Posted 05 January 2013 - 17:42
Metro was an huge bet, had Microsoft not forced it for every users the manufacturers and software developers wouldn't have taken it seriously. Had Metro not being forced for all users the number of applications for it would be extremely low and Microsoft would have had an extremely difficult time transitioning to touch computing (tablets, convertibles, etc.).
Personal computers manufacturers have, for decades, proved to be extremely incompetent, selling all sort of crippled hardware (laptops with touchpads with all different sort of incoherent features, keyboard with function keys in the weirdest places (my last HP laptop has the function keys as normal keys under the ESC button, what the hell were they thinking?), super-expensive processors with extremely poor cooling or paired with an insanely low amount of ram or horribly slow hard drives, random proprietary devices with crashy untested drivers, etc.) because they know the average users rarely looks deeply into the specs, the only improvements we had were with every requirement enforced by Microsoft. Metro unfortunately is one of those, Microsoft will lose the bet only if touch-computing will end up being a fad (which I doubt will ever happen, with smartphones and touchscreens on everything nowadays) but they couldn't have done anything else. Had Metro not been mandatory they could have risked ended up crushed in the touch computing market due to the very small amount of applications (the Windows Store basically subsidizes part of the Windows license cost letting manufacturers selling hardware at cheaper prices).