use the Charms to access some settings, then the Control Panel for others.  Then how do you access the Control Panel, that's a fun challenge the first time you try it.

Again, it's like they worked on the Metro UI and then stopped.  They didn't quite build a complete OS.

Many people without a clue for one thread.