Jump to content



Photo

Windows 8.2 pro: ‘URmode’ concept


  • Please log in to reply
92 replies to this topic

#61 +snaphat (Myles Landwehr)

snaphat (Myles Landwehr)

    Electrical & Computer Engineer

  • Tech Issues Solved: 29
  • Joined: 23-August 05
  • OS: Win/Lin/Bsd/Osx
  • Phone: dumb phone

Posted 17 December 2013 - 01:05

:laugh:

That is crazy talk, Win32 is not going away for a long time. There are professionals who work and use Win32 programs everyday for like web design, developing code for software, video editing, Photoshop work, audio editing.

 

This one, bingo. If they killed off win32 and the applications that go with it, I'd have to migrate to Linux as a desktop. I would never use Windows again at that point. I have very little investment in it as it is except for the software ecosystem and ease-of-use. I'm sure the same is the case for the majority of developers out there. We'd go where the tools and ecosystems still exist.




#62 Andre S.

Andre S.

    Asik

  • Tech Issues Solved: 10
  • Joined: 26-October 05

Posted 17 December 2013 - 01:10

so when I click the wifi network icon in the notifications area of the taskbar on the desktop,and it pops up a metro options screen, that doesn't mean anything to you?

Yes, it means the Modern/Desktop integration is poorly thought out. We've seen small improvements in Windows 8.1 like the ability to disable top-right charms and boot to desktop, and Windows 8.2 looks poised to bring more improvements for Desktop users.



#63 Auditor

Auditor

    Neowinian

  • Joined: 16-May 10
  • Location: Alberta, Canada

Posted 17 December 2013 - 01:21

This.

 

I've said it earlier, but personally, I like what Metro is doing. I honestly feel as if adaptive and dynamic UIs like Metro are the future in UI design, and that the static, dull "workstation" UIs are a thing of the past. Microsoft isn't wrong for trying their hand at it, nor may they get it right the first time around (depending on who you ask), but there's an exciting world just waiting to be developed here. This is something that could make sitting at a desk "fun" again. There's just too many benefits to ignore.

 

Talk about delusional and we have no dearth of that. So you think flat and bald fisher price interface in future. If this is future for MS then no wonder MS is in such a deep mess.  MS took a big gamble with this metro interface and failed miserably. They are slowly coming to their sense and minority metro supporters will keep on rambling the same thing. Touch might be future for consumer device such as tablet but Metro is not and specially on desktop touch is not future at all.  Talk about start menu coming back shows MS still have some functioning brain left but we will see what they really mean by start menu. I will say to all metro lovers, keep copy of win 8.1 handy because that will be last OS with metro crap plastered on desktop unless you plan to use Surface. 



#64 vcfan

vcfan

    Doing the Humpty Dance

  • Tech Issues Solved: 3
  • Joined: 12-June 11

Posted 17 December 2013 - 01:41

How do you propose they stop win32 development unless they kill off the desktop completely then? If Win32 stays, it stays for developers too (much like all of MS APIs have stayed for the last twenty years even when deprecated). The only way to force a migration is to kill the platform off and they can't do that unless they either kill Win32 or kill the desktop. Neither they would risk simply because they would kill an ecosystem that has been two decades in the making. It would be simply shooting oneself in the foot if they did.

 
Ultimately,it is the market that will decide the fate of the desktop and win32. Microsoft can use windows though to push users to the RT side of things. If they push RT enough that users start abandoning the desktop, then its a possibility down the line that it can be removed.
 

Yes, it means the Modern/Desktop integration is poorly thought out. We've seen small improvements in Windows 8.1 like the ability to disable top-right charms and boot to desktop, and Windows 8.2 looks poised to bring more improvements for Desktop users.

 

Boy there sure is a lot of redundancy going on between the desktop and metro. Its not simply a case of integration. Why does Microsoft keep adding control panel options from the desktop, to the other side? Its a takeover, man. They are just assembling the army.



#65 Andre S.

Andre S.

    Asik

  • Tech Issues Solved: 10
  • Joined: 26-October 05

Posted 17 December 2013 - 02:51

Boy there sure is a lot of redundancy going on between the desktop and metro. Its not simply a case of integration. Why does Microsoft keep adding control panel options from the desktop, to the other side? Its a takeover, man. They are just assembling the army.

You seem to know where Microsoft is going much better than Microsoft itself is.  :laugh: You see some kind of master plan to deprecate the desktop, personally I see a lot of poor design and fumbling around. Time will tell how Windows will evolve, in the meantime Win32's alive and healthy, and nothing has replaced it.

 

I'd like to remind you of what Brian Harry said here on Neowin just recently http://www.neowin.ne...ual-studio-2013:

 

Neowin: The Modern UI is now slowly becoming the norm while we are seeing the first signs of the desktop app disappearing. What direction does the Visual Studio team think the future of app development will take and how will the VS tools adapt to it? 
 
Brian Harry: I’m afraid I disagree with your premise. At Microsoft, we absolutely see value in, and intend to continue supporting, both scenarios – the cloud/device model and the desktop application. Each has its place and will continue to for many, many years to come. Accordingly, while you’ll recognize that our tools and platforms support the technologies predominantly behind apps, such as standard HTML5, JavaScript (and TypeScript) and XAML, you’ll also note that our investments in and commitments to .NET – the framework for building desktop applications – continues unabated. In fact, while we recently took steps to unify, simplify and reduce costs for developers who wish to build apps for both the Windows Store and Windows Phone, we also released a significant update to .NET, .NET 4.5.1, on October 17th. (...)

 

 



#66 xWhiplash

xWhiplash

    Neowinian Senior

  • Joined: 07-March 08

Posted 17 December 2013 - 18:31

You do know this is 2013 not 1990 don't you.
I think its not a step back but a giant leep.

 

What are you referring to?  The start menu?  Does one little menu mean EVERYTHING else on the OS is 1990s?  What about SSDs and Trim?  Multi-core and hyperthreading?  Supporting TBs and TBs of storage?  Supporting many many GBs of RAM?  What about DEP, UAC, Code Integrity, and many other security enhancements?

 

Why do you guys freak the hell out every time somebody mentions the start menu.  Having one little UI element does not mean computing is back in the 1990s.  It is JUST a UI ELEMENT.

 

So you guys are saying there is no difference between Windows 95 and Windows 8 OTHER than the start menu/UI changes?  Really?



#67 xWhiplash

xWhiplash

    Neowinian Senior

  • Joined: 07-March 08

Posted 17 December 2013 - 18:38

This.

 

I've said it earlier, but personally, I like what Metro is doing. I honestly feel as if adaptive and dynamic UIs like Metro are the future in UI design, and that the static, dull "workstation" UIs are a thing of the past. Microsoft isn't wrong for trying their hand at it, nor may they get it right the first time around (depending on who you ask), but there's an exciting world just waiting to be developed here. This is something that could make sitting at a desk "fun" again. There's just too many benefits to ignore.

 

Do you guys sit and stare at the basic screen for hours and hours?  Who cares if the standard desktop environment is "dull".  I do not sit and stare at my desktop wallpaper all day.  I have programs open.  

 

Guess what.  If you open a picture in the Modern UI.  It is "dull" if you stare at it too, because it never changes.

 

I do not understand this argument that the desktop is SO INCREDIBLY DULL!  Um, it is SUPPOSED TO BE.  It gets out of my way and leaves my programs able to do their thing.



#68 +warwagon

warwagon

    Only you can prevent forest fires.

  • Tech Issues Solved: 2
  • Joined: 30-November 01
  • Location: Iowa

Posted 17 December 2013 - 18:52

This.

 

I've said it earlier, but personally, I like what Metro is doing. I honestly feel as if adaptive and dynamic UIs like Metro are the future in UI design, and that the static, dull "workstation" UIs are a thing of the past.

 

So you want to replace this "dull" looking desktop environment

 

209821-windows-live-mail_original.jpg

 

With this dull UI

 

Windows81Mailinbox_Web.png

 

One of the definitions of dull is.

 

"lacking interest or excitement." ... so wouldn't windows 8 be considered dull?



#69 +snaphat (Myles Landwehr)

snaphat (Myles Landwehr)

    Electrical & Computer Engineer

  • Tech Issues Solved: 29
  • Joined: 23-August 05
  • OS: Win/Lin/Bsd/Osx
  • Phone: dumb phone

Posted 17 December 2013 - 18:54

<snip>

 

So you guys are saying there is no difference between Windows 95 and Windows 8 OTHER than the start menu/UI changes?  Really?

 

I think you are making a strawman of the discussion here. Not of the post you quoted though because I don't think anyone knows what exactly that person was talking about. It was like two lines, extremely vague, and you can't tell whether they were talking about the OPs post, metro, win32, or what exactly :laugh:.



#70 Dot Matrix

Dot Matrix

    Neowinian Senior

  • Tech Issues Solved: 5
  • Joined: 14-November 11
  • Location: Upstate New York
  • OS: Windows 8.1
  • Phone: Nokia Lumia 920

Posted 17 December 2013 - 19:20

So you want to replace this "dull" looking desktop environment

209821-windows-live-mail_original.jpg

With this dull UI

Windows81Mailinbox_Web.png

One of the definitions of dull is.

"lacking interest or excitement." ... so wouldn't windows 8 be considered dull?

Windows 8 hardly lacks excitement. The Start Screen is quite nice to use, and more attractive than a static desktop. And yes, id rather have the digital, flat metro look over gaudy flashy UIs. Windows 7 is a great OS, but our machines are more capable than being dull static workstations. I'm talking in the "boring" sense. A grid of icons isn't anything great.

#71 +DConnell

DConnell

    Madman with a blue box

  • Joined: 16-July 04
  • Location: Honey Brook PA
  • OS: Windows 8.1u1, Win RT 8.1u1
  • Phone: Lumia 1520 running Windows Phone 8.1

Posted 17 December 2013 - 19:32

So you want to replace this "dull" looking desktop environment

 

209821-windows-live-mail_original.jpg

 

With this dull UI

 

Windows81Mailinbox_Web.png

 

One of the definitions of dull is.

 

"lacking interest or excitement." ... so wouldn't windows 8 be considered dull?

 

The Win8 Mail screen looks less busy and easier to use to me. Of course, it's also less a lot less powerful than Outlook , but if all you need is email, then that's not a negative.



#72 xWhiplash

xWhiplash

    Neowinian Senior

  • Joined: 07-March 08

Posted 17 December 2013 - 22:05

I think you are making a strawman of the discussion here. Not of the post you quoted though because I don't think anyone knows what exactly that person was talking about. It was like two lines, extremely vague, and you can't tell whether they were talking about the OPs post, metro, win32, or what exactly  :laugh:.

 

 

That is why I asked him what he is referring to.

 

Windows 8 hardly lacks excitement. The Start Screen is quite nice to use, and more attractive than a static desktop. And yes, id rather have the digital, flat metro look over gaudy flashy UIs. Windows 7 is a great OS, but our machines are more capable than being dull static workstations. I'm talking in the "boring" sense. A grid of icons isn't anything great.

 

What exactly is so DULL about Windows 7?

 

"a grid of icons" is what most people treat the start screen as.  I know NOBODY that utilizes these super awesome amazing live tiles.  Everybody I know uses the start screen as a "grid of icons" (myself included since I have NO need for live tiles nonsense).



#73 zhangm

zhangm

    Just bitter.

  • Tech Issues Solved: 13
  • Joined: 21-August 02

Posted 17 December 2013 - 22:36

So you want to replace this "dull" looking desktop environment
 
With this dull UI
 
One of the definitions of dull is.
 
"lacking interest or excitement." ... so wouldn't windows 8 be considered dull?


Just looking at that comparison, I really prefer the app UI because it is simple and to-the-point - at least, if you're running a Mail program for reading mail.

That said, what I don't appreciate about the vast majority of the Metro UI apps is that they've sacrificed a lot of functionality - something as elegant as sending a plain-text message, for example, is no longer an option. If the lost options return in future versions without dropping the no-nonsense interface, then I think I could enjoy using some apps over desktop equivalents.

Trying to swing this back on topic, I'm not confident that the changes proposed here would address any of the app functionality (or usability) issues, which is an important chunk of getting Metro to feel acceptable to some people.

#74 +snaphat (Myles Landwehr)

snaphat (Myles Landwehr)

    Electrical & Computer Engineer

  • Tech Issues Solved: 29
  • Joined: 23-August 05
  • OS: Win/Lin/Bsd/Osx
  • Phone: dumb phone

Posted 18 December 2013 - 01:30

Just looking at that comparison, I really prefer the app UI because it is simple and to-the-point - at least, if you're running a Mail program for reading mail.

That said, what I don't appreciate about the vast majority of the Metro UI apps is that they've sacrificed a lot of functionality - something as elegant as sending a plain-text message, for example, is no longer an option. If the lost options return in future versions without dropping the no-nonsense interface, then I think I could enjoy using some apps over desktop equivalents.

Trying to swing this back on topic, I'm not confident that the changes proposed here would address any of the app functionality (or usability) issues, which is an important chunk of getting Metro to feel acceptable to some people.

 

The problem with metro applications is that the design lacks any consideration for screen real estate. It's as if MS decided that applications needed to be as minimal and barebones as possible with as little as possible on the screen. So in order to do that they implemented only barebones functionality and put huge fonts and spacing between all UI elements. And unsuprisingly 3rd party developers took MSes lead and went home with it. To be perfectly fair the design decisions make sense for tablet computing by end-users where you don't want complicated applications or hard to use programs with many of bells in whistles. What you want is something akin to phone applications so that's what they (and developers) went for. And the end of the day though, in general, that means the death of configuration and tweakability to get a simplified interface and applications.

 

I don't think you are likely to see a merger between simplified UI design and a larger feature set because doing so would be a very difficult to actually do well. It's much easier to just keep the feature-set small and build the UI strictly from the small feature-set.



#75 Ambroos

Ambroos

    Neowinian Senior

  • Tech Issues Solved: 7
  • Joined: 16-January 06
  • Location: Belgium
  • OS: Windows 7 + 8.1
  • Phone: Sony Xperia Z2

Posted 18 December 2013 - 02:13

The fact that there aren't any more advanced Metro apps says a lot about the quality of the platform. The software that is there, even Microsoft's own, is extremely limited in functionality compared to what we had before.