Analysis: Windows 8 marks end of desktop era

Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer / Dan Farber/CNET

(MoneyWatch) COMMENTARY What kind of computer do you expect to have on your desk in eight years? According to IT research company Gartner, it's likely to be based on Microsoft's Windows RT platform, which is fundamentally different than the NT-based Windows we know and use today.

First, a word of explanation. When Windows 8 ships this fall, it will come in two flavors -- a Pro version and an RT version. Windows 8 Pro will run traditional Windows desktop applications as well as the new modern apps which define the Metro experience everyone associates with Windows 8. The WinRT version of Windows 8, on the other hand, is designed to work with mobile ARM processors. Due to technical limitations, WinRT doesn't support any traditional Win32 desktop applications (all the Windows programs you use today) at all -- it's Modern only.

While some analysts worry that this is a fatal flaw for WinRT -- it artificially limits what users can do with a WinRT PC -- Gartner thinks quite the opposite: It's the start of a new era in personal computing which will eventually lead to the extinction of traditional Windows desktop apps.

That's not to say that those desktop apps will disappear quickly. Gartner is estimating that we'll continue to see Win32 apps for 10 years or more. Eventually, though, those apps will fall by the wayside:

"By 2020, analysts believe enterprise end users will spend less than 10 percent of their time in Win32 applications. Most applications (including OS-neutral ones) and the browser will be run from Metro. Eventually, most Win32 desktop applications are likely to be run using server-based computing (SBC) or from hosted virtual desktops."

There have been few such fundamental transformative changes in the PC's 30 year history. The last time the core computing platform shifted was when the industry moved from DOS to Windows in the mid-1990s. What's the future of Windows and the new modern Metro interface? Do you believe, like Gartner, that eventually most business apps will be delivered as Modern apps? Sound off in the comments.

[cynchamb1960]

One of the many ways of putting the small businesses out of business. Bad Idea, very bad. And very selfish.

[JustARandomGuy123]

Is this the same Gartner, who proclaimed that Windows 8 is bad for enterprises: http://blogs.gartner.com/gunnar-berger/windows-8-part-1-a-business-decision/

So, if the above proves correct, I don't think desktop is over, not until it dies in the enterprise environment.

None of which I subscribe to, the reason I linked Gartner article is just to point out how inconsistent and useless these analysts are. The reason they exist has nothing to do with their opinion being true or otherwise. Their purpose is just to provide material so all kinds of middle and upper level managers can use to back-up their decisions. Instead of doing your research or standing behind the decision, it is possible to say "We are doing it because well-respected analysts say so..."...

Anyway, back to "desktop is dead" mantra - this is such a ridiculous statement that man finds hard even to figure out where to start. First of all, this mantra is nothing new, we're hearing it in one way or another for at least a decade, or more.

In truth, desktop is not going to die. Not unless there is a significant portion of population that, lo and behold, uses computers for work!!! Call them "desktops", "workstations" or just a "business laptop" - these things will have "Desktop UI" and "Desktop OS" because this is the only way to do most things properly.

Don't get me wrong - so-called "consumer" market for CE devices (tablets and such) is huge. Most likely bigger than "desktop" market already, at least in developed world. However, CE devices and other "non-desktop" gadgets are by no means a suitable replacement for a desktop. If you do not believe, just think about the wonderful experience of doing your:

- Accounting
- Software engineering
- CAD/3D/... design
- Supporting scientific studies (Matlab and such), except for reading papers (for which I think tablets are great)
- And many more...

With your fancy gadget displaying animated squares. Good luck :-)

And, yes, there are going to be (there already are) "hybrid" types of devices which can serve as both entertainment and productivity tools. This is also the strategy Microsoft is pursuing with Windows 8.

But make no mistake - these "hybrid" devices are usable for real work JUST BECAUSE they also have a desktop "role". The fact I might be able to use my "whatever" for reading news in the subway AND for real work does not make "desktop" dead.

And those "hybrid" devices will be successful if and only if they do not interfere with the desktop-use usability. I would rather have a separate tablet and desktop instead of lousy "hybrid" which is not good in either of its roles.

[TomDRector]

It is the last days of the desktop, but Apple started it, not Microsoft. In a desperate attempt to catch up, they developed this ridiculous RT version. I have used the desktop and the ARM versions of 8, and I see an apocalypse coming for MS. It will outdo, the new Coke fiasco. Corporate users have barely moved to WIN 7, and (based on my feedback) are NOT supporting a move to 8, in any form. iPads are over 75% of the BYOD efforts, and have further been implemented in many companies as POS and easily used dumb terminals. MS slept thru the revolution, and missed the last train to success. Its actually rather tragic.

[JonP2012]

"Windows 8 marks the end of Microsoft" more like.

The underlying improvements to Windows 8 are very good.

Metro as in interface on a tablet or phone is appropriate.

Metro on desktop Windows is idiotic desperation which will be a fiasco that they will be very lucky to ever recover from. As an enthusiastic Windows professional since 1990 I feel sick and betrayed that they could do something so moronic. I accept that some people really like it, but seriously this is awful for power users. I have been playing with W8 in earnest for a year now and I haven't learned to love it, and can't see that I ever could. Somebody in Microsoft thinks they are being very clever I suspect, but I have no doubt that it will be curtains for Windows (OK, pun intended I'm serious about the rest of it).

[BizHacks Dave]

@JonP2012: I'm curious why you think that Windows 8 is bad for power users. Tbe desktop is essentially unchanged, with the exception of some new functionality like the optional ribbon for Windows Explorer and better multi-monitor support. Power users will probably stay on the desktop and not use the modern app environment... so how is this bad for power users?

[tonowando]

Analysis: Windows 8 marks end of desktop era

this article is half right .

manufacturers are all rushing into the mobile device market ,
and leaving the desktop market .

but as several comments stated , being NEW , doesn't
automatically spell success for windows 8 .

ask VISTA how to spell success ?

a few months ago i visited my local bank , and one of the
bank employees commented , " how did i like her new computer " ?

she explained that her bank had finished an equipment upgrade .
all desktops & monitors had been replaced .

i asked , " what operating system are you using now " ?
" we're still on XP , we don't have any problems with it " !

her bank uses an out-side IT-service co. , and none of the
installations were done in-house .

but i have no doubt that the bank got the software that they
wanted & requested .

so this bank got the operating system that they wanted ,
regardless of whether DELL or HP were offering new systems
with XP pre-installed or not ?

AMAZON , TIGER-DIRECT , NEW-EGG and many more offer
desktop kits , build your own & install what you like .

the desktop PC , is far from dead .

and as one comment stated , UBUNTU is free !!

[saucymugwump]

One comment that must be made involves the current market share of XP: 50%. Yes, that's right, half the Microsoft market still uses an OS released in 2001. Why? Because it was the first consumer OS which was fairly reliable (based on NT). 7 is much better, but many people stick with what works.

As a poster or two noted, Microsoft will offer a $40 upgrade from XP/Vista/7. Why would they do that if they firmly believed that 8 will be a world-beater?

[rdgadz]

they want to do that to speed things along. eventually windows 7 will have the biggest share and then so will 8. its in the best interest for everyone to switch now so developers, like myself, will have a bigger market. .. the bigger the market the more developers.

[lanasth]

Get it right! The era of the desktop is by no means over with Win8. It is only altered. The era of the desktop is potentially only over for those who don't do any serious analysis.

[technogeek48]

I believe like Gartner, in that WinRT is a new era and that Win32 Apps will be fazed out eventually. I believe a big advantage that WinRT has is that computer manufacturers (OEMs) can produce smaller, thinner, and lighter hardware. It's all good for the consumer.

[ThreadAbort]

I actually use Windows 8 as my main OS right now on my Desktop. Once you get used to the new start menu. It's actually quite the same.

One very nice feature is a different task bar on multiple monitors. I hated hunting back to my primary monitor to find the application I was working on.

This is not the end of the desktop. It is about the unification of tablet, phone, and desktop to make us more productive.

[rufustel]

Contrary to the article, at least in the short-term, it will be interesting to see if Windows 8/Metro becomes the new Windows Vista and Windows 7 the new Windows XP, for laptops and desktops (and as distinct for tablets).

[rdgadz]

many reasons why that will not be the case:
1. Windows 8 runs on machines with less ram not more (vista needed 8gb min for 64bit)
2. MS is offering a 40$ upgrade path.
3. Windows 8 is faster in every way
4. new applications will only run in Windows 8
5. desktop mode is virtually the same but with more features.

[saucymugwump]

rufustel wrote: "Windows 8/Metro becomes the new Windows Vista"

That's not quite fair. Vista is a pig, performance-wise, while 8 is fast. If Vista had been as efficient as XP, it would have been accepted much more, not to mention those never-ending UAC prompts.

That said, 8's Metro GUI is meant for people who only use computers for texting their friends and determining the best restaurant at which to eat. It is not a system business people will flock to.

Many people will stick with 7 or even migrate to one of the flavors of Linux: Ubuntu is as easy to install as Windows 8 and is free. Microsoft is making a monumental blunder in forcing people to leave the Start button. Linux, here we come.


rdgadz wrote: "vista needed 8gb min for 64bit"

As an A+ certified tech, I can state with certainty that you are wrong. I have often looked at Task Manager while running Vista 32 and 64 bit versions and memory usage rarely rises above 2GB. Unless someone is running lots of simultaneous applications and/or running games, 4GB is far more than enough.