Recommended Posts

Not to bash anybody, but MS can't win. If they do the same as Android or iOS, they can't innovate and are just copying. If they decide to do something differently then people are upset because it's different and they want the same as all the others. Very strange if you ask me.

I can't thank you enough for this.

I know that. The point of a status bat is its visible. Esp on a desktop where there is more than enough space. I'm perfectly fine with how it is now on an Arm tablet, with no desktop. But with desktop apps that have useful information in the status bar, it makes no sense to hide it.

no, its better hidden. I've had iPhone and and android and both UIs are not to my liking. I prefer my WP where the status bar is hidden and can be shown if i want it.

I disagree. Most of the criticisms I see are mindless and inane and I can't say that I've seen many haters praising the OS for anything.

I'll tell you why I think Windows 8 and Metro are an improvement over previous versions. Large numbers of Windows users (including the majority of casual users) don't use their PCs for more than just internet browsing. For them Metro is a simple interface that allows them to make the most out of their PCs and also simplifies the transition to a tablet. For people who use their PCs for productivity the desktop works exactly the same way as it always has and the Start menu is improved to eliminate the problems caused by trying to squeeze too much onto a tiny menu.

I agree with you there are a huge number of people who just hate Windows for no reason at all, but let's not include them. There also many many experienced users with reasonable objections.

The problem with the 2 interfaces is the interaction - everyone will have to switch between Desktop and Metro, and this is not intuitive at all. It's a very unfriendly OS for new users and the included 'tutorial' is frankly a joke. 'Mkaing transition to a tablet' is not a valid argument, an OS can behave differently on devices, forcing the same touch gestures on a normal pc is stupid, esp when they are so hard to use.

I agree with you there are a huge number of people who just hate Windows for no reason at all, but let's not include them. There also many many experienced users with reasonable objections.

The problem with the 2 interfaces is the interaction - everyone will have to switch between Desktop and Metro, and this is not intuitive at all. It's a very unfriendly OS for new users and the included 'tutorial' is frankly a joke. 'Mkaing transition to a tablet' is not a valid argument, an OS can behave differently on devices, forcing the same touch gestures on a normal pc is stupid, esp when they are so hard to use.

I don't see why desktop users will have to use Metro-based apps if they don't want to. If you are referring to the Start Screen then I don't think it's unintuitive at all - I think it's a vast improvement over the Start Menu. Easing the transition to a tablet certainly is a vaid argument for those people who are interested in a tablet. I'm much more interested knowing that I can have the same interface on all my computing devices rather than the iOS and Android alternatives that force me to waste time learning different interfaces for no good reason. Windows 8's Metro interface works well with a mouse and keyboard and I expect it will work equally well on a tablet (all the reviews I've seen support this). You're not forced to use touch gestures on a "normal PC" because there are mouse/keyboard alternatives to all the touch gestures.

If you are primarily a Desktop program user, then Windows 8 gives you a new app launcher to replace the Start Menu.

If you are a casual Windows user, then you can live going in and out of Metro apps, and the desktop is like an emulator space for older apps.

I am assuming there are more Casual than Power users, so Windows 8 is a simpler, cleaner, brighter, and easier experience to use. Power users, if they are any good at what they do will adapt, even if they are unwilling at first.

  • Like 3

I agree with you there are a huge number of people who just hate Windows for no reason at all, but let's not include them. There also many many experienced users with reasonable objections.

The problem with the 2 interfaces is the interaction - everyone will have to switch between Desktop and Metro, and this is not intuitive at all. It's a very unfriendly OS for new users and the included 'tutorial' is frankly a joke. 'Mkaing transition to a tablet' is not a valid argument, an OS can behave differently on devices, forcing the same touch gestures on a normal pc is stupid, esp when they are so hard to use.

I installed RP on my wife's laptop and she as "normal user" as you get. All she uses is browsing, Office, music/video playback. There is not a single metro app she has used and the start screen is hardly anything getting in her way. She has everything pinned to taskbar and I haven't seen her use the start screen for anything more than launching "apps". Start screen(or lack of start button/menu) is not an issue for "normal people" and only people who don't like it forever reason think that "normal people" will have trouble using it. (sorry guys, IE10 + neowin = no enter key)

On a fresh install, music, pictures and video are all going to open with Metro apps, and once you are in Metro its nearly impossible for a user to figure out how to get back. I've seen people look for a close, back, or Esc, and that doesn't work. There's no taskbar. No one is going to discover the hot corners (even after the tutorial). And only power users know Alt-F4, Alt-Tab etc.

I really don't get what was so hard about adding chrome to Metro apps on a non touch device. It would be trivial to show a X in the upper corner as expected, show a taskbar in the bottom etc. Not doing these things doesn't make the UI any better. It preserves the Metro experience. It's only because of obstinately refusing to acknowledge that people will use Win 8 on a normal pc.

No one is doing that. Everyone agrees its a fast OS with a lot of nice improvements. Almost all the criticism is the behavior on non-touch devices and MS or the defenders hasn't given a single reason why Metro on desktop is better.

There's plenty of reasons it's better. For one, it's taking advantage of emerging desktop technologies. Kinect for PC, remotes, Xbox Controllers, and yes, even TOUCH. :o It's Microsoft future-proofing Windows.

Which is why I said 'more limited version'. In practice, if you see the number next to an app on iOS you know it has new content. The only thing live tiles add is showing a snippet preview, you still need to open the app. 'Tiles let you easily see' only for tiles you actually notice. Its not a substitute for a true Notification center.

Why do people have to defend every single thing about Win 8 as if its the best design ever.

Live tiles support badges that not only display numbers but other glyphs such as updates, etc.

No one is going to discover the hot corners (even after the tutorial).

Why not? having the whole screen dedicated to a picture and the words "put your mouse in the corner" sounds like a pretty good tutorial to me O.O

I really don't get what was so hard about adding chrome to Metro apps on a non touch device. It would be trivial to show a X in the upper corner as expected, show a taskbar in the bottom etc.

Because that goes against Metro and would be an (IMO) horrible design choice. Metro is about being minimal and focusing on the content over the chrome. It would be trivial to use the XP-style start button, taskbar, and visual styles in Windows 7 but Microsoft didn't do it. Go figure O:

Not doing these things doesn't make the UI any better. It preserves the Metro experience. It's only because of obstinately refusing to acknowledge that people will use Win 8 on a normal pc.

Not doing these things enhances Metro, and Metro is what Windows 8 is designed for. IMO, I would rather have Microsoft design an OS around a mediocre design and have it consistently use that design then mix a mediocre design with elements from less-than and greater-than designs.

It's only because of obstinately refusing to acknowledge that average users don't actually need these things (have you ever heard a user say OMG? WHERE'S THE CLOSE BUTTON? for an Android or iOS app? have consumers complained about there being no taskbar in iOS or an app-based taskbar in Android? didn't think so.) that you posted your comment.

Have you ever used iOS or Android on a non-touch device? They are mobile OS's, WIndows is NOT. There is a huge difference, what you said applies to WP7/WP8, and not at all to a desktop/enterprise OS. Have you ever used Win 8 on a normal pc? Or seen a normal user try to? It's a usability nightmare.

Good design is unobtrusive, and functional. Good design is what makes the user more productive, not just what looks pretty.

'Win 8 is designed for Metro' is exactly the problem because MS's implementation of Metro on non-touch is terrible. And guess what, a mediocre design which is consistent is still crap. e.g. if an OS required you to click 5 times to close a window, and used that consistently everywhere, that doesn't make it good.

Have you ever used iOS or Android on a non-touch device? They are mobile OS's, WIndows is NOT. There is a huge difference, what you said applies to WP7/WP8, and not at all to a desktop/enterprise OS.

but now the question is whether normal users want a desktop PC when they can do the same thing with a Surface-type hybrid. Sure - it's probably not going to be too good for enterprises and powerusers, but I wasn't talking about them, I was talking about normal users.

Have you ever used Win 8 on a normal pc? Or seen a normal user try to?

It's a usability nightmare.

I dual boot Windows 8 and openSuse on my laptop right now, and I've also installed the Windows 8 RP on two of my families computers. sure, at first they wanted to know how to close an app, but after about 3 minutes of showing them how to bring up the charms menu and drag down from the top, they're using Windows 8 just as well as they were using Windows 7, Vista, and XP. And the RTM has a tutorial in it, so please don't say "but what about users who don't have someone to tell them how to use it?"

Good design is unobtrusive, and functional. Good design is what makes the user more productive, not just what looks pretty.

a taskbar where one is not necessary is obtrusive, and so is essentially forcing all apps to have a visible chrome where one isn't necessary. hiding the chrome and focusing on the content, aka "Metro," IMO, makes the user more productive.

'Win 8 is designed for Metro' is exactly the problem because MS's implementation of Metro on non-touch is terrible. And guess what, a mediocre design which is consistent is still crap. e.g. if an OS required you to click 5 times to close a window, and used that consistently everywhere, that doesn't make it good.

but what if the OS had windows which had a close button on each side (with only one of those actually working), and then having to press the close button sometimes 1 times, sometimes 5, and sometimes 10?

once the user gets used to the global functions (like dragging down to close, opening the charms bar, and opening the appbar), Metro is more effective for the average user since it takes away unnecessary design elements and allows them to use the same keystrokes/gestures to do common things in all metro apps.

Take the Metro IE for an example - with the Desktop IE, you have to top window chrome, the taskbar, and the scrollbar using space that's supposed to be used to display the website. But in the Metro IE, 100% of the screen space is dedicated to the website. reading neowin forums in Metro IE the whole page is dark (I'm using the dark theme :D), but when reading it in the desktop it feels like Neowin is 'framed' - I have purple tabs at the top, and blue bars at the very top and bottom.

Metro IE still enables the normal user to do what they want (to type in a web address and manage tabs) but it is able to do that while giving the website the space it deserves.

Have you ever used Win 8 on a normal pc? Or seen a normal user try to? It's a usability nightmare.

Good design is unobtrusive, and functional. Good design is what makes the user more productive, not just what looks pretty.

Yes. I've been running both the CP and RP on my laptop and desktop machines. Guess what? The CP got me through a semester of school, and the RP has been running on my desktop (my laptop has been mostly inactive since school has been out for the summer) almost flawlessly (save for a complete re-install after a drive malfunction). It's no different than Windows 7 if you stick to the desktop. Usability nightmare? No, just different. It's a break from the old Windows workflow.

but now the question is whether normal users want a desktop PC when they can do the same thing with a Surface-type hybrid. Sure - it's probably not going to be too good for enterprises and powerusers, but I wasn't talking about them, I was talking about normal users.

I dual boot Windows 8 and openSuse on my laptop right now, and I've also installed the Windows 8 RP on two of my families computers. sure, at first they wanted to know how to close an app, but after about 3 minutes of showing them how to bring up the charms menu and drag down from the top, they're using Windows 8 just as well as they were using Windows 7, Vista, and XP. And the RTM has a tutorial in it, so please don't say "but what about users who don't have someone to tell them how to use it?"

a taskbar where one is not necessary is obtrusive, and so is essentially forcing all apps to have a visible chrome where one isn't necessary. hiding the chrome and focusing on the content, aka "Metro," IMO, makes the user more productive.

but what if the OS had windows which had a close button on each side (with only one of those actually working), and then having to press the close button sometimes 1 times, sometimes 5, and sometimes 10?

once the user gets used to the global functions (like dragging down to close, opening the charms bar, and opening the appbar), Metro is more effective for the average user since it takes away unnecessary design elements and allows them to use the same keystrokes/gestures to do common things in all metro apps.

Take the Metro IE for an example - with the Desktop IE, you have to top window chrome, the taskbar, and the scrollbar using space that's supposed to be used to display the website. But in the Metro IE, 100% of the screen space is dedicated to the website. reading neowin forums in Metro IE the whole page is dark (I'm using the dark theme :D), but when reading it in the desktop it feels like Neowin is 'framed' - I have purple tabs at the top, and blue bars at the very top and bottom.

Metro IE still enables the normal user to do what they want (to type in a web address and manage tabs) but it is able to do that while giving the website the space it deserves.

I find your reasoning very disingenious. If we follow this line of thought, you're saying that all UI's should have no chrome, no UI at all besides content. Do you think no one thought of this in the history of computer science? The reason we have UI's we do today is because they are the most EFFICIENT for people to use, and have been refined for decades.

Touch based UI like Metro is nice. Similarly, voice controlled UI's are great. But there is no evidence they are better suited, more functional or more productive in the state they are today. And most defnitely not on a non touch desktop pc.

Metro simply doesn't belong on a non touch device in its current form - its not designed for it and is a series of compromises. Win 8 Desktop is just another Metro app. You can even drag the Desktop from the top corner - tell me how that makes any kind of sense at all.

Microsoft has made this mistake before, when they tried to force the desktop UI, complete with Start menu and tiny controls, on tiny Windows Mobile devices. Not everything is a pc. But they learnt nothing. Now they are trying to pretend that everything is a tablet. In no other industry do people pretend that all devices and form factors should have the same UI. Imagine how terrible it'd be web sites suddenly decided to show the mobile version on your pc. That's what Metro and Win 8 is like, hiding all advanced functions and forcing a tablet metaphor on everyone.

Have you ever used iOS or Android on a non-touch device? They are mobile OS's, WIndows is NOT. There is a huge difference, what you said applies to WP7/WP8, and not at all to a desktop/enterprise OS. Have you ever used Win 8 on a normal pc? Or seen a normal user try to? It's a usability nightmare.

I have been doing this nearly all day every day for years, and so have countless others, with no sign of a "usability nightmare" anywhere (including countless usability studies). This is a common tactic from the vocal minority to try and invent non-existent problems extrapolated to the majority in order to make a case. It's important not to confuse this with reality.

Good design is unobtrusive, and functional. Good design is what makes the user more productive, not just what looks pretty.

Exactly. This is precisely the goal in getting rid of "chrome" and making that functionality globally and consistently available only when needed/useful/called-for.

'Win 8 is designed for Metro' is exactly the problem because MS's implementation of Metro on non-touch is terrible. And guess what, a mediocre design which is consistent is still crap. e.g. if an OS required you to click 5 times to close a window, and used that consistently everywhere, that doesn't make it good.

This is a straw man. Nobody makes you click 5 times to close a window, and "closing a window" isn't even a scenario, it's a way in which particular scenarios have been implemented in the past.

Microsoft has made this mistake before, when they tried to force the desktop UI, complete with Start menu and tiny controls, on tiny Windows Mobile devices. Not everything is a pc. But they learnt nothing. Now they are trying to pretend that everything is a tablet.

I don't follow. First you're saying that Microsoft made a mistake in the past by trying to "force" a desktop UI onto a phone/PDA. This alone I would actually argue against, as someone who owned many Windows Mobile devices - and thus knows that they didn't follow a desktop metaphor at all (i.e. there were no overlapping windows, no taskbar, no desktop, etc.). Yes it had an always available "Start" button, but it was only superficially related in any way to the desktop Start button, and showed a full-screen (or nearly so) menu.

Second, Windows 8 does exactly the opposite of what you accuse Windows Mobile of having done. Instead of taking a "desktop UI" as you call it and "forcing" it (as you say) onto a new kind of device, we very clearly decided not to do that, which is exactly what many folks here are objecting to! Instead we created something brand new, designed to bridge the gap between desktop and mobile. The two objections are mutually exclusive :-)

In no other industry do people pretend that all devices and form factors should have the same UI.

So cars, trucks, and motorcycles are all steered in completely different ways?

Imagine how terrible it'd be web sites suddenly decided to show the mobile version on your pc.

This is a poor analogy. This would make a lot of sense on a small screen PC, but obviously would not on a large screen, by definition. What you're calling a "mobile version" is really just a website designed exclusively for tiny screens, usually to make up for the fact that they're "normal" site was not designed to scale down that far. Of course, some websites are designed to have a single version which accommodates all screen sizes (the "mobile" and "normal" versions are the same).

That's what Metro and Win 8 is like, hiding all advanced functions and forcing a tablet metaphor on everyone.

You're making an assumption that Windows 8 would not look and work the same even if tablets did not exist. There's no such thing as a "tablet metaphor" by the way. There's a desktop metaphor, many aspects of which are clearly outdated (but will take time to evolve and replace). But things like full-screen apps, and system UI that fades into the background but is always globally accessible... These aren't really metaphors at all.

I find your reasoning very disingenious. If we follow this line of thought, you're saying that all UI's should have no chrome, no UI at all besides content. Do you think no one thought of this in the history of computer science? The reason we have UI's we do today is because they are the most EFFICIENT for people to use, and have been refined for decades.

Nothing's perfect :) And I would actually like to see the chrome be taken to a minimum in all UIs, but that's just a personal preference.

Touch based UI like Metro is nice. Similarly, voice controlled UI's are great. But there is no evidence they are better suited, more functional or more productive in the state they are today. And most defnitely not on a non touch desktop pc.

fair enough that there's no evidence, but has a study ever been done comparing the productivity of someone using a Windows 8-based surface-type device compared with a windows 7 desktop?

Metro simply doesn't belong on a non touch device in its current form - its not designed for it and is a series of compromises. Win 8 Desktop is just another Metro app. You can even drag the Desktop from the top corner - tell me how that makes any kind of sense at all.

You answered that in the sentence right before the question - it's just another Metro app. Now the Desktop is really just the place to run high-end apps and apps that haven't been upgraded to Metro. Why does XP Mode in Windows 7 have a close box? how does that make any kind of sense at all?

Microsoft has made this mistake before, when they tried to force the desktop UI, complete with Start menu and tiny controls, on tiny Windows Mobile devices. Not everything is a pc. But they learnt nothing. Now they are trying to pretend that everything is a tablet. In no other industry do people pretend that all devices and form factors should have the same UI. Imagine how terrible it'd be web sites suddenly decided to show the mobile version on your pc.

The problem with Windows Mobile was they just essentially stuck Windows onto a phone, added some apps, and called it quits. Windows 8 was rebuilt from, essentially, the ground up to work on everything from desktops to hybrids to tablets - they might have designed it with tablets first in their mind, but normal users don't care about what it was designed mostly for - all they care about is if they can get it to open up Facebook or play Solitaire. Which, btw, Windows 8 does very nicely.

That's what Metro and Win 8 is like, hiding all advanced functions and forcing a tablet metaphor on everyone.

hiding advanced functions, yes, it is - and that's not a bad thing. Microsoft's simply making Windows 8 work better for the majority of it's users, who almost never use the advanced features. Why do you need all those advanced features being obtrusive and getting in your way when you're trying to find a simple feature? It makes a lot of sense to me to take the highly-used features and bring them to the front, and then put the least-used features in the background.

You're making an assumption that Windows 8 would not look and work the same even if tablets did not exist.

Are you saying it would? For example, wouldn't you simply implement a contextual menu here (I realize there's an infinite edge, but it would still be faster to have an option right beneath the mouse cursor, wouldn't it?):

post-5569-0-08433800-1344277321.png

Are you saying it would? For example, wouldn't you simply implement a contextual menu here (I realize there's an infinite edge, but it would still be faster to have an option right beneath the mouse cursor):

Well, first off, I meant in a broader sense (i.e. full-screen apps and Start menu, for example). For specific details, I cannot speak for design decisions I wasn't involved in. Personally, I've never used that button. I never unpin anything I expect to actually use, so my Start screen always has everything I'll ever need. If I do need anything else I invoke it using search (and searching for nothing shows the same All Apps view).

Well, first off, I meant in a broader sense (i.e. full-screen apps and Start menu, for example). For specific details, I cannot speak for design decisions I wasn't involved in. Personally, I've never used that button. I never unpin anything I expect to actually use, so my Start screen always has everything I'll ever need. If I do need anything else I invoke it using search (and searching for nothing shows the same All Apps view).

Fair enough. It's not just the Start screen though. In fact, if I am seeing this correctly, it's only the start screen where there's at least an infinite edge. In other (Microsoft supplied) apps you have to target the exact location of the button. In some apps the toolbar vanishes if you click somewhere below the button, in others, simply nothing will happen. It works quite inconsistently actually. You can't move between buttons while holding down the mouse button either.

One of my issues is MS has always been a company which introduced change for a reason. When they added the Ribbon, it was met with widespread hatred. But they did extensive user studies with the Ribbon to decide which was a more productive UI, and shared those studies so the results were there for everyone to see.

With Win 8 I am not aware of any usability studies that measure the productivity on a non touch device vs Win 7. The magic word in Win 8 development has been 'telemetry' - they look at what features were least used, and remove them. This is of course a terrible way to do things. Using MS's own example, Word has a million features most of which are hardly ever used. When the Word team was asked why these rare features were present, the reply was that any given feature might be used by very few people, but all those people used different features, so everything was important.

Metro being more usable or better is not proven, we simply have to take MS's word for it since we have no option. This is in stark contrast to other decisions such as the new Explorer changes, where they did publish usability data on why it's better.

Win 8 removes power user features, customization, user control - all because the majority didn't use them (of course!). These advanced features don't need to interrupt a normal user. e.g. they took away the ability to customize Window colors, which is a huge deal to a certain segment. Everyone else is free to ignore that option if they want.

I guess I have a fundamental problem with architecting an entire OS around the concept of touch, relegating desktop to a 2nd class citizen, and adding workarounds (I'll be kind and not call them hacks) to make it work on a non-touch device. I have an even bigger problem when WinRT, the next gen Windows API, is flawed and limited to only Metro apps, as if no one would ever want to write a desktop app again.

Well, first off, I meant in a broader sense (i.e. full-screen apps and Start menu, for example). For specific details, I cannot speak for design decisions I wasn't involved in. Personally, I've never used that button. I never unpin anything I expect to actually use, so my Start screen always has everything I'll ever need. If I do need anything else I invoke it using search (and searching for nothing shows the same All Apps view).

I believe the question is why can't the context menu be shown as a regular context menu on a non-touch device. We know Metro can display context menu's just fine, e.g. if you right click on a network connection name you get a Metro context menu. The decision to show this as a bar is just because every Metro app behaves as if it was running on a tablet, thus it sacrifices usability.

All of these arguments come down to one simple thing... preference. That's it in a nutshell. There are those who prefer Windows 8 and those who don't. Those who don't prefer it, claim that it affects their productivity and is the worst thing ever. Those who do prefer it, claim that it hasn't affected their productivity and is the best thing ever.

These threads go back and forth, one side trying to convince the other or prove the other wrong. And, out of all theses threads and hundreds of pages and thousands of responses, replies, remarks, comments, statements, questions, retorts, and attacks... no one has swayed anyone. Or, at least very few anyway.

Most of the claims, to date, are subjective and not factual. Claiming that it does or does not affect your productivity is subjective even though it may be true for you. But, I get it. Nerds love debate, especially on the internet. But, the fact is... it's done. MS has shipped the OS to OEMs and it will be here in a short time. It cannot be changed now and most likely will not be changed in the future. That is to say, they're not going backwards. Say goodbye to the old desktop and the way we've been computing for the last 20+ years.

We can argue until we're blue in the face about the perceived benefits and detriments of Windows 8. But, this is the future of computing. Maybe not the only one, but the computer as you knew it is dead. It just isn't gone yet.

Alas, 20th century computer. I knew him well, Horatio.

All of these arguments come down to one simple thing... preference. That's it in a nutshell. There are those who prefer Windows 8 and those who don't. Those who don't prefer it, claim that it affects their productivity and is the worst thing ever. Those who do prefer it, claim that it hasn't affected their productivity and is the best thing ever.

These threads go back and forth, one side trying to convince the other or prove the other wrong. And, out of all theses threads and hundreds of pages and thousands of responses, replies, remarks, comments, statements, questions, retorts, and attacks... no one has swayed anyone. Or, at least very few anyway.

Most of the claims, to date, are subjective and not factual. Claiming that it does or does not affect your productivity is subjective even though it may be true for you. But, I get it. Nerds love debate, especially on the internet. But, the fact is... it's done. MS has shipped the OS to OEMs and it will be here in a short time. It cannot be changed now and most likely will not be changed in the future. That is to say, they're not going backwards. Say goodbye to the old desktop and the way we've been computing for the last 20+ years.

We can argue until we're blue in the face about the perceived benefits and detriments of Windows 8. But, this is the future of computing. Maybe not the only one, but the computer as you knew it is dead. It just isn't gone yet.

Alas, 20th century computer. I knew him well, Horatio.

:D agreed, it's pretty much pointless, but it's nice to be able to argue about it

It's a break from the old Windows workflow.

I didn't think it effected anyone's workflow. ;)

There you go again with the 'PC as you know it is dead' flamebait.

I never unpin anything I expect to actually use, so my Start screen always has everything I'll ever need. If I do need anything else I invoke it using search (and searching for nothing shows the same All Apps view).

That's pretty ****ed up.

With Win 8 I am not aware of any usability studies that measure the productivity on a non touch device vs Win 7. The magic word in Win 8 development has been 'telemetry' - they look at what features were least used, and remove them. This is of course a terrible way to do things. Using MS's own example, Word has a million features most of which are hardly ever used. When the Word team was asked why these rare features were present, the reply was that any given feature might be used by very few people, but all those people used different features, so everything was important.

Metro being more usable or better is not proven, we simply have to take MS's word for it since we have no option. This is in stark contrast to other decisions such as the new Explorer changes, where they did publish usability data on why it's better. Win 8 removes power user features, customization, user control - all because the majority didn't use them (of course!). These advanced features don't need to interrupt a normal user. e.g. they took away the ability to customize Window colors, which is a huge deal to a certain segment. Everyone else is free to ignore that option if they want.

This is exactly how I feel and sums it up very nicely. Everyone uses their computers differently, and it looks like some users are in for a rude awakening while others are much luckier.

Personally speaking, I redesigned my "Windows experience" around the time Vista came out. I still used a quick launch, but I had many things pinned to my Start Menu. I didn't like all of the "clutter" on my desktop; there were apps I preferred to keep hidden, but were always two clicks away from being used. When Windows 7 came out, this behavior of mine increased. I have 5 items pinned to my Superbar and everything else is tucked away nicely on my Start Menu. I have them in alphabetical order, they have their own lists and I can still keep my desktop clean. Occasionally, there will be an application I don't have pinned and for that, I would use the Start Menu search.

I started this new form of behavior in the Fall of 2006. I'm approaching six years of this way of utilizing my desktop and it has been taken away. Am I a minority? Absolutely, but the fact is, this quote is the exact reason why people are upset. Windows 8 is going to significantly alter my desktop approach and I honestly don't know if the changes are going to be worth it.

Also, why should I relearn my behaviors when at work I use and will continue to use Windows 7 (and OS X)? I certainly don't want to have to learn something that won't even translate to where I spend most of my computer work. There are many inconistencies that I haven't even addressed, but others already have. Brandon, as much as I respect you, your work for Microsoft and your willingness to help this community for years, you are sadly seeing it from the "other" side. You have a vested interest in this product and are going to try your hardest to make people see your opinions, but you are talking to people who know how to use computers.

If I want to always be dictated on how I can use my computer, I would be 100% Apple. I don't want Microsoft going to these because they are scared of how the market has been moving lately.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Microsoft brings Claude to its own Azure infrastructure, powered by Nvidia GB300 Blackwell by Karthik Mudaliar Anthropic's Claude models are now generally available in Microsoft Foundry on Azure and are running on Nvidia's GB300 Blackwell Ultra systems. Nvidia wrote in its announcement that the models are hosted on Microsoft Azure and accelerated by GB300 Blackwell Ultra GPUs, with Quantum-X800 InfiniBand networking used to support larger agentic systems and specialized sub-agents that can operate across business domains. This is great for customers and enterprises that want to build autonomous and domain-specific AI agents using Claude without moving outside Microsoft’s cloud platform. Microsoft currently offers Claude models in Foundry in two forms: “Hosted on Azure,” which runs end-to-end on Azure infrastructure and is generally available, and “Hosted on Anthropic infrastructure,” which remains in preview. This separation is quite important for organizations that have procurement, compliance, data processing, or internal governance requirements tied to Azure. Anthropic currently has 11 Claude models listed in Microsoft Foundry, including Opus 4.8, Sonnet 4.6, and even the unavailable Mythos and Fable models. Billing is handled through Claude Consumption Units (CCUs). Microsoft says CCU is an invoicing unit for Claude models in Foundry, with token usage converted using Anthropic’s published per-model token rates. The usage is billed through Azure Marketplace just like models from other distributors and appears on the customer's Azure invoice, while eligible spend can count against a Microsoft Azure Consumption Commitment. For starters, GB300 NVL72 is a rack-scale, fully liquid-cooled system that combines 72 Blackwell Ultra GPUs and 36 Grace CPUs. Nvidia has listed 37TB of fast memory, 130TB/s of NVLink bandwidth, and FP4 Tensor Core performance of up to 1,440 petaflops with sparsity. The deal is also part of a three-way partnership between Microsoft, Nvidia, and Anthropic. Under the deal, Anthropic has committed to buying $30 billion in Azure compute capacity and contracting additional capacity up to one gigawatt. Nvidia and Microsoft also said they would invest up to $10 billion and $5 billion in Anthropic, respectively.
    • WhatsApp is getting usernames, and you can reserve your preferred one now by Fiza Ali Sharing your phone number isn't always something you want to do, especially with people you've just met. Whether it's someone from a class, a local community group, or a sports team chat, handing over your number can feel like giving away more personal information than necessary. That's exactly the problem WhatsApp is trying to solve with its upcoming usernames feature. The company has announced that users can now reserve a unique WhatsApp username ahead of the feature's wider rollout later this year. Once usernames become available, they'll let people connect without revealing their phone numbers. It's a change that makes a lot of sense for group chats. Right now, everyone in the group can see your phone number. With usernames enabled, that won't necessarily be the case when someone contacts you for the first time. WhatsApp says it's opening username reservations early because more than three billion people use the app, meaning plenty of people are likely to want the same usernames. Reserving one now gives users a better chance of securing the name they actually want before the feature launches more broadly. If your preferred username is already taken, WhatsApp will also offer a built-in username generator to suggest available alternatives. The feature isn't only aimed at individual users. Creators, businesses, and organisations will be able to claim the same username they already use on Instagram or Facebook, making it easier to keep a consistent identity across Meta's apps. Furthermore, privacy is a big part of how WhatsApp is introducing usernames. There won't be a public directory where people can browse or search for usernames. Instead, people will need to know your exact username before they can start a conversation with you. Additionally, users can also choose to enable a username key, which adds another layer of control by requiring people to enter that key before sending a message. Once the feature rolls out, people who choose to use a username will no longer have their phone number shown when messaging a person or business for the first time. If you want to reserve a username, make sure you're running the latest version of WhatsApp, then head to Settings > Account > Username. The tech giant says usernames will roll out gradually over the coming months, and users will receive an in-app notification when the feature becomes available in their country.
    • When I think about a network, there are really two aspects, the hardware and the wiring. So here is what I would do for both. Wiring: Use Cat6A for the patch panel, outlets, and all structured cables (cables installed in walls). Run plenty of Wireless Access Point (WAP) cables, as a general rule, assume a signal can only pass through 2-3 walls and can't pass through a floor (that is conservative, but trust me on this if you want strong WiFi)  Cat6 patch cables are fine for now if you don't plan to run 10gig, those are easy to replace later if needed. Run OS2 single-mode fiber to anywhere you think you may have a server or sub-switch. (yes, single-mode for everything on a small network, don't mess with multimode unless you are at a scale where that minor cost and power savings will matter). If you really want to future proof, also run fiber to any high density WAP locations, it is likely that WiFi 8 and beyond WAPs will push the limits of 10g. Run 6-12 pairs of single-mode fiber between your MDF and the building's MDF, even if you only need 1 or 2 pairs now, those extra pairs will pay off down the road. Hardware: (its easy to say "get all the features incase you need them", so instead of futureproofing, I am going to take approach of suggesting areas worth investing in, and areas you can save money). Don't overspend thinking you need every feature on every port. You don't need 10g on every port, you don't need PoE on every port. Don't overspend on redundancy either, unless you are ready to buy two of everything, don't waste money buying two of some things and not others. Dual power supplies are worthwhile, but probably not HA or multi-path redundancy.  Get 1 "distribution layer" switch that your router/firewall will connect to as well as all your access layer switches below. This should be a fully managed 10g+ switch with a combination of copper and SPF ports, a few 25g uplink ports are nice for this switch. Given that you said it is a small network, I suggest also using that distribution layer switch for servers and WAPs, meaning it will need PoE. Speaking of wireless, get good professional tri-band WAPs, and either turn on the band stirring options, or limit 2.4 to an IoT only SSID. This will provide a solid WiFi capable nearly everything but the highest of bandwidth clients...you could even consider skipping wiring workstations depending on usage. Access layer switch for workstations and printers can be cheaper switches, 2.5g is a good sweet spot between price and future proofing, but even 1g is fine for most individual clients (the kind that could probably be fine on WiFi). You can consider saving a little on access layer switches by only getting 1 PoE switch for whatever needs it (remember your WAPs are connecting to the distribution switch, not here), and non-PoE for your workstations, because desk phones are falling out of favor. You can also save money here by not buying managed switches if you don't need them--but really do some soul searching there, if you go this route, then anything that isn't on your workstation VLAN would either need to be connected to the distribution switch, or its own access layer switch. Also, don't feel like you need a fancy fabric stacking switches for your access layer, that is the point of the higher-end distribution layer, to remove the need for things like that at this level. Home Hardware: I'm realizing the above assumed an office setting, if this if for your house and home lab then the above still applies, but you'll probably want everything managed and PoE, just because, but you probably also don't need multiple access layer switches. If your total port count is below 24, just skip separating distribution layer and access layer and just get one nice switch with the features you want. If you are at the point of considering a 48-port switch, I would instead get a nice high-end distribution switch for things that need it, and cheaper access layer switches with specs based on the needs of connected devices. For home use, don't worry about home running every device to the main switch, there is nothing wrong with running sub-switches for your media areas and office, those essentially become your access layer, just look for sub-switches with a 10g uplink so sharing bandwidth isn't an issue. Just make sure you always connect them to your distribution/main switch, don't daisy chain, the path should never have more steps than Client>Access>Distribution>Firewall>Internet or Client>Access>Distribution>Server if it is local.
    • Google Meet brings Gemini note-taking to AI Pro and Ultra subscribers by Karthik Mudaliar Google's Gemini-powered "Take notes for me" feature inside Google Meet is now available to Google AI Pro and Ultra subscribers. The features work on Google Meet for web as well as on mobile, and Google says that subscribers can use it for meetings they host in many supported languages. As the name suggests, "Take notes for me" allows Gemini to listen to a meeting, generate a summary, identify action items, and save the notes as a Google Doc in the user’s Drive. After the meeting, the organizer receives an email recap with the summary and action items, while the notes can also be attached to the related Calendar event depending on the meeting setup and sharing settings. The feature isn't automatically turned on for everyone, though. Google says that all meeting participants are notified when note-taking is turned on, and users can start it from the pencil icon in Meet or enable it for future calls through Meet’s meeting records settings. For work or school accounts, administrators can also control whether the feature is available and may require explicit participant consent for note-taking, recording, or transcription features. The feature first launched back in 2024, when it was available just for selected Workspace users. Over the years, Google added refinements and more options, including the ability to enable it when scheduling meetings via Google Calendar. Google's support docs say that the feature currently supports English, French, German, Italian, Japanese, Korean, Portuguese, and Spanish, but only one language at a time. Meetings with multiple spoken languages are not currently supported, and Google recommends using the tool for meetings between 15 minutes and eight hours. The new feature makes Google Meet closer to its rivals that have AI tools already built in. Microsoft Teams has recently started offering Copilot and intelligent recap features that summarize meetings, surface highlights, and help with follow-ups, while Zoom’s AI Companion can also generate meeting summaries from desktop and mobile meetings.
    • GnuCash 5.16 by Razvan Serea GnuCash is a personal and small business finance application, freely licensed under the GNU GPL and available for GNU/Linux, BSD, Solaris, Mac OS X and Microsoft Windows. It’s designed to be easy to use, yet powerful and flexible. GnuCash allows you to track your income and expenses, reconcile bank accounts, monitor stock portfolios and manage your small business finances. It is based on professional accounting principles to ensure balanced books and accurate reports. GnuCash can keep track of your personal finances in as much detail as you prefer. If you are just starting out, use GnuCash to keep track of your checkbook. You may then decide to track cash as well as credit card purchases to better determine where your money is being spent. When you start investing, you can use GnuCash to help monitor your portfolio. Buying a vehicle or a home? GnuCash will help you plan the investment and track loan payments. If your financial records span the globe, GnuCash provides all the multiple-currency support you need. Between 5.15 and 5.16, the following bugfixes were accomplished: Bug 421610 - RFE: Include logical dates for View->Filter by "date range"The Select Range section of the Date tab of the register's Filter By dialog box is changed to provide relative, specific date, or days ago options for the start and end of the filter range. The Show number of days item label is changed to Show from days ago to better reflect what it does. Bug 436105 - esc key not working as expected in register: Enable the escape key to cancel a field edit. Bug 797384 - Gnucash doesn't handle commodity prices with big numerator/denominator properly. Bug 798004 - Next gen UI for stock transactions Bug 799314 - Add "enter now" option in scheduled transaction editor. tab to allow users to select the scheduled transactions to be included in a “Since Last Run…” window. If there are no instances of a selected transaction triggered by today’s date, the next instance is triggered. Bug 799751 - autocomplete crash Bug 799759 - Users can't Enable entries via Checkboxes on Scheduled Transactions PageAllow the Enabled box in the list of scheduled transactions to be operated instead of having to open the transaction editor dialog and change the Enabled checkbox. Also added use of the Name column as the secondary column sort for all the other columns. Bug 799762 - Poor handling of cases where hidden/placeholder accounts are used in the account register Bug 799766 - Double line preference not respected in search register Bug 799767 - POST /accounts in bindings/python/example_scripts/rest-api is broken Bug 799777 - `xaccSplitSetParent`: reparenting a committed split silently drops its KVP slots (online_id, cap-gains links) Other changes & improvements: Numeric values may now be selected to copy in the Accounts page. Add new Finance::Quote source Finnhub.io: Free API key (personal/non-professional use) available at https://finnhub.io. Set FINNHUB_API_KEY environment variable to API key to use this source. As of June 2026, free tier API limit is 60 API calls/minute. The Investment Lots report has new optional columns for Computed Annual Growth Rate. Python Bindings: Improved translation of primary object (Account, Transaction, Split, etc.) so that they can be treated as normal Python objects. This is accomplished with SWIG magic so no existing code is obsoleted. Python Bindings: Better conversion of GLists to Python lists. Python Bindings: Destroy the QofSession in the Python Session dtor to prevent leaving the database locked. [engine] Add first-class online_id accessors for Split and Account and make them available to Python bindings, removing the unused Transaction online_id property. Improve C++ implementation of QofBook. Correct the Doxygen doc for qof_instance_get/set_kvp. [gnc-log-replay.cpp] fix incorrect guid dump Add some Boost library requirements needed by libgnucash-guile to CMakeLists.txt so that missing feature will fail at configure time. Use Compile-time Regular Expressions instead of std::regex in gnc-filepath-utils.cpp and instead of boost::regex in the CSV importer, with the CTRE v3.11.1 header added to borrowed [gnc-filepath-utils.cpp] null check char* arguments Add ChartJS licenses. Removed AEX from list of commodities. euronext.com is now using JS based anti-webscraping. [report-core] always offer options summary in reports. This is useful to debug reports. The Add options summary option is removed because it's no longer optional. Remove remaining obsolete IMContext from sheet Fix blurry text in HiDPI offscreen-rendered widgets Add port field to database connection dialog: The convention of appending the port number after the host isn't obvious. When editing a split in the register treat the account as being changed only if it isn't the one selected before editing instead of if the user performed an edit Return immediately from qof_book_destroy if hash_of_collections is null. If qof_book_destroy is called on a QofBook* freshly created with qof_book_new (usually because it was used to create a session that now must be destroyed) it would try to empty the non-existent hash tables, crashing. Clean up Flathub metadata to solve warnings at flatpak build time. Be consistent in naming GncPluginPage and GncPluginPageRegister HTML: Remove unimplemented function declarations. [gnc-html.cpp] remove unused buggy string conversion functions Convert libgnc-html to C++ Apply -Wall -Werr -Wmissing-prototypes to C++ compilation on Windows and fix the resulting errors. New and Updated Translations: Arabic, Croatian, Danish, Dutch, German, Finnish, Hungarian, Korean, Norwegian-Bokmal, Spanish Download: GnuCash 5.16 | 176.0 MB (Open Source) Links: GnuCash Home page | Other Operating Systems | Screenshot Get alerted to all of our Software updates on Twitter at @NeowinSoftware
  • Recent Achievements

    • Reacting Well
      NovaEdgeX earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • Week One Done
      NovaEdgeX earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Year In
      BA the Curmudgeon earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Conversation Starter
      rosiecharles earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • First Post
      KMilenkoski1202 earned a badge
      First Post
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      536
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      269
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      150
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      98
    5. 5
      macoman
      66
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!