Support for Windows XP is ending soon

Install Start8 to give you a Start Menu, update to 8.1 and set it to boot to desktop, and you'll very rarely see Metro unless you choose to. I can't say for certain it'll completely hide Metro as I've never used it.

And what is triggering the confirmation popups? I see them occasionally when I launch certain programs, but not constantly. You could turn off User Account Control to get rid of them, I think. You might want to try just turning it down a notch, first - it's meant to prevent unwanted changes to your system.

Hi, David.

Now then; I've been talking this over with a friend in the States who uses 8 (not by choice, but I'm not going into that), and he tells me more or less what you've now done.

Just confirm for me, please. You're saying you CAN use 8 as a standard desktop/mouse/keyboard setup, without having to use the 'Metro' interface? 'Cos it's Metro that I will never, EVER be persuaded to like (not even the Pope could make me like it!) I'm sorry, but to me, it's just ugly; but I was never much of a fan of the 'minimalist' school of design, anyway.

Get this; although I've been saying about the user experience on XP, I never used the standard XP theme...because to me, it was too stark. It was just one of the things I liked about XP; the fact that EVERYTHING about it was customisable to the nth degree. Perhaps 7 and 8 are, too; but for the life of me, I could never find out how you achieved it.....and believe me, I looked VERY hard.

If I could sort that, and if Microsoft would consider doing something about this perceived need to confirm what you've just asked the computer to do, over & over again, ad nauseam...then I could be persuaded to like 8.

It's just personal niggles, to be honest! Believe it or not, I am NOT that much of a 'stick-in-the-mud'.. I don't mind moving to new technology...but I DO like it to 'prove' itself a wee bit before I invest in it.

There have been a fair number of reports of Windows 8 doing ANYTHING other than what it was asked to do; I guess you're going to get that with any O/S until people DO get used to it. But you've always got those individuals who feel that the best solution for everything under the sun is to make an enormous, public fuss about it...

Mike W.

Windows 8 doesn't need a touchscreen. It's the first version that's actually designed to work effectively with one, but it isn't touch-only. Both the desktop and Metro sides work very well with traditional mouse and keyboard.

The options are an interface that works well only with m/k (the desktop) or one that works with m/k and touchscreen too. There's nothing in Metro that prevents the use of the mouse; in fact IMO it works a little better with a mouse than a touchscreen. That's a pet peeve of mine - the people who claim that Metro is touch-only or that Metro should be relegated to just tablets. I use it just fine on systems without a touchscreen, and prefer it to the traditional desktop in some cases. And the Start Screen is worlds better then any incarnation of the Start Menu (especially XP's).

Apart from the lack of menu, the desktop in 8 is your modernized XP interface. It's functionally identical to the 7 desktop except for the lack of the menu, and 7 was just an evolution of XP. Maybe if MS licensed a basic version of Start8 for you guys? As long as I don't have to use the menu it'd be fine - 17 years of textmaze was more than enough for me.

And introduced 7 and the many clicks it takes to do something.

What are you talking about? several of the Windows 7 features saves me time that I would be spending if I were using XP. I've been using 7 since March of 2010, but I would rather be using vista over XP. XP is old and hard to use and has terrible security, I really don't understand people's obsession with XP.

Good heavens, man....I've been using XP since it came out. I've tried Vista (yuk). I've tried Win7 (oh, GOD!) I've tried Win8 (aargh!!)

Every subsequent re-invention of the Windows O/S has doubtless worked better with the increasingly powerful CPUs, and is no doubt better security-wise. But the user interface has just got increasingly worse & worse, and simply more awkward to use. And what IS this OBSESSION with touchscreens? Sure, it's easier to use your finger than a keyboard.....but the CONSTANT need for cleaning...GAWD!!!

If Microsoft came out with an O/S that worked with modern quad-, six, and eight core processors AND modern RAM (and hardware), but designed a reworked version of the user interface (say, an 'Aero'-fied version of the XP interface (which needs WAY less constant confirmation than Vista, 7 OR 8 (Jeez!)), and called it Windows 9 (with option to use touchscreen OR mouse & keyboard, as you prefer).....I think it would sell pretty well.

(And please; don't tell me what I already know.....that you CAN use either option with Windows 8; I'm well aware of that.....I'm simply saying develop the idea further. The best ideas are simple ones, which build, incrementally, on past successes.)

I mean, let's face it. It's the user interface which the individual interacts with; NOT the machine -coded stuff behind it. I, for one, would have no problem using Windows 8.1 IF it came with a modernised XP-style interface...there's no getting away from the fact that each new O/S is certainly more stable than the predecessor upon which it is based. And yes, Stanley...you are of course right; it IS the "comfortable chair" syndrome. Trouble is, as you get older, it's not so easy to learn new stuff...doesn't mean to say that older folk should be cut-off from the modern world because they find it harder to absorb a completely new way of doing things...

The XP diehards (of which I am one), AND the younger generation who like the touchscreens, etc., would BOTH be catered for. After all, the idea is to come up with a system which meets with everybody's approval.....and allows you to generate useful profits into the bargain.

I like Microsoft stuff, generally.....but the only thing I object to is a small number of people 'blue-skying' new ideas (nothing wrong with THAT), but THEN arbitrarily deciding that THIS is the way Joe PubIic IS going to use technology for the foreseeable future! I'm not too sure I'm happy with that...

Anyone else agree with my summary?

Many disliked Windows Vista for look/feel and changes from Windows XP just like some disliked XP for similar reasons but with 2000 as the comparison version of Windows.

Sometimes when you drill down to actual reasoning, though, it is just the "comfortable chair" syndrome.  It works for the need, they are used to it and it is supported...  Oh, wait.