News - Microsoft's software satisfaction score climbs, despite Windows 8

Quote:

---

Results show that the highly criticised Windows 8 has caused little negative impact.

---

Read more.

Really?
Windows - No Aero, no rounded edges
Office - Bland and white

Quote:

---

The results show that customer satisfaction has not been adversely affected by the highly criticised Windows 8 to the extent we saw with Windows Vista a few years previously.

---

That's maybe because Windows8 is a fundamentally good OS held back by a schizophrenic UI. Whereas Vista had a good UI (since it's basically the same as Windows7's) but the underpinnings weren't the best. Or, as some cynic of my acquaintance said "Vista was the beta test programme for Windows7".

Just had an upgrade-a-thon at work - moving from Office 2007 to the Office 2013 equivalents, including an IE8->10 upgrade. I really, really don't like the Office 2013 look and Lync2013 is a useless p.o.s., but I find some nice stuff in the rest of the "2013" products, and they all seem to launch faster. :) So I'd give 'em a 55-60% satisfaction score at the moment. Would have been higher, but Lync really is awful.

IE10 - still not impressed - it's less annoying now though because I've reinstated the menu bar etc.

Windows Phone 8 though, I think quite impressive. Put it this way, Google could well do with some of the small-resource responsiveness that WP8 shows for Android. And don't get me started on the Samsung version of Android ... :puke:

I still don't get why vista has such a bad rap, yeah it's not as fast as win 7/8 and it did have slow file transfers but I was actually more efficient (ie got more done) on vista than I was in either xp or 3.1....

Also I wouldn't exactly say being 1/2 points below average is particularly damning considering the sheer number of users that microsoft has...

I'd also argue that 90% of the people complaining about windows 8 are hardcore tech people and people who just like to 'complain', I've used just about every version of windows since 3.x days and honestly apart from the start screen which is a bit jarring win 8 is not actually that bad, it's basically windows 7 with some fundamental improvements and a needed 'touch interface' slapped on top, although it really could handle hidpi screens better.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LSG501

....

I'd also argue that 90% of the people complaining about windows 8 are hardcore tech people and people who just like to 'complain', I've used just about every version of windows since 3.x days and honestly apart from the start screen which is a bit jarring win 8 is not actually that bad, it's basically windows 7 with some fundamental improvements and a needed 'touch interface' slapped on top, although it really could handle hidpi screens better.

---

Windows 8, as far as I'm concerned, is pretty good. MUI, on the other hand, is far less so, unless you are using a touch screen.

What REALLY annoyed me, though, wasn't MUI, but MS' s attitude in trying to force it on us, whether we wanted it or not, and for reasons entirely based on their marketing, not our interests.

I'll try just about anything, 'improvement"-wise. I quite like the Office ribbon-bar approach .... though was not impressed, again, with MS forcing it on people, short of them loading utilities to bring back classic menus. Mostly, I find the ribbon paradigm an imorovement. But I sure know a lot of people that hate it.

I also quite like the Unity interface on Ubuntu, though prefer Gnome. But I'll use either. I seriously don't like MUI. I find it truly horrible. But that's not why I detest the way MS went with W8. That is entirely down to them trying to force something on us that, personally and for non-touch, I find hugely retrograde. I not hugely techy. I also don't complain about many things. What I do do, when I find something I dislike enough to moan about it is stick to my guns, usually because it's a position I've thought about.

So, Steam? Don't like it, won't use it but I understand why many/most people do find it attractive. Not a problem. .I'm just not going there myself.

Smartphones? Not really for me. And, if we get discussing it any people challenge me (as usually happens) I'll explain my reasons for not being a fan. ButvI understand why most people do like them.

Adobe and CC? I'm not, personally, remotely interested in either cloud 'benefits' or subscription. If they eant to offer that, fine. But I'm seriously peeved over them ditching the standalone licence model, having been a long-term user. But so be it. Photoshop and I part company over this.

But MS, forcing a major and entirely unnnecessary paradigm shift in Windows interface, to suit their marketing strategy, and never mind inconveniencing users in the process? Bleep that for a game.

If they had just offered users a choice. And, given the number of companies offering cheap or free utilities to do just that, I call "cobblers" on MS' s original position that it's too difficult to do, too built-in. Hogwash.

What upsets me is not the horrible MUI. It's the arrogance of MS' s position. And, come to that, their similar arrogance over XBox One similarly infuriated me, to the point that I'm NOT buying it with a Kinect that cannot be physically disabled, and even after their most recent u-turn on that, they've convetted me from a fan and confirmed user, to disaffected, disenchanted, angry and more likely to go PS4 than XBO unless given a VERY good reason not to.

I don't complain for the sake of it, but if I don't like something, I can be pretty persistent in saying so, even if alone in that view.

Some people (I'm told) like MUI. Fine, if we had a choice, they could choose to use it. Some people don't care either way. Fine, if we had a choice, we could all choose. But there areca lot, like me, seriously peeved at MS over MUI. Evidently, they've had a lot of backlash or they wouldn't still be rowing back on forcing it on us. ut given that we've a choice of putting up with it, or moaning and refusing to use it, it seems that moaning and refusing to be cowed or forced has worked .... both over MUI and Kinect, though I'm reserving judgement on their latest apparent u-turn on MUI until we see what it actually looks like when released, after the cynical "start buttin is back" farce.

How annoyed am I? Annoyed enough to have migrated several machines to Ubuntu, to be keeping XP and Win7 on others, and to be examining XP or Win7 under VMWare for others.

Until and unless MS give us a true, genuine option to avoid MUI, my one Win 8 licence will remain my only Win 8 licence, and that is only used where I need to test under a legit Win 8 environment. It's on a separate hard drive that sits in a drawer about 98% of the time. Unless MS capitulate, and give us the option, that W8 licence will be the last MS PC product I buy. And and this point, I'm not terribly bothered if they capitulate or not. They've almost entirely burned their bridges with me. As have Adobe.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LSG501

I still don't get why vista has such a bad rap.

---

Well, it had some rather important problems when it was released. Most of these problems were fixed, and by the time Windows 7 came along Vista was almost as good as 7, but by then the damage to its reputation was done.

Windows 8 has the Metro interface, which, frankly, is just not good for mouse and keyboard use. Microsoft SEVERELY overestimated the willingness of their customers to fully switch to touch devices.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by valhar2000

....

Windows 8 has the Metro interface, which, frankly, is just not good for mouse and keyboard use. Microsoft SEVERELY overestimated the willingness of their customers to fully switch to touch devices.

---

Exactly.

For me, touch on portable devices, phone or tablet etc, fine. It's a compromise implied by portability, and is an acceptable way to get the optimum solution. But not on a desktop. I neither need nor, frankly, want touch on my desktop machines. I'd rather, depending on what I'm doing, use keyboard, mouse, graphics tablet or voice dictation. Touch? I see no point at all. Hence, I don't want my desktop OS messed up with a touch-optimsed UI. It's a solution for a problem I don't have, and actually, is a seriously retrograde step for my desktop needs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by valhar2000

Well, it had some rather important problems when it was released. Most of these problems were fixed, and by the time Windows 7 came along Vista was almost as good as 7, but by then the damage to its reputation was done.

Windows 8 has the Metro interface, which, frankly, is just not good for mouse and keyboard use. Microsoft SEVERELY overestimated the willingness of their customers to fully switch to touch devices.

---

I was a very early adopter of windows xp, I had no choice because the rig I had built (I was young....) was dual cpu (2x athlon mp1900+ :) ), that had A LOT of teething problems, programs just would not work in some cases etc, but that never got the same bad rep as vista did. I personally feel vista (and I went 64bit...) had less issues than xp did at the beginning, it's just one or two issues seem to be more noticeable (file transfer for example).

I can get on with the metro interface just fine using a keyboard and mouse, yeah it's different to the start menu but it's not that bad after a few days, especially if you 'block' you software like I have, I'd have arranged my start menu anyways so this was no different.

Windows 8 has the Metro interface, which, frankly, is just not good for mouse and keyboard

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LSG501

I personally feel vista (and I went 64bit...) had less issues than xp did at the beginning

---

My experience was different. I never had any problem with XP (not until recently, because it's simply obsolete). Back in the day I used Windows 98 SE to play games, and Windows 2000 for everything else. Then one day somebody told me that Windows XP was like Windows 2000 but with the ability to play games, so I installed and found that they were right.

Later on, when I switched to Vista, I was put off by the UAC, and turned it off. Eventually, I learned that the inconvenience of UAC is not really, or not solely, Microsoft's fault, and that many applications had been modified to work better with it, so I enabled it and found that it worked well enough. Now UAC is always turned on to the maximum setting on every Windows machine I use.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LSG501

I can get on with the metro interface just fine using a keyboard and mouse, yeah it's different to the start menu but it's not that bad after a few days

---

The Start Screen is okay, it's the Metro Apps I don't like. I have Windows Phone, and I like it, so I do believe that Metro on a touch screen should work quite well, but with a keyboard and mouse it's just annoying.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LSG501

I still don't get why vista has such a bad rap, yeah it's not as fast as win 7/8 and it did have slow file transfers but I was actually more efficient (ie got more done) on vista than I was in either xp or 3.1....

---

First off I'm going to say that I pretty much agree with everything Valhar2000's written in both of his/her posts.

Second, Vista - from my experience - was a disaster pure and simple. Heck, it was so bad that the workgroup I was in at the time were actually advised - even 12 months after launch - to remove the pre-installed Vista image on their new laptops and install XP instead.

Vista - again based on personal experience - was glacially slow, bloated, unpredictable and annoying. Someone who's still using it by choice, (i.e. don't have driver or app issues preventing an upgrade), is someone that I just can't understand the mindset of. I guess the digital version of those religious folk into self-flagellation. Everyone I know whose gone Vista->Windows7 are delighted with the upgrade and wouldn't entertain any thoughts of going back.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LSG501

I'd also argue that 90% of the people complaining about windows 8 are hardcore tech people and people who just like to 'complain',

---

So Windows8 isn't for the "hardcore" whereas Windows7 was okay? Not much of recommendation that - fine, I'll take the advice and stick to '7 then. :p (Not that I consider myself "hardcore" by any means these days).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LSG501

I've used just about every version of windows since 3.x days and honestly apart from the start screen which is a bit jarring win 8 is not actually that bad, it's basically windows 7 with some fundamental improvements and a needed 'touch interface' slapped on top, although it really could handle hidpi screens better.

---

"Needed touch interface"? None of the Windows devices (RT and Phone8 excepted) here have touchscreens. Of the people around me, a grand total of 1 (who has an AIO) has a touch screen Windows device. In which case were exactly is this perceived "need"? Are Microsoft going to subsidise the costs of "touch-enabling" my devices? No, of course not.

So instead we get the "joy" of having to work around an interface that was intended for devices other than the ones in use. Windows8 is akin to an Astra CTC VXR I saw the other day - guy had slapped on one of those roof box things and was driving around with it. Sure if you're on holiday then the extra space is useful, but for day-to-day it's just an ugly encumberance.

Ditto for MUI. Windows8 may be that VXR, sleek and fast, but it's a bit bl**dy difficult to overlook the carbuncle on the roof.

I'm not an "all change is bad" - like I said, there's a lot in Office 2013 that I like, and there's bits of Windows8 that would have my seal of approval. MUI on tablets and Windows Phone is pretty darn good - especially on phones, I prefer it to Android in a lot of ways. Like Saracen though I'm not going to get all enthusaistic for any system that is either slower and/or more trouble to use than what was there previously. "Progress" usually means going forward, not back.

Rant over.

I guess this means most people aren't spitting feathers over a start menu. Which is what I expected, you shouldn't dismiss a car because you don't like the stereo.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by valhar2000

My experience was different. I never had any problem with XP (not until recently, because it's simply obsolete). Back in the day I used Windows 98 SE to play games, and Windows 2000 for everything else. Then one day somebody told me that Windows XP was like Windows 2000 but with the ability to play games, so I installed and found that they were right.

---

sounds like you didn't pick up xp really early on in it's life, it did improve after about 6 months to a year but for the very early and I mean early adopters it was a pita... especially with cad software etc

Quote:

---

Later on, when I switched to Vista, I was put off by the UAC, and turned it off. Eventually, I learned that the inconvenience of UAC is not really, or not solely, Microsoft's fault, and that many applications had been modified to work better with it, so I enabled it and found that it worked well enough. Now UAC is always turned on to the maximum setting on every Windows machine I use.

---

and there you hit the nail on the head with one of the uac issues, it wasn't MS's fault that the software companies couldn't fix their own programs to work with it properly, there's still a few that have the same issue even now....if they hadn't actually been lazy we wouldn't have needed to resort to turning it off, which in turn made them even more lazy... Don't get me wrong uac could be a pita with start up programs but it wasn't that bad if the programs were designed to work with it and to be honest I only really noticed it from time to time, same as I get in windows 8...

Quote:

---

The Start Screen is okay, it's the Metro Apps I don't like. I have Windows Phone, and I like it, so I do believe that Metro on a touch screen should work quite well, but with a keyboard and mouse it's just annoying.

---

So don't use the metro apps.... windows 8 doesn't force you to use metro apps (well except as default ie if you want a touch friendly browser AND a desktop browser) although I've found some nice windows 8 apps, outcoldplayer is a great little app which allows me to treat google music like a built in music player and is considerably lighter on system resources than the other options or web browser for example. I also find I use the hotmail email and calendar apps (pita to sync up with android though...), the remote desktop app which is really nice for win 8 to win 8 and then I've got a couple of 'on demand' tv apps which again are lighter than using the browser...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by crossy

First off I'm going to say that I pretty much agree with everything Valhar2000's written in both of his/her posts.

Second, Vista - from my experience - was a disaster pure and simple. Heck, it was so bad that the workgroup I was in at the time were actually advised - even 12 months after launch - to remove the pre-installed Vista image on their new laptops and install XP instead.

Vista - again based on personal experience - was glacially slow, bloated, unpredictable and annoying. Someone who's still using it by choice, (i.e. don't have driver or app issues preventing an upgrade), is someone that I just can't understand the mindset of. I guess the digital version of those religious folk into self-flagellation. Everyone I know whose gone Vista->Windows7 are delighted with the upgrade and wouldn't entertain any thoughts of going back.

---

I switched to windows 7 as soon as it was released too, I was always after a speed boost with cad rendering etc but it wasn't for the slow, bloated os you're describing... except for ram usage (it was lighter but this was done on purpose by MS after vista complaints), file transfer and 'improved uac' there wasn't really much of a change in overall performance.

Quote:

---

So Windows8 isn't for the "hardcore" whereas Windows7 was okay? Not much of recommendation that - fine, I'll take the advice and stick to '7 then. :p (Not that I consider myself "hardcore" by any means these days).

---

well I mean hardcore as in the users that dig into the core of the OS, play around with numerous settings etc, tweak the hell out of the start menu etc, a 'normal' home user doesn't really do this, they turn it on, they install a load of toolbars to their browser and look at facebook :p

Quote:

---

"Needed touch interface"? None of the Windows devices (RT and Phone8 excepted) here have touchscreens. Of the people around me, a grand total of 1 (who has an AIO) has a touch screen Windows device. In which case were exactly is this perceived "need"? Are Microsoft going to subsidise the costs of "touch-enabling" my devices? No, of course not.

---

um... microsoft have had tablet form factor pc's for over a decade and the biggest complaint anyone had about them was the UI not being 'touch friendly'....

Quote:

---

So instead we get the "joy" of having to work around an interface that was intended for devices other than the ones in use. Windows8 is akin to an Astra CTC VXR I saw the other day - guy had slapped on one of those roof box things and was driving around with it. Sure if you're on holiday then the extra space is useful, but for day-to-day it's just an ugly encumberance.

---

.... they could have been on holiday :p

Quote:

---

I'm not an "all change is bad" - like I said, there's a lot in Office 2013 that I like, and there's bits of Windows8 that would have my seal of approval. MUI on tablets and Windows Phone is pretty darn good - especially on phones, I prefer it to Android in a lot of ways. Like Saracen though I'm not going to get all enthusaistic for any system that is either slower and/or more trouble to use than what was there previously. "Progress" usually means going forward, not back.

---

I'll admit I complained about the lack of the start menu too, I still want it as an 'option' but I'm not so sure windows 8 is slower in the UI front for day to day use, unless you're some sort of admin etc who has to deal with a lot of old 'command line' type things, once you get used to the change. Getting to control panel and other settings is just right click versus start menu.... which is actually quicker, you can still pin your programs to the start bar, or in my case add a quick launch tool bar (which I had to add in win 7 too), and for me the start screen isn't that bad, I've just arranged my main programs into blocks (about 50 tiles in 10 columns) based on 'genre and then most used' and they're literally a quick scroll and click if they're not on the first pane. If I want something that isn't needed on a regular basis I can just type it in like in windows 7, I'm sure you all started doing this in windows 7 so it's no different.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LSG501

um... microsoft have had tablet form factor pc's for over a decade and the biggest complaint anyone had about them was the UI not being 'touch friendly'....

---

Fine, I was looking at some Windows7-based "skip reclaims" the other day and wondering if they'd be usable, price was <£100 so worth a punt.
Okay, so if Win8 is the attempt to address their touchless criticism then why the heck did they veer to the complete opposite? Just have a checkbox that says "Touch enabled device" that's switched on by default. Switch it off and reboot and get a desktop that suits "old fashioned" systems - job done.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LSG501

I'll admit I complained about the lack of the start menu too, I still want it as an 'option' but I'm not so sure windows 8 is slower in the UI front for day to day use, unless you're some sort of admin etc who has to deal with a lot of old 'command line' type things, once you get used to the change. Getting to control panel and other settings is just right click versus start menu.... which is actually quicker, you can still pin your programs to the start bar, or in my case add a quick launch tool bar (which I had to add in win 7 too), and for me the start screen isn't that bad, I've just arranged my main programs into blocks (about 50) based on 'genre and then most used' and they're literally a quick scroll and click if they're not on the first pane. If I want something that isn't needed on a regular basis I can just type it in like in windows 7, I'm sure you all started doing this in windows 7 so it's no different.

---

I'm going to agree with that "type it in" comment 110% - hitting Windows key and typing "wor" is much faster than finding Word for me, etc. I'm not that bothered about a Start Menu (personally) although I really that some like to have a beautiful hierarchy of folders and applications.

And there's one of my major objections to MUI - it's inconsistent. Windows key is now used to switch between MUI and "desktop", so it's a real wrench to train NOT to press it and just start typing to get that command launched. And if you've got apps up then you need to make REALLY sure that none are selected when you start typing or else end up with command selections in your Powerpoint by mistake!.

MUI doesn't add anything on my kit, so I want rid of it. If you've got a touch device then MUI IS useful, and heck, if I had a touch screen then I'd probably want it. Strangely enough my aged father thinks MUI great - the large tiles are first rate for someone with visual impairment or less than perfect motor skills.

Roll on Windows9.... ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by crossy

I'm going to agree with that "type it in" comment 110% - hitting Windows key and typing "wor" is much faster than finding Word for me, etc. I'm not that bothered about a Start Menu (personally) although I really that some like to have a beautiful hierarchy of folders and applications.

---

Yeah, I even find it's hard to get other techies to do it.....in fact I probably find it harder to convince techies to do that than ordinary users. Really frustrating watching them trying to find where the icon is in the UI....when there is no need to!

Just to add fuel to the fire.....I recently rolled out a Server 2012 R2 RDS box (windows 8.1 interface) and created a standard start screen for all users. They actually quite like it!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by shaithis

I guess this means most people aren't spitting feathers over a start menu. Which is what I expected, you shouldn't dismiss a car because you don't like the stereo.

---

Well, not sure I agree with that. Certainly, I've bought cars in part because they didn't have a stereo. My last new car was a case in point. The first thing I did, post-delivery, was have the after-market security system and after-market audio system I actually wanted fitted. At considerable cost.

But for me, the start menu isn't really the issue. It's a very obvious symbol of the issue, though. I know I can add a cheap, or free, after-market start menu and get a pretty respectable and comprehensive simulcrum of the start menu. But why should I have to bother? The real issue for me is Microsoft's attitude, which strikes me as overwhelmingly arrogant, in trying to force users to put up with design decisions because it suits MS interests, not user's interests. Yet, they expect us to buy into that, because of their market dominance.

Crossy said he wanted the choice of MUI. Check. He said perhaps enable it on touch devices. Check. At least, give US the choice. Had they done that, I'd probably have gone to Win8 without issue. But their attitude over MUI, over several XBO design features, heck even over the ribbon bar (though I get on fine with that) all speaks to an arrogance towards users that I find obnoxious.

So, Adobe. Having used Photoshop for years (two decades) I'm now told I've got to rent it. Well, bother that. I'm NOT going to. Ever. So, I've had to design an alternate approach. And that's an application I use, these days, fairly infrequently ... which in part is why they can shove their rental model up the black hole of Calcutta, as far as I'm concerned. But, they suddenly announce they're doing it, and the hell with anyone that doesn't want to. Why? Because they want regular income streams.

The attitude Adobe exhibit is similar to that from MS, over both Win8 and XBO. MS just aren't quite at the point of "our way or no way" with their attempts at rental, I.e. Office 365.

But unlike Photoshop, Windows to me is not an infrequent application. It's my core OS base. Or was. And Office was my core application suite. And I'm not doing rental for them any more than I am for Photoshop.

So .... to me, the Win8 start menu thing, or more broadly, forced-MUI is symbolic of where I suspect, or fear, MS is going, albeit more cautiously than Adobe. It speaks to a set of goals (rental) and a mindset (arrogance) that leaves me very worried for my future computing experience if I stay. Hence, I haven't.

It's rather like Win8 and Office are to my computing life what foreknowledge of the iceberg would be to Titanic passengers. I'm just getting off before it hits, because the Captain seems determined to steam, full-tilt, despite knowing there's ice in the area, and I am not going to risk being there when it hits. MS seem to me to be entirely arrogant enough to be quite likely to suddenly do an Adobe and announce future versions are rental only, and I have no desire to be onboard when they hit that iceberg, because it is totally and utterly unacceptable to me.

Which is why you'll now find me in the Linux life raft.

Frankly, for my part, MS can do as they wish with Win8, Win 9+ and MS Office now.

I agree with nearly everything people have said here about how disappointed they are with Windows 8, and that's coming from an IT pro who has lived and breathed the products and flown the flag for 20 years.

I really can't see what they're trying to do now. All it needs, is to have an install option, metro UI or standard UI and everyone would've been happy, but they were clearly trying to get everyone to buy Surface's, hence they didn't give you that option. No one is likely to buy a Surface unless it's cheap. If MS want to make a dent in the market, then these devices need to be cheap!

All these things are so obvious to anyone, it seems except Microsoft.
For the original comment, "Microsoft's satisfaction score climbing", sorry I just don't see it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rich835

I agree with nearly everything people have said here about how disappointed they are with Windows 8, and that's coming from an IT pro who has lived and breathed the products and flown the flag for 20 years.

I really can't see what they're trying to do now.

---

20 years in IT and you still don't get what they were doing? Seriously?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rich835

I agree with nearly everything people have said here about how disappointed they are with Windows 8, and that's coming from an IT pro who has lived and breathed the products and flown the flag for 20 years.

I really can't see what they're trying to do now. All it needs, is to have an install option, metro UI or standard UI and everyone would've been happy, but they were clearly trying to get everyone to buy Surface's, hence they didn't give you that option. No one is likely to buy a Surface unless it's cheap. If MS want to make a dent in the market, then these devices need to be cheap!

All these things are so obvious to anyone, it seems except Microsoft.
For the original comment, "Microsoft's satisfaction score climbing", sorry I just don't see it.

---

I certainly agree they were trying to leverage sales of mobile devices by trying to get a common UI and utilising numbers of installed desktop users. It didn't seem to occur to them that the result might not be to leverage mobile device sales (including Windows Phone), but rather, they might seriously alienate their desktop users, who would feel like cannon fodder.

But as for having to sell devices "cheap", erm, not necessarily. Look at the marketing model of Rolls Royce, Ferrari, Rayban, Rolex, Patek Philippe, Apple, a vast variety of fashion designers, perfume and 'personal' product manufacturers, and so on. Bear in mind that company's objective is profit, not sales volume. One way might be volume. That works pretty well for most software products. But would Adobe make more profit selling Photoshop at £50 than they do at £600? It depends how many they sell.

Some products do well in the market they aim at precisely because they aren't cheap. If Rolls Royce, Aston Martin, RayBan, etc, were cheap, they couldn't sell at preposterous prices to people who buy them largely because they're preposterously priced.

Lol, I did get it, everything made sense before, this new direction is questionable Imo.

Yeah probably the same boneheaded survey company that concluded nobody used the start menu....