Stardock talks about Windows 8 concerns in annual report

Stardock CEO Brad Wardell has been very open about his concerns about the current version of Windows 8. He spelled some of them out in a recent interview with Neowin. Stardock also released a Windows 8 app, Start8, that was designed to give desktop users of Windows 8 a more classical Start menu.

This week, the privately owned Stardock issued its annual report, written by Wardell, which goes into detail about what happened at the company in the past 12 months and what it has planned in the future. The annual report also details its issues with Windows 8 as it stands now.

Stardock's report says that it feels Windows 8 could be a failure if Microsoft does not change three things about the OS:

  1. Allowing desktop users to use Windows 8 entirely as a desktop OS. Specifically, interface and experience changes are necessary to prevent users from being shifted back and forth between the desktop and “Metro”.
  2. A realistic way to organize programs on Metro. Currently, Microsoft has termed “Groups” as being columns of tiles with a column label. Users are expected to either show a tile or hide it. If they are hidden, they can only be found through searching (typing). There is no folder concept in Metro as there is on the desktop, Android, Mac, or iOS.
  3. A migration away from mouse-over discovery of features back to visual discovery features. In the present consumer beta, Windows 8 requires the user to move the mouse around the screen to discover new elements, which work inconsistently depending on the context or the application.

While Stardock believes there will be a number of third party software programs that will deal with these issues, it adds that many users may simply decide not to use Windows 8. In fact, Stardock's report says that the immediate threat to the PC as a whole, as well as gaming consoles, is an Apple display product with AirPlay support. The report says:

A Windows 8 failure may buy enough time for Apple to release displays (and get partners to release displays) with embedded AirPlay. The “computing” will be done on an iPad/iPhone, the keyboard/mouse handled by Bluetooth and the display via AirPlay.

The report also talks about Stardock's plans to release new software products that will enhance and improve the Windows OS. The company plans to release a number of updates to its many software programs that will work with Windows 8 such as WindowBlinds and ObjectDock. Indeed, the report claims, "ObjectDock’s popularity has recently increased as users look for ways to effectively organize their programs in a Windows 8 world."

Stardock also plans to release two PC games this year. One is the fantasy turn-based strategy game Elemental: Fallen Enchantress which is being developed internally by Stardock. The other is Sins of a Solar Empire: Rebellion, a stand alone continuation of the hit space strategy game that's being developed by Ironclad Studios. The report states that Stardock will make some game-oriented announcements for other platforms later in 2012.

Stardock concludes its report by saying that because of the sale of its Impulse game download service to GameStop in May 2011, it was able to have its most successful year ever. It adds, "Over the next 18 months, (Stardock) hopes to begin announcing a wide range of new products, games, and technologies."

 

Disclaimer: Stardock involvement with Neowin.

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Review: Sapphire 7850 2GB OC Edition

Next Story

Petition for Alan Turing on £10 note gains steam

124 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

I love windows 8, really. but i think stardock right. windows 8 will be a failure (not like windows vista that has many problems but it now become stable as SP2 arrived) if they didn't listen to their users. i suggest :
1. Bring Back the START Button!
The start button it just like an identity of Windows just Like the Menu bar and the dock (althrough dock is new) in Mac OS X. the problem of the hot corner is: should we scroll all the way to the Bottom left screen to reveal it?? it just sucks.

2. Add option to turn off Metro
i love windows 8 and metro. but the fact is there's a lot of people that dislike it. metro is great, but microsoft should listen to the user's want because they will use it. and if they don't like it, then they'll leave it.

3. Add folder too, not just group.
well group is useful, but with folder too it's even better. why? because even if users group their apps, still didn't give more space.

4. at least users can use their pictures (even better, live pictures) as the start screen background instead using patterns and colors (and add more colors)
so they will not be bored by only looking their screen all day and feel more happier seeing their baby at their start screen.

5. More Features and more goodies + eyecandy

While I agree Windows 8 will have a profound hit for Stardock's business, this is their chance to "trump" Microsoft again by enhancing their software.
More innovation required by Stardock me thinks.

Everyone realizes exactly what this is, right? Stardock is whining because Metro essentially puts them out of business in their traditional sense. I've been a long-time subscriber to Stardock and even have it loaded on my Win7 machine. But I can't tell you how glad I am to divorce myself from the traditional desktop and move to an entirely Metro UI. Stardock has no value in Win8, as far as I'm concerned. I think their "Start button for Win8" is just stupid and just feeds the lame people who are so mentally lazy that they can't -- or won't -- grasp Win8. The only thing that will slow or otherwise inhibit the complete jettison of the traditional desktop is the lack of Metro versions of apps. But, as quickly as possible, the desktop needs to DIE. The people at Stardock either need to resign themselves to just supporting those who can't seem to graduate from Win7 or older versions, or morph into creating innovative hubs in the Metro style. If they choose the former, then I'll be letting my subscription to Stardock lapse because they are useless. If they choose the latter, I'm willing to hang on to see what they come up with....but Win8 start buttons is NOT something that will impress me.

Since Desktop is just another full screen size application under Metro and Start Menu is just part of Desktop why MS couldn't keep both at least. We can still have Metro and Desktop with its Start Menu. Just saying. Obviously two OS exist within Windows 8 and every attempt from MS to kind of merge Desktop and Metro is without 'taste'.

techguy77 said,
Since Desktop is just another full screen size application under Metro and Start Menu is just part of Desktop why MS couldn't keep both at least. We can still have Metro and Desktop with its Start Menu. Just saying. Obviously two OS exist within Windows 8 and every attempt from MS to kind of merge Desktop and Metro is without 'taste'.

Because the Start Orb/Menu is redundant! When you have better features on the Start Screen, and better customization, here's no need for the Windows 95-Windows 7 Start Menu.

Not to mention, the frigging Start Button can be found in at least FOUR different locations - Hardware buttons on tablet devices, "Home" Windows keys on the keyboard, A "live" corner, and again on the Charms bar!

Edited by Dot Matrix, Mar 22 2012, 1:11pm :

techguy77 said,
Since Desktop is just another full screen size application under Metro and Start Menu is just part of Desktop why MS couldn't keep both at least. We can still have Metro and Desktop with its Start Menu. Just saying. Obviously two OS exist within Windows 8 and every attempt from MS to kind of merge Desktop and Metro is without 'taste'.

not two OS, two UI's

Dot Matrix said,

Because the Start Orb/Menu is redundant! When you have better features on the Start Screen, and better customization, here's no need for the Windows 95-Windows 7 Start Menu.

not quite redundant, but it just like an identity of windows

Not to mention, the frigging Start Button can be found in at least FOUR different locations - Hardware buttons on tablet devices, "Home" Windows keys on the keyboard, A "live" corner, and again on the Charms bar!

Microsoft has the liberty of screwing up Windows 9 as well and then making things again with Windows 10 because they are a monopoly and its customers are blind enough to not object to them ruining existing features that worked well.

xpclient said,
Microsoft has the liberty of screwing up Windows 9 as well and then making things again with Windows 10 because they are a monopoly and its customers are blind enough to not object to them ruining existing features that worked well.

What the frak are you talking about? Monopoly? What is this, 1998?

oh i get it, monopoly is a type of Games that kids played it right??

xpclient said,
Microsoft has the liberty of screwing up Windows 9 as well and then making things again with Windows 10 because they are a monopoly and its customers are blind enough to not object to them ruining existing features that worked well.

Of course Microsoft will allow just classic windows 7 interface (start button and all) the reason it is and has been disabled is they know Windows 7 is great what they want was for developers to make metro apps and now they want feedback on metro not the desktops lack of a start button .


winrez said,
Of course Microsoft will allow just classic windows 7 interface (start button and all) the reason it is and has been disabled is they know Windows 7 is great what they want was for developers to make metro apps and now they want feedback on metro not the desktops lack of a start button .

No, it doesn't look that way. It's disabled because the Start Button is now on the Charms bar for easy finger and mouse access, and also a hardware button will exist on tablet devices. Desktops also have a Windows key. The Start Button is a highly redundant piece of the UI that has been on the chopping block for a while now, that won't be coming back, and quite frankly, I'm loving the dynamic and customization aspect of the new Start Screen. It's nice to have dynamic tiles to look at and browse through rather than static icons to old, outdated x32 programs.

You have to keep in mind, that the desktop is only there as a compatibility layer. Windows 8 IS Metro, Metro IS Windows 8.

Edited by Dot Matrix, Mar 22 2012, 4:14am :

Dot Matrix said,
...

Well said.

Instead of complaining, Stardock should make a Live Tile customizer for legacy applications. I'd buy that from the Windows Store.

I do not like Metro, thus I am not going to purchase 8 in it's current state. I think it is a vastly inferior UI.

I'm also a gamer, at some point I am going to be unable to continue to follow this hobby when Microsoft refuse to backport new technologies such as DirectX.

So pray tell Metro-Sycophants, what is your solution to this issue? Will you be Fascists and order me to change my opinion because you said so? I'm already following your "Don't use it if you don't like it advice".

Maybe force Microsoft to Open-Source Windows?

Athernar said,
Maybe force Microsoft to Open-Source Windows?

SuperSyco to the rescue!!!!

Uhm good luck with that.

In regards to the rest, my advice would be to begrudgingly put down your $129 for an OEM license of Win8 Home Premium, and then spend the first oh, 30 or so minutes after install customizing the desktop, following your favorite tweaker website click-by-click so you never have to see the Metro interface.

Until that app is released that you want......

dotf said,
......

Oh I thought of something better, Windows 8 Starter Edition should have 0 Metro!!!!!!

Then people won't think it's a useless product, and Microsoft won't think their Anytime Upgrade program is a complete waste too!!!!!

Oh WIN!

Please tell MS to do this, oh pretty pretty please!

Athernar said,
I do not like Metro, thus I am not going to purchase 8 in it's current state. I think it is a vastly inferior UI.

I'm also a gamer, at some point I am going to be unable to continue to follow this hobby when Microsoft refuse to backport new technologies such as DirectX.

So pray tell Metro-Sycophants, what is your solution to this issue? Will you be Fascists and order me to change my opinion because you said so? I'm already following your "Don't use it if you don't like it advice".

Maybe force Microsoft to Open-Source Windows?

All games that I tried on Windows 8 Consumer Preview works great as it was on Windows 7...

therefore your argument is invalid...

I'm excited for new upcoming pc games and also games from Windows 8 Store once it is released

Athernar said,
I do not like Metro, thus I am not going to purchase 8 in it's current state. I think it is a vastly inferior UI.

I'm also a gamer, at some point I am going to be unable to continue to follow this hobby when Microsoft refuse to backport new technologies such as DirectX.

So pray tell Metro-Sycophants, what is your solution to this issue? Will you be Fascists and order me to change my opinion because you said so? I'm already following your "Don't use it if you don't like it advice".

Maybe force Microsoft to Open-Source Windows?

DX 11.1 will be available for Windows 7 so no worries. You will do gaming on Windows 7 for many years to come.

Eins.MY said,

All games that I tried on Windows 8 Consumer Preview works great as it was on Windows 7...

therefore your argument is invalid...

I'm excited for new upcoming pc games and also games from Windows 8 Store once it is released

Your argument is the only invalid one here, as it's clear you lack the reading comprehension to properly understand what I said.

I do not wish to use 8, so 8's ability to support now and in the future games is irrelevant to me.

techguy77 said,

DX 11.1 will be available for Windows 7 so no worries. You will do gaming on Windows 7 for many years to come.

11.1, yes. But what about when DirectX 12, 12.1, 13 and etc hit and Microsoft refuse to backport them?

At that point I'll be forced to downgrade to 8 for those technologies if I wish to run applications that make use of them.

you SHOULD watch the //build/ conference video, part with Michael Anguilo.......


Athernar said,
I do not like Metro, thus I am not going to purchase 8 in it's current state. I think it is a vastly inferior UI.

I'm also a gamer, at some point I am going to be unable to continue to follow this hobby when Microsoft refuse to backport new technologies such as DirectX.

So pray tell Metro-Sycophants, what is your solution to this issue? Will you be Fascists and order me to change my opinion because you said so? I'm already following your "Don't use it if you don't like it advice".

Maybe force Microsoft to Open-Source Windows?

If the 'concerns' were valid, then Stardock would 'hoping' for Windows 8 to not address the needs of the consumers, as Stardock's main product lines are 'additions' to Windows to make it easier and/or pretty.

So if this was a valid list of concerns, they would have development in place to address the issues they think are a problem with Windows 8, as they already did with the Start Menu utility.

The problem is Microsoft has a lot of 'consistency' and functionality to get coordinated in Windows 8, which is a true concern. However, to believe that StarDock has more knowledge or understanding of usability and users than Microsoft is a bit of a hyperbolic leap.

If just comparing ONE individual, I would take the vision and advice from Bill Buxton from Microsoft long before I would listen to any reviewer or 'I know better' personality from StarDock that has failed many times in their UI add-on attempts.

Their whole Object Desktop project could have offered a lot of innovation and vision, but instead was poor copies of existing UI models from the past, that failed to grasp the important parts of what a UI needs to accomplish. (From that alone, I don't care much for their 'vision'.)

It is refreshing to read that a well-reputed company has put Windows-8 defects out there in writing. More companies should follow suit. Maybe, with several major players stating the obvious flaws/faults with Windows-8, maybe, just maybe, Microsoft will realize the error of their thinking and make the necessary corrections.

Yes, third-party vendors will be more than ready and able to create workarounds to Windows-8's defects; however, consider them as damning indictments to Windows-8.

I think I would be concerned about Windows 8 if I was Stardock - I'm certain that Windows Vista/7 really hit their userbase of Object Desktop, Windowblinds and IconPackager (products that I've used since the OS/2 days) when Microsoft switched to the Aero desktop they finally achieved a good looking desktop that doesn't require as much customization as Windows 95/98/ME (plus the quality of skins that have been developed in the post XP era really doesn't stack up to what had been generated previously...) The Metro desktop doesn't appear to offer as many opportunities for skinning and could leave Stardock with the same problem that happened to Macintosh users when Apple went from OS 8 & 9 to OS X.

I was a big fan of a customization program for the Mac called Kaleidoscope which allowed users back in the System 7 days to skin their desktops by changing the way the windows looked - there was a large community of creative people developing thousands of skins for the program and you could make the Mac look pretty much the way you wanted. Apple eventually incorporated a similar feature into Mac OS 8.5 and after Steve Jobs returned to Apple he eventually killed support for "themes" as part of the Mac operating system. When OS X was introduced Kaleidoscope was left out in the cold and Mac users have generally chosen to stay with the default Mac look and feel (which many call elegant...)

Windows Vista and 7 introduced Windows Aero and the simple glass-like interface is far more attractive than what came with earlier versions of Windows. I've found that I use the Stardock family of apps a lot less than I used to because the default Windows theme is so darn good looking...

GraveDigger27 said,
I think I would be concerned about Windows 8 if I was Stardock - I'm certain that Windows Vista/7 really hit their userbase of Object Desktop, Windowblinds and IconPackager (products that I've used since the OS/2 days) when Microsoft switched to the Aero desktop they finally achieved a good looking desktop that doesn't require as much customization as Windows 95/98/ME (plus the quality of skins that have been developed in the post XP era really doesn't stack up to what had been generated previously...) The Metro desktop doesn't appear to offer as many opportunities for skinning and could leave Stardock with the same problem that happened to Macintosh users when Apple went from OS 8 & 9 to OS X.

I was a big fan of a customization program for the Mac called Kaleidoscope which allowed users back in the System 7 days to skin their desktops by changing the way the windows looked - there was a large community of creative people developing thousands of skins for the program and you could make the Mac look pretty much the way you wanted. Apple eventually incorporated a similar feature into Mac OS 8.5 and after Steve Jobs returned to Apple he eventually killed support for "themes" as part of the Mac operating system. When OS X was introduced Kaleidoscope was left out in the cold and Mac users have generally chosen to stay with the default Mac look and feel (which many call elegant...)

Windows Vista and 7 introduced Windows Aero and the simple glass-like interface is far more attractive than what came with earlier versions of Windows. I've found that I use the Stardock family of apps a lot less than I used to because the default Windows theme is so darn good looking...

There are many ways on how to "attack the metro interface". They could be creative and change the shapes of the tiles, from their corners to their size. They can force a user background picture to the Start Screen. Enable more than 6 tiles per row. Allow custom background pictures in metro apps. Have the start screen appear with a different effect, and so on.

As he openly admits to a possible threat from iOS, it never crossed his mind to start targeting iOS development? For the types of games they create, iOS would be perfect.

For all the people who have development experience and absolutely loathe Metro, I have 1 request.

REVIVE LITESTEP!!!!!!!


I'm talking to the 40% owners of this site, and everyone else who wants to pitch in.

wahoospa said,
If Windows 8 is Windows 7 with Metro on top then why is Windows 8 needed?

Because you have it backwards. Windows 8 is Metro with a Windows 7 application compatibility environment.

wahoospa said,
If Windows 8 is Windows 7 with Metro on top then why is Windows 8 needed?

noo. Metro IS Windows. they are not building layers and all of that stuff. (quote from //build/ conference

Jose_49 said,
They just need to port EVERY feature of the start menu and Windows Explorer to it.

What 'start menu features' are there?? You do realize the start menu is just a bunch of custom code within explorer.exe to launch shortcuts via shell invoke or .lnk follow thru?
As for explorer, the intent by Microsoft is to keep that stuff out of Metro for a reason, it's BAD UX. Yes it was needed for the last 30 years because nothing preceded it. Now it just seems silly in the days of 4TB HDDs and cloud storage and it just gets messy.
Metro shares content between apps and allows you to search content across local and the cloud, removing the need to painstakingly manage your files on disk.

But again, if you like these tasks, maybe you should look into an OS that requires you to use these outdated concepts.

But there are tasks the Start Screen lacks, which were covered by the original start menu. From Shutting down to the search of folders.

And by outdated concepts it doesn't mean that it is inferior for the new ones.

I'm not against metro, I'm just saying it needs to be polished. People argue because they all use computers differently, and if they find something that could be done faster and easier, they will complain when they make it harder to do.

I just don't like how metro and the desktop look like two different OS's. The Desktop should have Metro-ish icons, wallpapers, etc. If this does backfire on Microsoft, Apple will take over the tablet market. I wanna like it but it doesn't have the spit and polish you expect from something in this stage of development. I wiped vista and installed Windows 7 Beta and never looked back. If MS does make any changes they will be generally minor. IMO....

butilikethecookie said,
The Desktop should have Metro-ish icons, wallpapers, etc.

Not at all. Windows 8 is a Metro OS designed to run Metro apps. Why would they lavish any sort of meaningful updates on the desktop, something that's merely an application compatibility environment?

butilikethecookie said,
IMO....

Another person who really doesn't understand what it takes to change the classic desktop.
This is part of the reason for Metro. The undertaking you're asking for would far outstrip even Microsoft's modest development cycles.

If you know where to look, you can still find win3.11 dialogs (windows) in Windows 8.

There's a mantra in software development that if it ain't broke, don't fix it. While this may be true in isolation, when you start to add it all up, you see just how broken it is.

TCLN Ryster said,

Not at all. Windows 8 is a Metro OS designed to run Metro apps.

Is Office a Metro app? No, it is not
Is Windows Division the most profittable one? No, it is Office

Bottom line at least for the foreseeable future WIndows 8 or any other MS OS will be an OS designed to run Office; everything else is secondary............

Some of you seem very opposed to people who dislike metro. All I'm asking for is a choice. I don't want to be forced to use a completely different system. Microsoft allowed the classic start menu in vista when they modified it, why not now?

Unclean009 said,
Some of you seem very opposed to people who dislike metro. All I'm asking for is a choice. I don't want to be forced to use a completely different system. Microsoft allowed the classic start menu in vista when they modified it, why not now?

Choice = Windows 7 still available for sale.... or I don't know...buy some StarPort product for Windows 8.

Unclean009 said,

You're the first person with negative feelings towards metro that I agree with. Yes, I do think it's bad not to give users a choice, but at the same time it shouldn't be either/or at install time.

It should be something that can be enabled or disabled on a whim on x86/x64 architectures anyway.

My preference would be for enabling it, hoping the apps will come. If you make it an all or nothing choice when starting out, users will feel jilted when they want to venture into Metro on the desktop and cannot.

HawkMan said,
No folder concept as there is on Mac or iOS......
So Wardell never used either of these OS'

Neither have u.
The Mac most certainly does have a concept of folders. Just because it's obfuscated from the GUI by the wonderful folks at Apple doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Just open up a terminal window, and run some ls commands.

dotf said,

Neither have u.
The Mac most certainly does have a concept of folders. Just because it's obfuscated from the GUI by the wonderful folks at Apple doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Just open up a terminal window, and run some ls commands.

How are folders obfuscated in OSX?

dotf said,

Neither have u.
The Mac most certainly does have a concept of folders. Just because it's obfuscated from the GUI by the wonderful folks at Apple doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Just open up a terminal window, and run some ls commands.


Yes, and so does Win8... You point being.

He cant argue about no folders and start menu nd bring up Mac an iOS.

I'm sorry, Dave, but there will be no Metro kill switch. Enough of this silliness already. Windows 8 can still be used as a "desktop OS" even with it. I've been using it as such, and have not had any problems with it.

Dot Matrix said,
I'm sorry, Dave, but there will be no Metro kill switch. Enough of this silliness already. Windows 8 can still be used as a "desktop OS" even with it. I've been using it as such, and have not had any problems with it.

He's just annoyed because they can sell fences no other desktop "enhancements" for it since windows don't need them. He also doesn't understand that the metro screen is the new pinned items on the start menu, all programs as still under all programs, or search, same as before

Dot Matrix said,
I'm sorry, Dave, but there will be no Metro kill switch. Enough of this silliness already. Windows 8 can still be used as a "desktop OS" even with it. I've been using it as such, and have not had any problems with it.

Actually, there is a Metro kill switch, and many people will be using it, it's called never using Windows 8.

I'd like to know why people that like Metro are so opposed to the idea of having a friggin' choice, as if choices were a bad evil thing, is it possibly because they secretly think without forcing everyone to use it, that Metro will fail so hard?

JaredFrost said,

I'd like to know why people that like Metro are so opposed to the idea of having a friggin' choice, as if choices were a bad evil thing, is it possibly because they secretly think without forcing everyone to use it, that Metro will fail so hard?

Windows has never really been about "choice". You went with what you were given. If Microsoft wants three screens and a cloud, then that's what they want. But needless to say, I'm kinda glad they're taking the choice to update the desktop OS. If you really think about it, it's been stagnant for a while. We're getting the best of Classic Shell with Metro. If done correctly, I can still use Metro apps without having to even buy a tablet.

Can't say that with Apple, now can you? If I want an iOS app that has no Mac equivalent, I have to buy an iPad.

Dot Matrix said,

Windows has never really been about "choice". You went with what you were given. If Microsoft wants three screens and a cloud, then that's what they want. But needless to say, I'm kinda glad they're taking the choice to update the desktop OS. If you really think about it, it's been stagnant for a while. We're getting the best of Classic Shell with Metro. If done correctly, I can still use Metro apps without having to even buy a tablet.

Can't say that with Apple, now can you? If I want an iOS app that has no Mac equivalent, I have to buy an iPad.

But they would never force you to use three screens or a cloud, the option would just be there to use it, it wouldn't be a requirement, that is choice.

They can still make it so WP7 Apps work in Windows, with or without Metro, using that as an excuse is shortsighted and stupid.

When they first added the extended start menu with Windows XP, there was the option to not use it and use the old one, when they added Luna and Aero, there was the options to not use those, they added the quick launch, there was the option to disable it, don't like catagory view in the Control Panel? Don't like side pane in explorer? don't worry, you can choose to turn them off, there are many many other examples of where you're given basic choices on how you use the OS.

Seems like a lot of choice to me, and to me that's what set Windows apart from OS X, customization and choice without over complicating it like Gnome or KDE can, be it OS level or third party software, will there be software to hack all these back into Windows 8? oh probably, but it shouldn't come to that, basic interaction with the OS should be a built in choice.

First, it would have been nice to have some sort of disclaimer being Stardock owns part of NeoWin.

Second, could this be the reason for the recent negative "commentary?" Need to make sure we hold the official company line - Win8 makes some of Stardock's main products obsolete, need to protect that business by scaring away people.

virtorio said,

Like what?

Recently there were some editorials done on NeoWin criticizing Win8. If you are worried about your business, what better way than to put out some editorials criticizing what could cause your business to dip?

Something else interesting I read from the StarDock CEO: http://www.neowin.net/forum/bl...ng-to-do-what-i-want-to-do/

"Now, users on Stardock sites who read my posts know how I "treat" people. It's not that I treat people badly. I'm just not very sympathetic to people who incessantly complain about every little thing. I particularly have little patience for people whose idea of "free speech" is to flame some person, product, or company and then be taken aback when that person or representative of that product or company defends themselves."

And yet, the Stardock CEO has no problem flaming a product (Win8) or company (Microsoft). Will he be taken aback if there is a Microsoft response defending themselves? Will he be taken aback if the people who like Win8 & Metro stand up?

nohone said,

Recently there were some editorials done on NeoWin criticizing Win8. If you are worried about your business, what better way than to put out some editorials criticizing what could cause your business to dip?


So the Neowin editors can't voice their opinions then? That is the purpose of an editorial. There are plenty of articles all over tech sites that are in a similar vein to those articles. I personally don't believe the editors are being influenced by Brad Wardell, but if you have concerns with the integrity of Neowin's content producers maybe it's time you find someone else to go.

virtorio said,

So the Neowin editors can't voice their opinions then? That is the purpose of an editorial. There are plenty of articles all over tech sites that are in a similar vein to those articles. I personally don't believe the editors are being influenced by Brad Wardell, but if you have concerns with the integrity of Neowin's content producers maybe it's time you find someone else to go.

So I guess what you are saying is that NeoWin should shut down their commenting system, because only NeoWin writers opinions mean anything. That if people disagree with something, then they should just shut up because the NeoWin authors are the end-all-be-all voice of opinion.

And as for your "go somewhere else" bit, I will be damned before I shut up just because you don't like what I have to say. If you don't like my opinion, then I suggest you don't read it - and certainly don't comment on it. This place is starting to quickly turn into Engadget, with the "I don't like your opinion so I am going to whine about you being a hater or tell you to leave because I don't agree with your opinion" attitude. So if you don't like what I have to say, then deal with it.

I know windows means windows and UI Metro absent only can open an application. I sincerely believe that Microsoft has made a mistake, trying to introduce an interface designed and developed for handheld devices that are managed with the finger, in a desktop pc is much better handled with a mouse and do not dirty the screen.
Metro interact with UI is not as well thought out to run some functions which have to perform many steps.
is still lacking to read and write files from other file systems such as Linux, Apple, etc ... able to mount different images to ISO format like NRG, etc ... to compress and decompress other formats like RAR to ZIP, etc ... a good notebook
If not rectified with respect to the start menu button and decide if you want to interface Metro, or the Classic Windows before taking the final version of windows 8 think to stick a big thud

hordmop said,
.....

First of your post is so full of FUD that you barely make sense.

First off, you can have two metro apps on screen, an infinite number 'open' (aka resident in RAM).

Metro interactions with keyboard and mouse are actually quicker than some of their touch counterparts, which is opposite of what you seem to believe.

You only think desktop PC is much better handled with keyboard and mouse because that's the way it has been since Microsoft ripped off Apple who in turn ripped off Xerox. That is to say, you're trained to believe this.

Also, from a programming perspective, the classic desktop is becoming a nightmare to program for. There needs to be a simpler model, and that is the Windows Runtime, the core of the Metro experience. The classic desktop is stagnating because of the effort required to create innovative experiences.

Plus, no one ever follows Microsoft's UI guidelines for Win32 development. We wind up with abominations like Oracle Forms, PowerBuilder, .NET, Java and classic Win32 COM. All of these wind up providing an inconsistent user experience.

Now on to the more technical details of your post:

Why would Microsoft, a software company out to make money, write code for file formats that aren't standardized by any governing body (NRG)? This would require either a) reverse engineering which will result in lawsuits, or b) paying royalties to the companies who hold copyright/patent which would drive up the base price of the OS.
Strike up the same for the other mentioned formats.

Finally, it's not wise to make the user choose one camp or the other. What happens when a Metro app comes out that compels the user to want it on all of their computing devices? Oh sorry, you didn't want to have this app on your desktop, so you're SOL.

I sometimes wonder if people react to the way something looks, or if they do the research themselves.

dotf said,

First off, you can have two metro apps on screen

You can if your screen resolution is above a certain size. My laptop display is 1280x800 and that is below the limit.

I basically work all day with two windows on screen at once, side by side (one of them often being Windows 7 in a virtual machine) so I consider this limit unnecessary.

Edited by virtorio, Mar 22 2012, 1:37am :

virtorio said,
I consider this limit unnecessary.

Yes, but then again, YOU haven't done the research to figure out that apps have to run at more than one aspect ratio and more than one resolution. Maybe if YOU had done the groundwork that the Windows 8 team have, you will understand why it's a technical limitation imposed by Microsoft to keep UX development easy for all partners.

dotf said,

Yes, but then again, YOU haven't done the research to figure out that apps have to run at more than one aspect ratio and more than one resolution. Maybe if YOU had done the groundwork that the Windows 8 team have, you will understand why it's a technical limitation imposed by Microsoft to keep UX development easy for all partners.

Actually I have done the research and read all the blogs. There are plenty of solutions to this problem (scrollbars, have the inactive window move off-screen a little) but not allowing that functionality, especially with the number of potential customers with 1280w displays shouldn't be one of them.

dotf said,

.....

FUD, or an opposing view?

I say the latter because Microsoft did develop Metro for touch based interfaces. If you don't believe me, you can head on over to Microsoft for official documentation that backs up the above statement.

omgben said,
.

Touche.
My point is merely that there are the thousands of hours Microsoft put into discovering this new way of doing things in a touch first world. They admitted in blogs during DP era that they got some of their assumptions on mouse/keyboard interaction wrong and changed them.

We on the other hand can only research in terms of the tiny number of blog posts they release on their journey. By comparison we are so ignorant to the matter.

While many other companies out there tend to operate in incubation, confident in their direction, Microsoft are at least sharing the journey with future customers, and I welcome this new era of design, consumers first.

dotf said,
First of your post is so full of FUD that you barely make sense.

Blah blah blah...another Microsoft employee getting paid to mess with REAL people with REAL thoughts.

Does this guy really think there will be no way to turn off Metro? Some people just don't understand what "Consumer Preview" means... definitely not a final product

GreenOwner said,
Does this guy really think there will be no way to turn off Metro? Some people just don't understand what "Consumer Preview" means... definitely not a final product
Vista and Windows 7 didn't change much from when they were at this point, so what makes you think Windows 8 will?

That and Microsoft have been very clear that there will be no way to turn off Metro.

GreenOwner said,
Does this guy really think there will be no way to turn off Metro? Some people just don't understand what "Consumer Preview" means... definitely not a final product

Give 1 valid reason to "disable" it?
You have a start screen with many cools features, if you don't want them just click on "desktop" and it's working like 7 (with more features ofc, but overall it's the same experience).

Anthonyd said,

Give 1 valid reason to "disable" it?
You have a start screen with many cools features, if you don't want them just click on "desktop" and it's working like 7 (with more features ofc, but overall it's the same experience).

No, it's not because in order to do anything you have to constantly switch to the Metro interface.

Xilo said,

No, it's not because in order to do anything you have to constantly switch to the Metro interface.

Just like you constantly open the start menu. Except the start screen has 46 pinned apps instantly available organized in groups without scrolling, whereas the start menu has ~8. Meaning you have faster access to more favorite heavily used apps, faster then the start menu.

Xilo said,

No, it's not because in order to do anything you have to constantly switch to the Metro interface.

You have that backwards. The Metro interface IS Windows 8, like it or not. You're switching to the classic desktop to use legacy apps. Classic desktop is a limited-UI application compatibility environment to allow you to run non-metro apps.

The shortage of metro apps aside for the moment, I've found very few core windows functions I've had to switch to the classic desktop to access.

Xilo said,

No, it's not because in order to do anything you have to constantly switch to the Metro interface.

Right. Dude, I click open Metro just as much as I click open the start menu.... about 5 times a day, otherwise, I'm able to carry on my merry way on the desktop.

HawkMan said,

Just like you constantly open the start menu. Except the start screen has 46 pinned apps instantly available organized in groups without scrolling, whereas the start menu has ~8. Meaning you have faster access to more favorite heavily used apps, faster then the start menu.

The difference is that it is jarring to move between desktop and metro, the old start menu was part of, integrated into the desktop.

Anthonyd said,

Give 1 valid reason to "disable" it?
You have a start screen with many cools features, if you don't want them just click on "desktop" and it's working like 7 (with more features ofc, but overall it's the same experience).

1: It's ugly
2: It's unintuitive
3: I hate invisible menus
4: Gestures suck for a mouse
5: Windows has always been about customization.

Most of those may be opinion, but that doesn't make them invalid.

Now, you tell us why there shouldn't be an option to turn it off? how does someone else wanting to use their computer a different way affect you? as forcing people to use this affects them, but them not using it has NO barring on you.

Xilo said,

No, it's not because in order to do anything you have to constantly switch to the Metro interface.

Not true.
Maybe before the taskbar was super, allowing for pinned applications. The only real reason to enter Metro is to use metro apps.

If you don't like it, don't use it.

Microsoft's biggest mistake so far with Windows 8 was swapping out a collection of filesystem shortcuts for an app platform that they intend to become the future of Windows.

If they could have found a different way to incorporate Metro, I think their would be less whiny users.

virtorio said,
Vista and Windows 7 didn't change much from when they were at this point, so what makes you think Windows 8 will?

That and Microsoft have been very clear that there will be no way to turn off Metro.

I am pretty sure businesses would be very angry if they have no way of disabling Metro. I myself ABSOLUTELY love Metro but I know that at my company I would not allow Metro or the "New" Start Screen as they call it. I currently have Windows 7 installed and my employee's mainly use Outlook, IE 9, and VNC and I am almost sure that the Metro UI would be an issue.

dotf said,

You'd miss the option of having it. You're just ****y because it's forced on you.

Once that content provider comes out with a killer app, you'll forget this nonsense.


I like to multi task with more than one and one third visible programs. I also like to copy and paste my files easily around multiple hard drives.

Anthonyd said,

Give 1 valid reason to "disable" it?
You have a start screen with many cools features, if you don't want them just click on "desktop" and it's working like 7 (with more features ofc, but overall it's the same experience).

Well the Start Screen is definitely not something that will be accepted in many companies that want the new features of Windows 8 without the Metro Start Screen. It just isn't that business orientated in my opinion, many will want classical look and feel because it would interfere with productivity and the Start Screen just has to many social aspects that are not allowed in a business environment and it would be a pain to disable everything.

GreenOwner said,
the Start Screen just has to many social aspects that are not allowed in a business environment and it would be a pain to disable everything.

The start screen has social aspects? It has whatever apps you install on it. If buisness' don't want you installing social apps, they can quite easily restrict you from using the store.

dotf said,

You'd miss the option of having it. You're just ****y because it's forced on you.

Once that content provider comes out with a killer app, you'll forget this nonsense.

No I really wouldn't miss the option to have it, I do have the option of having it and I formatted that option away and replaced it with 7

Detection said,

No I really wouldn't miss the option to have it, I do have the option of having it and I formatted that option away and replaced it with 7

Good for you. Bye then.

GreenOwner said,

Well the Start Screen is definitely not something that will be accepted in many companies that want the new features of Windows 8 without the Metro Start Screen. It just isn't that business orientated in my opinion, many will want classical look and feel because it would interfere with productivity and the Start Screen just has to many social aspects that are not allowed in a business environment and it would be a pain to disable everything.

Windows 8 out of the box is neither business or consumer orientated, it just IS. The functions of the start screen depend entirely on what apps are installed, nothing more, nothing less.

Also saying the start screen would "interfere with productivity" when the opposite is in fact true is just ludicrous. Having preview information from multiple apps available on one screen will do just the opposite, it will increase productivity. For example, I'm on the desktop at the moment browsing the web in chrome. I can just hit my windows key and instantly I can see at a glance if I've got new emails, messages, upcoming appointments, see what the weather is doing and check the news headlines. Then I just press the windows key again and I'm back where I was. Yeah, real unproductive stuff there.

Detection said,

Why, where you going ?

I thought you'd made up your mind, removed Windows 8, and re-installed Windows 7, thereby ending the legitimate need for your furthered involvement in this discussion. I'm sorry, my mistake.

Detection said,

Cool, I'm happy for you.

I just think tablet UI's belong on tablets, I don't hate Metro, I just hate Metro on my PC


That's where you're wrong. The Metro experience is not a "tablet UI." It's an experience for all formfactors.

SierraSonic said,

I like to multi task with more than one and one third visible programs. I also like to copy and paste my files easily around multiple hard drives.

DUDE!!!!

Seriously?
This is your reason?

This is one of the EXACT user stories that were created when Metro as a PC interface was conceptualized.
These are the tasks that ordinary users, your plumbers and your wallboard folk just can't cope with.
These are the usage scenarios they hope to ELIMINATE with Windows going forward.

However, if you like toiling away on your computer, who am I to judge.

The 'work' we do on computers today is completely unnecessary. Give Win8 a chance when it RTMs and you will see.

GreenOwner said,
Does this guy really think there will be no way to turn off Metro? Some people just don't understand what "Consumer Preview" means... definitely not a final product
I wanted to run windows 3.1 instead of running win95. I was very resistant to it. A week into it I was saying win 3.what? I'm used to running win8. It takes getting used to as things are different but shutting it out completely is a little premature.

Callum said,

That's where you're wrong. The Metro experience is not a "tablet UI." It's an experience for all formfactors.

Perhaps tablet isn't the right word, but it is certainly optimized for use on touch devices, so say otherwise is absurd, gestures, invisible menus, these are all indicative of a touch device, a GUI optimized for point and click would have visible menus and buttons.

And you might not agree with people, but that doesn't make them wrong, you constantly say everyone with an opposing position is flatout wrong, then you don't elaborate, how are invisible menus/button, and gestures the best use of a point and click input device? to me that does not sound or feel intuitive at all. can it be used with them? of course, but it's not the optimal use of them.

But I'll give you this, Metro is an experience for all formfactors, and in this case, it's a bad one.

Detection said,
No I really wouldn't miss the option to have it, I do have the option of having it and I formatted that option away and replaced it with 7

Sure, you tried the consumer preview, good for you. Did you also notice the lack of apps in the store? the paid section is absent for now, for good reason. The true light of Metro is in the hands of the community, and so far, not one of them are ready to put out a final version, because the OS is yet to be final.

You're silly to think that the apps today are truly representative of what will be in the store on launch day or even three years later.

Your point here has as much validity anyone who panned the iPhone when it first launched. Look where it is today.

Callum said,

That's where you're wrong. The Metro experience is not a "tablet UI." It's an experience for all formfactors.

We're still on this? I think you're grabbing at straws, sir. Maybe you're even arguing semantics. I believe this has already been brought to your attention, but Microsoft themselves have said that Metro was designed for mobile. They encourage developers to design their Metro apps, "touch first," and to embrace Windows 8's touch technologies. Keyword is, "touch," get it?

So when people say that it is a tablet UI, they're not wrong. It's a UI optimized for mobile devices that wasn't translated well to the desktop. I mean, the Zune app is a perfect example of applying Metro's principles to the desktop. It gives me all of the functionality and information that I need, and it only takes up 1/4 of my screen. Tell me why the masses need a full screen weather widget, and how it's forward thinking?

omgben said,
We're still on this? I think you're grabbing at straws, sir. Maybe you're even arguing semantics. I believe this has already been brought to your attention, but Microsoft themselves have said that Metro was designed "touch first,"

Yes, touch first, however the keyboard/mouse experience is great.
The problem with your assessment and why I have trouble agreeing is that we've been conditioned by Microsoft to believe that all keyboard and mouse interaction be reflected on an always visible UI.
But then came notifications and later toasts and all of these other sorts of things that just happen on our desktops that violate the very basics of Microsoft design.
The implementations were kludgy and inconsistent, and it makes my desktop feel like it was built by frankenstein, and I am stuck with his monster.

Now, Microsoft come along and say, guess what, this is how interaction works now, it's fun, fast and fluid, and you can intuitively understand every app once you get the basics which takes all of about 5 minutes.

From that point on you are free to discover what app developers out there want to offer, the only limitation is that they operate inside a consistent UX framework.

As a side note, Zune is NOT a great example of Metro on the desktop. Zune was created BEFORE Metro was defined as a style guideline.

Now that Microsoft have defined Metro as the UX Framework for the Windows Runtime, we're beyond this nonsense of 'metro on the desktop'.

Those things could be called Metro-inspired, or consistent with Metro style guidelines, but NEVER as Metro on the desktop.

To assist you with your Zune comment, Zune inspired Metro. Windows Media Center inspired Metro. The metropolitan landscape inspired Metro. Print media inspired Metro. Design School research influenced Metro.

With all of these other things done right, I would call Microsoft crazy not to take a bet that because we exist as humans in a modern world that we should have devices that reflect that, whether on the go or stationary in the den or wherever.

Why wouldn't they make Metro the framework for the entire user experience of a Windows branded device?

GreenOwner said,
Some people just don't understand what "Consumer Preview" means... definitely not a final product

...it means beta and beta is what Microsoft uses to tell the world that this is what they're going to be forced to use.

Also ONLY Microsoft employees and people who are incapable of doing anything productive on a computer like Windows 8.

dotf said,

Yes, touch first, however the keyboard/mouse experience is great.
The problem with your assessment and why I have trouble agreeing is that we've been conditioned by Microsoft to believe that all keyboard and mouse interaction be reflected on an always visible UI.
But then came notifications and later toasts and all of these other sorts of things that just happen on our desktops that violate the very basics of Microsoft design.
The implementations were kludgy and inconsistent, and it makes my desktop feel like it was built by frankenstein, and I am stuck with his monster.

Now, Microsoft come along and say, guess what, this is how interaction works now, it's fun, fast and fluid, and you can intuitively understand every app once you get the basics which takes all of about 5 minutes.

There's nothing intuitive about the current Metro apps. Most things have no visual indicator making you stumble upon features just by pure luck. Lots of things are not in places that anyone would consider obvious. Some features go against the usability concepts introduced in Win7. If that is not poor design I don't know what is.

You say that your desktop is built like a Frankenstein, wouldn't Metro simply make it the super Frankenstein monster because it's poorly integrated with the old stuff? I mean it has things like 5 different control panels accessed by arbitrary options like "Settings" "More PC Settings" etc.

dotf said,

Yes, touch first, however the keyboard/mouse experience is great.

Try to use W8 with the pen..................... You are not able to call the "Charm Bar", the list of the open apps etc. etc.

JaredFrost said,

Perhaps tablet isn't the right word, but it is certainly optimized for use on touch devices, so say otherwise is absurd, gestures, invisible menus, these are all indicative of a touch device, a GUI optimized for point and click would have visible menus and buttons.

And you might not agree with people, but that doesn't make them wrong, you constantly say everyone with an opposing position is flatout wrong, then you don't elaborate, how are invisible menus/button, and gestures the best use of a point and click input device? to me that does not sound or feel intuitive at all. can it be used with them? of course, but it's not the optimal use of them.

But I'll give you this, Metro is an experience for all formfactors, and in this case, it's a bad one.


That's mainly what I was pointing out, and that's why I said he was flatout wrong in this instance.

It isn't a "tablet UI," but it is an experience that was optimised for touch-based devices like tablets. I find people stating flatout that it's a "tablet UI" to be quite dangerous, as it provokes misunderstanding from some (especially many average users).

I can understand if people think it doesn't work well on other formfactors, though. I haven't yet used it enough to know for sure, but so far, I've enjoyed using it on my notebook.

omgben said,

We're still on this? I think you're grabbing at straws, sir. Maybe you're even arguing semantics. I believe this has already been brought to your attention, but Microsoft themselves have said that Metro was designed for mobile. They encourage developers to design their Metro apps, "touch first," and to embrace Windows 8's touch technologies. Keyword is, "touch," get it?

So when people say that it is a tablet UI, they're not wrong. It's a UI optimized for mobile devices that wasn't translated well to the desktop. I mean, the Zune app is a perfect example of applying Metro's principles to the desktop. It gives me all of the functionality and information that I need, and it only takes up 1/4 of my screen. Tell me why the masses need a full screen weather widget, and how it's forward thinking?


I am arguing semantics. I just find it quite dangerous of people to refer to it as "a tablet UI" because of the misunderstanding it can provoke. I'm certainly not suggesting it works well on other formfactors or that it wasn't optimised for touch-based devices, when I mention that people are wrong for calling it "a tablet UI."

Fritzly said,

Try to use W8 with the pen..................... You are not able to call the "Charm Bar", the list of the open apps etc. etc.

Strange, I can on mine....

Anthonyd said,
"There is no folder concept in Metro as there is on the desktop, Android, Mac, or iOS."
Because it sux mate.

???????????????????????????????????????????

downhillrider said,
This was an infomercial.

Indeed. Every time an article or story about an owner of Neowin appears on this site, there should be a mention of that fact. It's really quite disingenuous otherwise.

I don't really trust Stardock. It seems like they are more concerned about how Windows 8 will affect their business (their products) than how it will affect real end users.

Agree.. take away the traditional desktop and your taking away the canvas upon which most of their products are designed to enhance...

I should hope so as well. If he wasn't worried about his own business, then they wouldn't be doing so well now would they.

Silly comment is silly. Stardock creates the first 3rd party freeware app specifically for Windows 8, and they are supposed to be "concerned" about it?

I must have missed something, please enlighten me.

Neobond said,
Silly comment is silly. Stardock creates the first 3rd party freeware app specifically for Windows 8, and they are supposed to be "concerned" about it?

I must have missed something, please enlighten me.

It's hardly silly at all. The fact they've released a tiny freeware product for Windows 8 isn't even relevant to the rfirth's comment. The fact is that a large portfolio of Stardock products, in other words their core business, is built around enhancing what is now called "the classic desktop", which in Windows 8 has been relegated to a simple appcompat environment for legacy non-metro apps. It's hardly surprising then that they're worried that should Windows 8 succeed in getting the average user off the desktop and into metro for most of their time, that it will affect Stardock's bottom line. Also not surprising that you would be defending their position given the relationship between Neowin and Stardock.

Edited by Ryster, Mar 21 2012, 9:18pm :

Neobond said,

I must have missed something, please enlighten me.

You should probably mention that Neowin is 40% owned by Stardock.

TCLN Ryster said,

It's hardly silly at all. The fact they've released a tiny freeware product for Windows 8 isn't even relevant to the rfirth's comment. The fact is that a large portfolio of Stardock products, in other words their core business, is built around enhancing what is now called "the classic desktop", which in Windows 8 has been relegated to a simple appcompat environment for legacy non-metro apps. It's hardly surprising then that they're worried that should Windows 8 succeed in getting the average user off the desktop and into metro for most of their time, that it will affect Stardock's bottom line. Also not surprising that you would be defending their position given the relationship between Neowin and Stardock.

I'm not surprised by his response either, considering Stardock pays the bills.

rfirth said,
I don't really trust Stardock. It seems like they are more concerned about how Windows 8 will affect their business (their products) than how it will affect real end users.

I dont trust em either. They have a track record of producing and abandoning their terrible games(only Sins of a Solar empire was good), but Demigod/Elemental were total messes. Their software its sort of meh. I somehow doubt their much of a success any more as their software becomes less relevant over time.

Uh, this is from the report:

"Stardock remains concerned about the direction of Windows 8. Since we are not currently a cross-platform development shop, our success relies heavily on the success of Windows."

Do you understand? They need Windows to succeed and the concern is that desktop users could reject it. The fact that the desktop is crippled just means there are more functions for Stardock to take over if Windows 8 gets popular. SO they don't want it to fail in general.

Honestly, some people.

Beyond Godlike said,

I dont trust em either. They have a track record of producing and abandoning their terrible games(only Sins of a Solar empire was good), but Demigod/Elemental were total messes. Their software its sort of meh. I somehow doubt their much of a success any more as their software becomes less relevant over time.

Have to disagree with you on that, with the new "Metro" interface Stardock will have a new oppurtunity to design new programs for it, which increases revenue. Also, keep in mind most people dislike the Metro interface and think it is kind of ugly, with Stardock's programs you could customize the interface however each individual pleases.

As far as their games go... They didn't develop Demigod, however it was published by them and they handled the release, so how much was their fault and whether or not they were the reason it failed is up for debate. As far as Elemental goes, the game was flat out horrible and yet the company worked on it for a year after release, not many companies out there will work on a game for that long when they've already lost so much money on it. Not to mention they're giving away the two sequels to anyone who purchased the game the year Elemental came out.

Corin Blair said,

Have to disagree with you on that, with the new "Metro" interface Stardock will have a new oppurtunity to design new programs for it, which increases revenue. Also, keep in mind most people dislike the Metro interface and think it is kind of ugly, with Stardock's programs you could customize the interface however each individual pleases.

As far as their games go... They didn't develop Demigod, however it was published by them and they handled the release, so how much was their fault and whether or not they were the reason it failed is up for debate. As far as Elemental goes, the game was flat out horrible and yet the company worked on it for a year after release, not many companies out there will work on a game for that long when they've already lost so much money on it. Not to mention they're giving away the two sequels to anyone who purchased the game the year Elemental came out.

Did they have a choice? Who in their right mind will buy another game from them after those 2. When the CEO of a company posts on the game forums, "Just buy itnow, and put it down for 6 months while we fix it", its time to lose all faith in that company.

I liked the Impulse store, I liked SINS, and Demigod was a great concept poorly executed because no one there can code proper netcode that didnt require a fibre connection to not disconnect.

I do find it ironic that they make public statements saying how game developers should make their games when they arent even a player in the software/gaming world.