Why grande changes to Windows are hard for Microsoft

I find that Windows users are not really known for their progressiveness. Lets divide them into three groups:

Business users, who have no choice anyway since IT installs their machines. As businesses are actually the main force behind Microsofts keen upholding of legacy code, there is little reason for them to get excited about a new interface. So here we have a very low adoption rate.

Non-Computer users: The kind of people who almost accidentally bought their PC at Walmart, still run Windows XP (maybe even 98SE), and mostly use the system to print ugly birthday flyers or play Solitaire. They would probably enjoy Win8, but they won’t ever notice it exists until they go and buy a new PC at Walmart. Here, we have another low adoption rate.

The enthusiast Computer user: These are people that grew up with Windows, know (and sometimes love) all of it’s kinks and quirks, and use it for a variety of tasks. They’re its avid defenders in Engadget comment threads and tend to be a tad regressive, since Windows has always worked for them quite well and as they fear loosing the high investment in Windows knowledge that they accumulated over the years. The less regressive, the higher the chance that this particular person has already switched to Mac or Linux. The more regressive, the higher the chance that he/she would actually reject or even despise radical Windows interface changes as it deviates too much from her/his well known Windows. The adoption rate should be pretty solid, but this market segment is also heavily courted by the alternatives.

For Microsoft, and for two out of these three groups, backwards compatibility is of uttermost importance. And that's why most energetic Windows users will love the Windows 8 approach of having everything, and this is also why most of them won't understand the complaints of Gruber et al: Because they like the looks of modern ui like iPad (or Windows 8 for that matter), but they love their 25 years of cruft.