Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

Windows 8.2 pro:

93 posts in this topic

Posted

Note: Theverge report that Microsoft is planning to make the Start menu available as an option in the next major Windows release. But i think start screen Is more power full and customizable then the start menu like windows7.

 

The biggest issue most people have with windows 8.1 is the dual environments. As desktop user I would like to work from desktop, also don

post-511837-0-49244600-1387052126.jpg

post-511837-0-69907300-1387052136.jpg

post-511837-0-95918500-1387052146.jpg

post-511837-0-08860800-1387052154.jpg

post-511837-0-42388700-1387052159.jpg

post-511837-0-74284900-1387052164.jpg

post-511837-0-79483400-1387052171.jpg

post-511837-0-03476400-1387052199.jpg

post-511837-0-12131400-1387052306.jpg

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

taskbar showing up over the metro start is redundant. The option to disable full screen start and the rest of the metro garbage should be an option for desktop users; that is all.

6 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

ummm...no

8 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I think it would be better to make the taskbar invisible leaving just the icons, clock visible on the start screen.

 

 

 

Then again, it is a little redundant considering there are already tiles to launch the programs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

What VCFan said. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

ummm...no

 

People who reply like this should be banned.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

People who reply like this should be banned.

Why? The concept is flawed. For starters, where did the Share Charm go? I use that, quite often. Second, having the power button next to the All Apps toggle, is asking for trouble, thanks to a missed hit. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Why? The concept is flawed. For starters, where did the Share Charm go? I use that, quite often. Second, having the power button next to the All Apps toggle, is asking for trouble, thanks to a missed hit. 

 

Besides those two things, what else is flawed about the concept?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

The taskbar doesn't seem right sitting on top of the Start Screen. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

For me, the most important feature I need for Windows 8.2 is the ability to run modern apps in a window on the desktop, and aero transparent back as an option.

I don't care if ms decide to run the start screen in a window on the desktop, or as a start menu like the old one.

And remember, those of you who prefer win8.2 as it is now, can most likely continue this by options/adjustments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I'm kinda confused how anyone here "needs" the old glass theme back. No one "needs" glass any more than a user "needs" Luna back. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

ummm...no

if you are gonna say simply 'no', how about giving us  solid articulated reasons. How are the designs flawed and use relevant UI theory to explain pls. Also, explain an alternative to solve the current UI problems MS faces, namely the start menu, metro and the desktop. 

 

On topic : these designs all share something in common : compromise

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

if you are gonna say simply 'no', how about giving us  solid articulated reasons. How are the designs flawed and use relevant UI theory to explain pls. Also, explain an alternative to solve the current UI problems MS faces, namely the start menu, metro and the desktop. 

 

On topic : these designs all share something in common : compromise

They're not really needed at this point. I'm sure by now the designers at Microsoft toyed with these ideas, and ultimately rejected them for various reasons. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

They're not really needed at this point. I'm sure by now the designers at Microsoft toyed with these ideas, and ultimately rejected them for various reasons. 

Neither You or I were in any of those design meetings, and at no point have I seen any official or leaked concepts that resembles the ideas and concepts shown by the OP. So for you to make that statement, would be a risky assumption, unless offcourse you are an MS employee. As for his reasons, yes by all means state and explain carefully the reasons these designs are flawed. I'm sure we all would like to know why you disagree. This is for the sake of debate.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

if you are gonna say simply 'no', how about giving us  solid articulated reasons. How are the designs flawed and use relevant UI theory to explain pls. Also, explain an alternative to solve the current UI problems MS faces, namely the start menu, metro and the desktop. 

 

 

how about just a switch in boot options, that has 2 choices.   Win7 look, or Modern UI look.     just let people choose what they want.   i can't understand why that's so difficult for MS.....

5 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

They're not really needed at this point. I'm sure by now the designers at Microsoft toyed with these ideas, and ultimately rejected them for various reasons. 

 

I don't think the window'd 8 apps part is a bad idea... isn't there unconfirmed reports that they are at least doing that part in the next build?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

if you are gonna say simply 'no', how about giving us  solid articulated reasons. How are the designs flawed and use relevant UI theory to explain pls. Also, explain an alternative to solve the current UI problems MS faces, namely the start menu, metro and the desktop. 

 

On topic : these designs all share something in common : compromise

Its the nicest possible way I could put it, but if you guys want me to elaborate, then I will.

 

first. why would Microsoft have different OS modes? its a ridiculous idea because why would they deliberately sabotage the adoption of the new API of the future? if people haven't been paying attention, that's WinRT. Have you been following that last 2 BUILDS??? Did you even hear them talk about Win32??? Its all about WinRT and metro. Why aren't we allowed to develop desktop apps for WindowsRT? Why does the charms pop up, the task switcher in the desktop??? Because they don't want you in the desktop. They want you in the store,buying stuff. Metro is in your face deliberately,and its a good thing.

 

Second. showing/hiding UI elements is just asking for trouble. It will make things confusing. Its just awful design.

 

And last, we should all hope for win32 to just die, as a programming language for developers. its OLD, and messy,and there are better ways to do things. WinRT is going to get more powerful as time goes on. The apps are cleaner, better looking, easier ,safer and better to develop. I've been doing win32 stuff for ages, and making a UI usually takes up a significant portion of my time. And no I don't want to use crap like QT, or wxwidgets. XAML is just a treat. If you've been following stuff like WPF I guess you cant not love RT.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Its the nicest possible way I could put it, but if you guys want me to elaborate, then I will.

 

first. why would Microsoft have different OS modes? its a ridiculous idea because why would they deliberately sabotage the adoption of the new API of the future? if people haven't been paying attention, that's WinRT. Have you been following that last 2 BUILDS??? Did you even hear them talk about Win32??? Its all about WinRT and metro. Why aren't we allowed to develop desktop apps for WindowsRT? Why does the charms pop up, the task switcher in the desktop??? Because they don't want you in the desktop. They want you in the store,buying stuff. Metro is in your face deliberately,and its a good thing.

 

Second. showing/hiding UI elements is just asking for trouble. It will make things confusing. Its just awful design.

 

And last, we should all hope for win32 to just die, as a programming language for developers. its OLD, and messy,and there are better ways to do things. WinRT is going to get more powerful as time goes on. The apps are cleaner, better looking, easier ,safer and better to develop. I've been doing win32 stuff for ages, and making a UI usually takes up a significant portion of my time. And no I don't want to use crap like QT, or wxwidgets. XAML is just a treat. If you've been following stuff like WPF I guess you cant not love RT.

With Win32, we are able to modify the OS, with WinRT we aren't, just the one app, that is more than enough of a reason for me to vote for win32. I am sure everything you want done with winrt can be done with win32. I view metro as a means to use windows with touch, I DO NOT want metro to replace windows, I want it to become part of it. I regret getting a windows phone for this exact reason, it is to locked down for my tastes. I would prefer to customise my device completely as with android, but the interface of wp is too nice (although very limited and it will continue to be until everyone gets the same access as nokia does.).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I would rather just learn to be efficient with the UI that is presented. Actually I don't really use much of it, I just put shortcuts to apps and services I need. That's all an OS is to me, a platform to launch applications on and the easier it is for me to quickly see or find the shortcut I want, the better. I don't need any fancy menu systems, trees, shadows or anything else, I just need to launch an application to get some work done and WIndows 8 does that just fine and the side tile makes it quick to swap apps.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Why? 

 

Because it's a lazy reply. The reply of someone who couldn't be arsed to bother typing a real reply. It's impolite and is no better than just typing 'lol' or 'cool story bro'.

Should they be banned? No. Should they just not bother replying to they actually have something worth saying? Hell yeah.

 

I agree with everything vcfan said in his second reply, just wish he could have typed that in his first reply.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Its the nicest possible way I could put it, but if you guys want me to elaborate, then I will.

 

first. why would Microsoft have different OS modes? its a ridiculous idea because why would they deliberately sabotage the adoption of the new API of the future? if people haven't been paying attention, that's WinRT. Have you been following that last 2 BUILDS??? Did you even hear them talk about Win32??? Its all about WinRT and metro. Why aren't we allowed to develop desktop apps for WindowsRT? Why does the charms pop up, the task switcher in the desktop??? Because they don't want you in the desktop. They want you in the store,buying stuff. Metro is in your face deliberately,and its a good thing.

 

Second. showing/hiding UI elements is just asking for trouble. It will make things confusing. Its just awful design.

 

And last, we should all hope for win32 to just die, as a programming language for developers. its OLD, and messy,and there are better ways to do things. WinRT is going to get more powerful as time goes on. The apps are cleaner, better looking, easier ,safer and better to develop. I've been doing win32 stuff for ages, and making a UI usually takes up a significant portion of my time. And no I don't want to use crap like QT, or wxwidgets. XAML is just a treat. If you've been following stuff like WPF I guess you cant not love RT.

I have no comment about the UI issues. However, saying that shoving the Microsoft store is a 'good thing' is, in fact, far from a 'good thing.' Microsoft should never enforce an our-story-only distribution model. The can of worms that would open... Imagine if every company had to pay fees to have their software released on the Windows platform! Do you know the outrage (and illegalities) of that?

 

WinRT may as well replace Win32 for the majority of purposes, but Win32 should always be an option. After all, WinRT is merely one of many possible ways of doing a job. And it's not always the best.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Its easy.
Ive been saying it since 2011:
1. Desktop mode for desktops
2. Metro for tablets.

It's really as simple as that.

And if people want to run Metro apps, just let them run it in a window. If Stardock can do it, why the hell can't M$?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Its the nicest possible way I could put it, but if you guys want me to elaborate, then I will.

 

first. why would Microsoft have different OS modes? its a ridiculous idea because why would they deliberately sabotage the adoption of the new API of the future? if people haven't been paying attention, that's WinRT. Have you been following that last 2 BUILDS??? Did you even hear them talk about Win32??? Its all about WinRT and metro. Why aren't we allowed to develop desktop apps for WindowsRT? Why does the charms pop up, the task switcher in the desktop??? Because they don't want you in the desktop. They want you in the store,buying stuff. Metro is in your face deliberately,and its a good thing.

 

Second. showing/hiding UI elements is just asking for trouble. It will make things confusing. Its just awful design.

 

And last, we should all hope for win32 to just die, as a programming language for developers. its OLD, and messy,and there are better ways to do things. WinRT is going to get more powerful as time goes on. The apps are cleaner, better looking, easier ,safer and better to develop. I've been doing win32 stuff for ages, and making a UI usually takes up a significant portion of my time. And no I don't want to use crap like QT, or wxwidgets. XAML is just a treat. If you've been following stuff like WPF I guess you cant not love RT.

 

MS already effectively has different modes: Metro and the desktop. Based on what we hearing w.r.t. to them attempting to window the Metro apps & add a mini-start window back, it might be that they are realizing that Metro as it stands isn't the the ideal environment for desktop users. It certainly isn't conducive for real work.

 

Think about it this way, how do you expect complex IDEs to work well with a Metro and no windowing system? I can't even imagine... 

 

It is also worth noting that Win32 isn't a programming language and that MS itself is very inconsistent in the languages that they do use and promote. At the moment, I wouldn't be so sure that the .net languages will survive given MS has essentially reverted their APIs back to C++ for WinRT (C++ with syntactic sugar). It's COM based, native, and has rope to hang yourself with. The common language runtime extensions they do have for WinRT appear to be basically nailed onto their new C++/Cx APIs. For example, you can't even interface C++/Cx libraries with desktop/console .net projects.

 

I do agree with you that GUI programming tends to be a major chore, but the real question here is how powerful XAML is. The desktop isn't going to go away, so if MS wants to deprecate all of their win32 classical APIs, XAML is going to have to work in the desktop and it is going to have to offer the same types of widgets as standard GUI paradigms do. One size certainly doesn't fit all for applications, and no-one in their right mind would want to use WinRT apps as a replacement for the host of applications involved in complex development.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

One thing I think is superior in Modern UI, is snap view scaling. Designing to snap view is much more aesthetic and productive than scaling to more or less randomly resized windows. If we're going to run Modern apps in a scalable windows, why do we need WinRT again? Just keep evolving Win32?

 

Don't like the notion of running Modern UI apps in a Window. Snap it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

One thing I think is superior in Modern UI, is snap view scaling. Designing to snap view is much more aesthetic and productive than scaling to more or less randomly resized windows. If we're going to run Modern apps in a scalable windows, why do we need WinRT again? Just keep evolving Win32?

 

Don't like the notion of running Modern UI apps in a Window. Snap it.

 

You'd think they would have added nice abilities to snap windows nicely in desktop mode back in the day (other than aero-snap), but for some reason they never did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.