The new O/S is apparently selling well, or at least better than Windows 7 did at this stage, according to Steve Ballmer. Of course, when Windows 7 appeared, the previous viable version (Windows XP) was not imminently losing support from Microsoft. Clearly, the huge number of Windows XP systems out there have to go somewhere, and it looks like a lot of early adopters are going for Windows 8. I’m sure the much lower upgrade price ($40 as opposed to $100) was a big factor in those decisions.

ARS Technica has an extended look at the use of Windows 8 in the workplace, specifically the Enterprise edition. Their conclusion? That upgrading to Windows 8 isn’t really worth the trouble, unless your existing systems run Windows XP. In other words, stick with Windows 7 if that’s what you’re using in your business. There are simply not enough useful new or improved features in Windows 8 Enterprise. Add to that the increased training costs associated with the new user interface, and it’s best to stick with 7 for now.

Yet another post from ARS Technica looks at the viability of Linux as a replacement for Windows on the desktop. They conclude that the arrival of Windows 8 is not going to drive people to Linux, as others have predicted, and that the big beneficiary is actually going to be Windows 7. I think they’re right. However, if the current push towards mainstream gaming on Linux goes anywhere, that may change.

According to a recent review over at ARS Technica, the core apps that come with Windows 8 (People, Calendar, Mail, etc.) may be okay for tablet users, but most desktop users will probably avoid them in favour of what they used previously.

Which raises the question: if the idea was to move toward a common user interface for all Windows platforms, but desktop users avoid apps that use the new UI, has anything really changed? Application developers (including Microsoft) will be working on software that supports the new UI, but for now, nothing much has changed.

There’s a lot being written about Windows 8 on technology blogs. Below I’ve linked to a few recent posts from ARS Technica and The Verge. These articles are not reviews, so don’t expect much in the way of criticism. Still, for anyone trying to decide whether to try Windows 8, they might be useful.

• The Verge: Windows 8 primer: how to navigate Microsoft’s new operating system
• ARS Technica: A visual tour of Windows 8
• ARS Technica: Better on the inside: under the hood of Windows 8

Traditionally, upgrading to a newer version of Windows on existing hardware meant a noticeable drop in performance. That’s because ‘new’ in the software world usually means ‘uses more memory and other hardware resources’. Is that the case with Windows 8?

Ars Technica ran some benchmarks, comparing the performance of Windows 8 with Windows 7 on the same hardware. Given the amount of hype out there about Windows 8’s improved boot times, I was curious what a real world test would show.

Well, there’s good news and there’s bad news. The bad news is that although boot times have improved with Windows 8, the difference isn’t as large as we’ve been led to believe. The good news is that Windows 8 doesn’t appear to be any slower than Windows 7. In fact, in most tests, Windows 8 is about the same or slightly faster than Windows 7. Of course, that really just emphasizes a point that Microsoft has been making: that Windows 8 is – at its core – the same as Windows 7.

Today is the big day for Windows 8. Those of us who remember the Windows 95 release are perhaps less excited about this one. As was Windows 95, the new O/S is being touted as a game-changer. Jaded by the marketing hype, and disappointed by duds like Windows Me and Vista, my considered opinion is “meh.” I’ll get it, I’ll install it, I’ll test it, and I’ll report on it. But I seriously doubt it’s going to change much of anything for me.

Pricing and retail availability for the new O/S are discussed in a post over at net-security.org. As predicted, a download-only upgrade version of Windows 8 Pro is available for $40 USD. If you want media, the same thing will cost you $70 USD. The new System Builder version, of interest to PC hobbyists and professionals, has yet to be announced.

Ars Technica has a detailed report on the Windows 8 upgrade experience. They wanted to know if the old warnings about Windows upgrades still hold true. Spoiler: yes they do. If you’re one of those people who only uses a few applications, and who keeps their software and drivers up to date, then the upgrade may work fine for you. Otherwise, you’re taking a chance on making a big mess.

Ars Technica also has a new review of Windows 8.

The Verge has a useful buying guide for Windows 8 that helps to sort out the various options.

A review of Windows 8 over at The Verge gives it a score of 8.8 out of 10. While short of gushing, the review has mostly good things to say about the new O/S, suggesting that either it really is that good, or the reviewer(s) swallowed every last drop of that Microsoft Kool-Aid.

A recent post at Microsoft’s Windows for your Business blog reads – as one might expect – a lot like PR hype for Windows 8. Even the subtitle: “Identifying your unique Windows 8 adoption path” assumes that the reader will be upgrading to the new O/S.

The gist of the article is that Windows 8 is going to be a really good thing for “the enterprise”, meaning businesses and corporations. Having read this article and much of the material linked from it, I remain unconvinced.

This list of features found only in the pricey ‘Enterprise’ edition of Windows 8 is supposed to get IT managers all excited about Windows 8, but I don’t see anything particularly compelling there. Not enough to upgrade from Windows 7, anyway. Sure, if you’re still running Windows XP in your IT shop, you might want to consider Windows 8, but right now, Windows 7 looks like a much safer bet. Thanks to Microsoft’s surprisingly generous support windows, Windows 7 is going to be around for a long time.

Microsoft is apparently applying a strict set of rules to the Windows Store, which is making its debut on desktop PCs with the arrival of Windows 8.

By the current rules, many popular PC games would not be acceptable for the Windows Store, including Skyrim. Games not available through Windows Store would still be available in the usual way, but they would be limited to running on the Windows desktop rather than on the new user interface. But who cares whether a game will run on the new UI? Most PC games take over the entire screen when they run anyway.

I’m betting this goes one of four ways:

1. Game developers ignore the Windows Store and sell their games the same way as before. Windows Store becomes increasingly marginalized and irrelevant.
2. Microsoft figures out how to sell mature content in Windows Store, and game developers gradually give in and start using it.
3. The Windows Store restrictions remain in place, Microsoft phases out support for desktop gaming, and PC gamers revert to Windows 7 in disgust. Windows 8 retail sales drop to zero, joining business sales levels.
4. Microsoft relents, recognizing that the only way to keep Windows Store relevant is to allow people to buy what they actually want there.

See Techdirt’s coverage of this issue for more details and links.

Update 2012Oct27: Microsoft is apparently paying attention. They have decided to adjust their rules to allow inclusion of mature games, although the change will not take effect until as late as December 2012.

The Verge reports on findings from a Forrester study (as interpreted by The Wall Street Journal) showing that companies are significantly less interested in Windows 8 than they were in Windows 7.

Clearly, businesses have settled on Windows 7 to get them from the impending demise of Windows XP to the next (post Windows 8) version. Microsoft’s extended support for older operating systems is a real boon for IT departments, but there’s a danger that eventually Microsoft will give up and adopt a support model more like Apple’s, in which you’re practically forced to upgrade the O/S every other year.