Just in case you had any doubt, new PCs loaded with Windows 8 also come pre-bloated with crapware. For those unfamiliar with the term, crapware refers to the software pre-installed on OEM systems that typically adds nothing useful, but uses up system resources and causes slowness and instability.

OEM system builders like Dell, HP, Acer and so on install the software because they make money from it: third-party software companies pay the OEM builders to install trial versions of their software. Other types of crapware originate with the OEM builder: software that delivers advertising, offers to sell more products, reminds the customer to register their software, tracks usage, and a host of other shady purposes, often presented as helpful.

Some builders offer an option to buy systems without the crapware, but that will cost you extra. A better solution is to use the free software PCDecrapifier.

ITWorld has some details on new Windows 8 crapware they’ve encountered.

Renowned interface expert Jakob Nielsen has taken a closer look at the new Windows 8 user interface, and his conclusions are not positive. While the new UI works reasonably well for tablets, it’s problematic for desktop PCs.

One of Nielsen’s most entertaining findings is that the new UI no longer supports multiple windows, leading him to suggest that the O/S be renamed “Microsoft Window”.

Computerworld has a useful summary of Nielsen’s findings.

Apparently Microsoft was expecting Windows 8 sales to be much higher than they have been to date. No doubt this is at least partly because of doubts related to the new user interface, and partly due to general satisfaction with Windows 7, acknowledged to be the basis for Windows 8.

Update: Ars Technica looks at the available numbers and says it’s too soon to declare Windows 8 a disaster.

Update 2: The Verge reports that Microsoft is claiming they have sold 40 million Windows 8 upgrades in its first month.

Microsoft has traditionally been pro-consumer in terms of backward compatibility. They expended a lot of resources to make sure that new versions of Windows would be compatible with older hardware, for instance.

A rare exception to this was Microsoft’s failure to make DirectX 10 compatible with Windows XP. Given the huge number of Windows XP systems still out there when DirectX 10 was introduced in 2006 (and even now), this move almost certainly hurt everyone involved, including Microsoft, game developers and consumers. As a Windows XP gamer, I occasionally encounter games that require DirectX 10, at which point I put the box back on the shelf.

Despite claims to the contrary, it’s clear that a big part of Microsoft’s DirectX 10 decision was that they wanted people to upgrade to Windows Vista. I’m sure a few gamers upgraded Windows because of this, but to the vast majority it was just another stupid roadblock and a reason to be angry at Microsoft.

Game developers were left with a difficult decision. They could continue developing for DirectX 9, but in doing so they would not be able to use the new features of DirectX 10. They could develop two versions of their games, one requiring DirectX 10 and the other, compatible with DirectX 9, but this would add a lot of work and complexity to the process. Or they could stop developing for DirectX 9, but this would eliminate a huge potential market: Windows XP gamers. None of these choices are ideal. For the most part, DirectX 10-only game titles are still relatively rare.

Unfortunately, Microsoft has made a similar decision for DirectX 11: it will only be available on Windows 8. Once again, this decision is likely to do more damage than anything else.

When Microsoft introduced the ‘Modern UI’ on the XBox 360 a while ago, it seemed obvious to most people that the new UI was just an excuse to shove more advertising into the faces of users. It changed a perfectly functional, text-based navigation system into an attention-grabbing, image-oriented, and ultimately wasteful navigation system. Visual ads are much more effective than text ads, and the current XBox 360 interface delivers them relentlessly.

A bit of background: Microsoft has long been jealous of Google’s ability to make massive amounts of money through advertising. Microsoft has tried to emulate Google by mirroring the services Google provides with Bing, Bing Webmaster Tools, and so on. When the new XBox 360 UI – the one filled with ads – first appeared, Microsoft may have expected backlash from users. When no such backlash materialized, Microsoft must have decided they could get away with the same thing in Windows.

So, when Microsoft announced that Windows 8 would have the same interface as the XBox 360, I immediately assumed we’d be seeing ads in Windows 8. Sure enough, we’re starting to see reports of advertising appearing in the apps built into Windows 8.

But here’s the problem: XBox 360 users spend very little time looking at the user interface. 99.9% of the time, they’re looking at full screen content in the form of video and games. The interface ads barely register. That’s not the case with Windows applications, where most desktop users spend all their time. If I need to use a certain type of application, and I have a choice between one that shows me ads all the time, and one that doesn’t, guess which one I’m going to choose? Business IT departments are going to really hate this as well, and it’s going to be yet another reason for them to avoid Windows 8 completely.