Not true. Not even close. I would say 8 is less secure since most newbies to 8 have no idea how to install a decent AV program. I would say it goes by a case to case basis. Saying what you said is just plain arrogant.
They would have one of those by default if Symantec and other AV makers weren't threatening to sue the @*#( out of them for anti-competitive practices just like the browsers did. The browsers lost and IE is still part of the core OS, but that doesn't mean the AV makers will lose. The AV makers should lose and we should have built in AVs (because it is better for the end users), but it is a big enough threat that MSFT hasn't taken that step yet. Personally, I hope they do. It is a joke that consumers are not protected because one company is threatening to sue another one.
As for people not having any idea how to install an AV program... How is that different for past OSs? They didn't know how to do it before and forget now that Windows 8 is out. In fact, Windows 8 makes it easier than ever before. Windows 8 reminds you if you don't have an Anti-Virus installed and you can just go into the MS Store and type in "anti virus" and boom there are dozens of choices clicking on them goes straight to their download with instructions page.
In prior OSs you just had to do a web search and hope you randomly picked a good one. To some extent you have to do that now, but nothing is going to make it into the MS Store listing that actually installs viruses on your PC instead of installing anti-viruses which is a step up from the hope and pray method. The hope and pray method is still there for those who want to use it as well, so Windows 8 is no worse than anything prior.
Seriously?
First, that would negate freedom of the market, and the freedom to choose to use what one wants. The reaction to that would destroy MS.
Second, the majority of machines aren't touch screen, and their specs couldn't handle W8/8.1.
As for XP?
MS chooses not to support it for several reasons, among them profit. There is nothing "wrong" about XP. There are more modern OSs, but just as people have free choice - or not so free if they can't afford to upgrade machines and OSs, MS is free to develop other OSs and sell them, and support what they choose for their own reasons.
Also, read this: http://www.neowin.net/news/china-wants-microsoft-to-extend-windows-xp-support-past-april-8th
There are many computers in China.
What you say about the security of older OSs is true, but it is also a function of browsing habits and the configuration of the policies on that computer, as well as having appropriate security software. Face it, the cost of software/movies/games and the desire to get something for free causes people to resort to unscrupulous behaviors and the infection of their machines (their kids could also be guilty of infecting their machines).
It is also a fact that MS will most likely bring back the start menu in some form because people want to work in a way they are familiar with and not be forced to adopt someone else's ideas about how they should work.
In the end, the OS is meant to make computing easier and more efficient for the user.
My PC isn't touch screen either, I don't see what that has to do with it.
Also, making computing easier and more efficient doesn't mean keeping the same UI indefinitely.
I am all for leaving something in if it is better that it is left in, I just don't accept "because that is how I have always done it" as a reason to keep something in.
As for not being forced to adopt someone elses ideas about how we should work, did phones not give us completely new UIs that we accepted without question? For all the people that bought Apple PCs because it had an apple logo on it, did they not get a new UI because of the way Apple thought they should work? People get hit with new UIs all the time and it is only a problem when it happens in Windows?
There will always be people doing illegal things, but that doesn't mean Windows 8 isn't more secure than prior OSs. How many of those China PCs are running illegal copies of XP, btw? I don't see why MSFT should support their piracy habit. If they want to then it's cool, but I really don't think they should be focused on China's stance in regards to supporting XP.
I just happen to be against giving consumers a choice when there is a high likelihood they will make a choice that hurts other people. If they just hurt themselves then I wouldn't care, but that isn't how it works. I don't want to be hurt because of somebody else's bad decision making. There is enough of that as it is.
Also, my PC with Windows 8 boots up faster than it did with Windows 7. If I installed XP it would probably be slower than Windows 8 too. There was hideous amounts of bloat with prior OSs, but the current trend is that newer OSs are faster than the old ones. A big problem in Windows 8 development was that computers were booting too fast and you couldn't even go into the BIOS anymore because the screen went by so fast you couldn't read the key and press it before the opportunity was gone.
