Windows 8 UX designer on Metro: "It is the antithesis of a power user"

Since the first beta leak.. well.. since the first pre-beta image leak, Windows 8 has had a mixed reaction. Some believe that the new Metro-- or Modern-- interface has seriously affected their workflow, whereas some accepted the Start Screen as a welcomed addition and replacement to the cluttered almost 20 year old Start Menu.

Whatever your view is on the new interface, Jacob Miller, a UX designer for Microsoft that worked on Windows 8, has shared some personal views and responses to criticisms on the /r/technology subreddit of Reddit under the username "pwnies."

"I want to talk about why we chose Metro as the default instead of the desktop, and why this is good in the long run - especially for power users.

...but not in the way you might think.

At this point you're probably expecting me to say that it's designed for keyboard execution, or some thing about improved time trials for launching programs, or some other way of me trying to convince you that Metro is actually useful. I've talked about those in the past extensively on reddit, but for this discussion let's throw that all out the window. For this discussion, assume that Metro is sh*t for power users (even if you don't believe it to be)." - Miller

Miller continued on to explain that the design team split users into two groups: content creators and content consumers:

  • Content creators were explained to be power users: they have multiple windows open across multiple monitors, they sometimes even have virtual machines that also have their own nested levels of complexity.
  • Content consumers were explained to be casual users who just use basic social media platforms, view photos, and so on. They were described as the computer illiterate younger siblings, the older grandparents, or the mother "who just wants to look up apple pie recipes."

Windows 8 was designed for the latter group: the content consumers. This is also where Metro stems from: it is a platform that is "simple, clear, and does one thing (and only one thing) relatively easily." Miller described Metro as the antithesis of a power user.

However, all was not doomed. Miller continued to explain that prior to Windows 8 and Metro, the two aforementioned groups had to share the same space. 

"It was like a rented tuxedo coat - something that somewhat fit a wide variety of people. It wasn't tailored, because any aggressive tailoring would make it fit one person great, but would have others pulling at the buttons. Whatever feature we wanted to add into Windows, it had to be something that was simple enough for casual users to not get confused with, but also not dumbed down enough to be useless to power users. Many, MANY features got cut because of this." - Miller

Miller continued on to cite multiple desktops as something that was cut as a result of this. As he explained, multiple desktops has been a feature that power users have been requesting for over a decade, and it is a feature that is available in GNU/Linux, OSX, and "even OS/2 Warp has it. But Windows doesn't." It was revealed that Microsoft has tried to implement it multiple times, however it is always received poorly in user testing and confuses the casual users, who are explained to be a large part of the demographic of Windows-- much larger than those of GNU/Linux and OSX... and rightfully so. The Windows market share trumps consumer operating system share by leaps and bounds, so it is understandable why the confusion of the casual users would cause concern for the designers at Microsoft.

"Our hands were bound, and our users were annoyed with their rented jackets. So what did we do? We separated the users into two groups. Casual and Power. We made two separate playgrounds for them. All the casual users would have their own new and shiny place to look at pictures of cats - Metro. The power users would then have free reign over their native domain - the desktop." - Miller

Miller went on to comment on why Metro was made default, and there was no boot to desktop option included in Windows 8. He explained that casual users "don't go exploring," and that if they made the desktop the default-- as it's always been-- the casual users would never have migrated to "their land of milk and honey"-- the casual-friendly Metro interface. He explained that they would have occupied the Desktop as they always did, and that Microsoft would have been right back where they started. This was softened in 8.1 when they gave power users the option to boot directly to the desktop.

Now that casual users are aware of the Metro interface, or their "land of milk and honey" as Miller calls it, the Microsoft team can start "tailoring" the interface (in reference to his tuxedo jacket metaphor above). It was explained that there will be some time before the focus turns to power users, however once the focus returns that Microsoft would be able to implement the power user features that it wasn't able to before. Using Miller's own example: one feature we are able to predict for the next major iteration of Windows will be multiple desktops.

The user 'mindbleach' asked questions behind the reasoning for including the Metro interface-- which we've learned was intended for casual users-- in Server 2012, however Miller commented that he wasn't involved in its development and assumed it was to avoid code fragmentation. This comment however did solidify a concept that is often mentioned: that Microsoft iterations operate on a tick/tock cycle: 

"Windows 7 couldn't have existed without the lessons we learned from the mess that was vista. Xp couldn't have existed without 2000. Hopefully Windows 9 will be a solid refinement on all this" - Miller

Before you load your weapons however: Miller pointed out that the "tick" cycles, that is Windows 2000, Vista, and Windows 8, are not betas or test beds for the next iteration, and that they just have more issues than the "tock" cycles. Which is understandable: the "tick" iterations have always introduced significantly new features in Windows, and these new features usually affect things such as driver compatibility, system requirements, or general accessibility. Vista, for example, introduced draconian-like UAC control which really annoyed some users. Regardless of how UAC was initially received, it was leaps and bounds ahead of Windows XP's security offering. Eventually toned down in Windows 7 (well, by Vista Service Pack 1, but Windows 7 did improve it further), it was a necessary evil to endure.

But why should power users be forced to use a touch interface? Unfortunately the answer is not so simple. It was explained that the interface was designed for keyboard use as well. The Metro UI was designed for keyboard navigation, and Miller believes it provides much more capabilities for keyboards than the old Start Menu did.

All in all, Miller's comments make sense. Computers have consumed the world we live in much more than we could have ever anticipated 20 years ago. We didn't realize the penetration that computers would have into our lives-- professional and personal. Having two UI's for different tasks, in my opinion, is a welcomed addition. I often crave the power functions I have in GNU/Linux when I need them, but I welcome a simplified OS for when I get home from work and just want to watch a movie, or play a game with my little brothers and sisters.

However you look at Windows 8, it seems that Windows 9 will be a welcomed improvement. A refined Metro UI for the casual users, a more powerful desktop environment for the power users, and the end of confusion from either side.

"Familiarity will always trump good design. Even if something is vastly better, if it is unfamiliar it will be worse. That's why people act like a unicorn was murdered every time facebook releases a new redesign. The windows 7 start menu IS better because it is familiar. We've used that design paradigm for the last 20 years. Metro is going to take some getting used to. As I mentioned, this is a long term strategy for MS. We knew full well casual users wouldn't like it initially. Hopefully in 5 years we'll look back and see we made the right decision." - Miller

The full reddit thread with all of Miller's comments is available here, and the bulk of this article covered the things discussed from this comment thread.

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Huawei mocks Apple and Samsung in their latest teaser

Next Story

Xbox One update introduces "black screen" issue

322 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

Creating a hybrid OS was stupid from the beginning. Windows 8 fans may continue to live in denial. Heck, Microsoft could re-release Windows 3.1, call it Windows 9, and the fanboys would be telling the rest of us to adapt and move on.

Spin it any way you want. Windows 8 is garbage.

Edited by COKid, Feb 23 2014, 6:15am :

Yup, it's MS. They're not allowed to do anything new or different.

The tech press slaughtered Win8 (and the Surface tablets for that matter), and it got hold, spreading out to the regular guy. Now everybody's opinion is that Win8 is the next Vista.
It's not, and for a lot of non/less techy users a very nice change.

Don't like? Don't use.. ;-)

P.S. The desktop is still there.... but hush.... don't tell...

I have never understood some of the more rabid criticism of Win8/Metro. If you don't like the Metro interface, then you don't have to use it! Just use the familiar desktop, it's not hard.

I personally find Win 8 a joy to use, if I want to casually consume media, I used Metro as it's just far quicker and easier to flick through a couple of tiles. But I use the desktop environment for any development work etc. I really struggle to see why people moan about the interface when you have the choice to pick whichever one you want to use, it's amost as if people hate on it just for the sake of it.

The mistake MS made with W8 is that there are more than 2 classes of user of windows. The user I suppport is the office person who wants to use word excel etc and don!'t want apps and that sort of rubbish. I suspectthat they are a very large number of people who ms completely ignored with W8. Office 10 assumes that anything from a network is suspect while people in an an office environment use a network by default. Get real MS.

macanucaire said,
Office 10 assumes that anything from a network is suspect while people in an an office environment use a network by default. Get real MS.

well..... not sure what office you work in, but normally they -do- have some kind of network by default, wired or wireless. It would be quite hard to work together otherwise, wouldn't it??

Maybe some of you complaining about a loss of productivity should get back to work instead of spending time on a message board whining about how an OS is keeping you from being productice.

The mistake of win8 is that m$ is stuffing the touch interface down the desktop throat.
take Skype for example, if I am working on the desktop, why the heck do I need to switch to metro just to chat?!! and the thing takes the entire screen... talk about screen flow. rookie mistake. really..

What's stopping you from installing the desktop version of Skype. If that's better for your workflow, then remove the Metro version and install the desktop.

You're not forced to use anything on the Metro side. At least now we have a choice of UI and program style. It's a nice improvement over having the ancient desktop design and arcane textmaze Start Menu stuffed down our throats as the only option.

I was never much of a desktop icon/shortcut person. But I've totally embraced the start screen as my "desktop of shortcuts" and it works rather well. I love how I can group them together as I please and name the groups. As a power user, it works for me...

I could have sworn that:
Windows 2000 = NT 5.
Windows XP = NT 5.1

Wouldn't that make Windows 2K the Tock and not the Tick?

aotay81 said,
I could have sworn that:
Windows 2000 = NT 5.
Windows XP = NT 5.1

Wouldn't that make Windows 2K the Tock and not the Tick?

No. Win2k would be the Tick, because tick comes before tock. At least in my country.

Well written, they need him in PR. MS could have used these explanations for people, though of course MS could have helped themselves by trying to help people understand the new interface which I think was done terribly.
I run into it all the time at work where everyday people struggle with the Windows 7 desktop. I'm not sure they'd do better with Metro, but I hazard a guess that due to smartphone usage, they'd catch on faster.

Absolutely agree with what he said! And you can even see how they made the desktop more powerful in Windows 8 (new Task Manager, Ribbon UI, and more).

The desktop should be the mightiest "app" in Windows. But only if you need and want it. The core UI should be simple and focused on content. Because even power users sometimes just want to relax and enjoy content.

So the Content Creators make an interface for the Content Consumers, then wonder why the Consumers don't like it. I can't find any Content Consumers or Content Creators who like Win 8's interface. Why doesn't MS realize it's too great a sea change for people? They did that when they redesigned Office Suite and put in new menus. What little skill people had developed in using those programs had to be re-learned.

Not the best of examples. While not much if anything has changed in the Office Ribbon you don't hear complaints now, especially when the same has spread to so many parts of the core OS experience. I remember how vitriolic the anti-Ribbon complaints were and even had a hard time myself at first, and this is a similar situation. As Microsoft refines Metro and its interaction with the desktop over time I similarly expect the complaints to die down as we all figure out what works best for each of us and how we each want to use the OS in different ways.

hardtohandle said,
So the Content Creators make an interface for the Content Consumers, then wonder why the Consumers don't like it. I can't find any Content Consumers or Content Creators who like Win 8's interface. Why doesn't MS realize it's too great a sea change for people? They did that when they redesigned Office Suite and put in new menus. What little skill people had developed in using those programs had to be re-learned.

Mainly because Modern UI IS HALFBAKED, in the concept that i can't do all task only in Modern UI (and i am not talking to use legacy software).

Perhaps in your neck of the woods some are, but I've never seen even a single person to date who's switched. On the contrary although I was uncertain how people would feel about subscription-based Office looks like it's taken off with a bang and thus Office has more users than ever before.

hardtohandle said,
So the Content Creators make an interface for the Content Consumers, then wonder why the Consumers don't like it. I can't find any Content Consumers or Content Creators who like Win 8's interface. Why doesn't MS realize it's too great a sea change for people? They did that when they redesigned Office Suite and put in new menus. What little skill people had developed in using those programs had to be re-learned.

If people still have issues with Office years after the ribbon UI, it's time to start looking for new employees. Or personally, time to move on.

In the computer/software industry things change very rapidly, and if you don't adapt you're left behind. If that takes you way out of your comfort zone, so be it.

I still see people picking up a new iPhone or android tablet and not nag about the unfamiliar UI.
But when it's Office or Win8/MUI it's suddenly hell to pay for MS?

Stuff changes, get over it.
Get someone to help you out, take a course, read a book about it.
Some self effort in these things are quite helpful. Nagging... not so much....

Brony said,

Mainly because Modern UI IS HALFBAKED, in the concept that i can't do all task only in Modern UI (and i am not talking to use legacy software).

I don't understand this comparison. Yes, Metro has apps, but did you previously edit Word documents in the Start menu?

Dutchie64 said,

If people still have issues with Office years after the ribbon UI, it's time to start looking for new employees. Or personally, time to move on.

In the computer/software industry things change very rapidly, and if you don't adapt you're left behind. If that takes you way out of your comfort zone, so be it.

I still see people picking up a new iPhone or android tablet and not nag about the unfamiliar UI.
But when it's Office or Win8/MUI it's suddenly hell to pay for MS?

Stuff changes, get over it.
Get someone to help you out, take a course, read a book about it.
Some self effort in these things are quite helpful. Nagging... not so much....

^ This. Stuff changes. Move with it or be left behind. Simple.

the product guys maybe forgot they were there to sell to the maximum number of people as possible. They didnt do that. Whether anyone likes 8 or not, it didnt sell well.
Period.
Microsoft is there to make money. Anyone who works there and forgot that needs to go.

sorval said,
the product guys maybe forgot they were there to sell to the maximum number of people as possible. They didnt do that. Whether anyone likes 8 or not, it didnt sell well.
Period.
Microsoft is there to make money. Anyone who works there and forgot that needs to go.

Wrong, Windows 8 has sold 200 million retail copies in its first 15 months, or about 4 million a week.

Vista did not sell well, Windows 7 sold abnormally well. Windows 8 sold well.

I have an Idea why doesn't Microsoft give Power users and Content consumption users a CHOICE.. for phones and tablets call it WINDOWS TOUCH instead of metro for touch eccentric devices, and for power users in the Desktop just windows 8 what's so hard? instead of this merging philosophy that clearly user have an issue, Merging two OS in to one is not in itself a CHOICE. but more like a Compromise.

pquin7 said,
I have an Idea why doesn't Microsoft give Power users and Content consumption users a CHOICE.. for phones and tablets call it WINDOWS TOUCH instead of metro for touch eccentric devices, and for power users in the Desktop just windows 8 what's so hard? instead of this merging philosophy that clearly user have an issue, Merging two OS in to one is not in itself a CHOICE. but more like a Compromise.

There is choice! I have the choice top click into the desktop and work, while I also have the choice to open a Metro application. See? The choice is there.

pquin7 said,
I have an Idea why doesn't Microsoft give Power users and Content consumption users a CHOICE.. for phones and tablets call it WINDOWS TOUCH instead of metro for touch eccentric devices, and for power users in the Desktop just windows 8 what's so hard? instead of this merging philosophy that clearly user have an issue, Merging two OS in to one is not in itself a CHOICE. but more like a Compromise.

What makes you think people are either power users or consumption users? I can be a power user one minute, and then switch to Facebook for a break. Why should I have to be limited to using one interface or the other?

We have a choice now. We can use one side or the other, or both as our needs change over the course of the day.

How is limiting people to just one or the other improving on that choice? That is removing choice - your way we can choose once when we install the OS or buy the machine. As things are now, we can make the choice as many times as we want, based on our needs at that particular time.

That's real choice, not pick one or the other, and you're stuck with it!

DConnell said,

What makes you think people are either power users or consumption users? I can be a power user one minute, and then switch to Facebook for a break. Why should I have to be limited to using one interface or the other?

We have a choice now. We can use one side or the other, or both as our needs change over the course of the day.

How is limiting people to just one or the other improving on that choice? That is removing choice - your way we can choose once when we install the OS or buy the machine. As things are now, we can make the choice as many times as we want, based on our needs at that particular time.

That's real choice, not pick one or the other, and you're stuck with it!

^ This

The problem in this situation is, people no longer us a desktop for "media consumption", They use their smartphone or tablet. Granted, there are many people who still only own a desktop, you know...the old people who have no choice but to use it. But overall, the desktop is no longer the media consumption device, not even the laptop.

Even though I could watch Netflix on my laptop, I actually prefer laying in bed with my smartphone. When I am done I can slide it under my pillow. Laptops are big an bulky in bed. They overheat if you set them down on the cover. They get heavy no matter how much they weight. Even the Mac Air is heavy when you hold it for a long time.

What this guy and Microsoft simply misunderstood, is that when they wanted to make Windows the same no matter the size of the device, the should have considered a switchable UI that on desktops/laptops you ask for it, while on smartphone and tablets its the default.

Microsoft, this wasn't a total bad idea. You just got confused. But I see what you are trying to do. Microsoft is trying to keep Windows a focal point in our minds. Why? Because before we had fancier phones, before we had tablets, the Windows PC was the main entertainment device for the home with its only competition was the stereo and the Tv. That has changed. Windows now has new competition from smartphones and tablet that for many people can replace a Windows desktop.

The other thing they are doing is, trying to make sure that even though you may have a tablet or smartphone, that you wont forget about your PC. After all, If you give all 3 the same UI, in your mind you may not think of the differences right away.

Hi_XPecTa_Chens said,

Even though I could watch Netflix on my laptop, I actually prefer laying in bed with my smartphone.

The future is about watching movies on a phone rather than on TV/laptop? Yeah right...

I somewhat agree. Keep in mind the direction for Windows 8 was largely set back in 2009-10, so the migration away from PCs for consumption and entertainment hadn't really happened yet.

To summarize what the dude said:

- Metro is a content consumption space - it does only one thing but is very simple to use
- The Desktop is a content creation space, with superior flexibility, multi-monitor support etc.
- By trying to be both at the same time, the Desktop was a poor compromise for both of these scenarios (too hard for casual users, too limited for power users).
- By providing casual users with a more user-friendly interface, Metro leaves the Desktop free to evolve to better meet the needs of content creators and power users.
- Microsoft has some catching up to do in the Metro space, but once it's "purring along", the desktop should see more improvements as well. The only reason Windows 8 defaults to Metro is to force casual users into it, otherwise they wouldn't even notice it exists.

I guess this puts the nail in the coffin of the "Desktop is deprecated" theory. It's still the prime content creation space, and Metro is part of a strategy to evolve the Desktop in new directions.

Andre S. said,
I guess this puts the nail in the coffin of the "Desktop is deprecated" theory. It's still the prime content creation space, and Metro is part of a strategy to evolve the Desktop in new directions.

I think the people (person) advocating that "theory" was simply clueless / out-of-touch from the beginning. The fact they live in the Metro environment is proof enough they have no experience in the creation field. More amusing still is how the pro-Metro crowd seem to be cheering this article on without understanding the implications the designer's statements have.

I suppose the true reason behind the clash over 8 is not because of 8 itself, but rather the stratification of what was previously a homogenous user base into power users, and those that liked to think they were power users.

How come Microsoft cannot see it? Isn't it obvious? The problem of all things computing for Microsoft is Metro. I think that's the bottom line.

Think about it. Metro is the most controversial component on Windows 8, thus labeling the OS a total disaster in terms of sales. Same can be said in regards to Surface Tablets and Windows Phones. What is the least common denominator of all those? Metro.

As a happy medium, I've axed my Windows desktop and laptop as my primary computers at home and switched to OS X a little while ago. However, I run Windows 8 as a VM and thanks to Unity I can run my Windows software (most notably Office 2013) as if it were native.

The major plus point is that I get instant access to my applications and never have to see that ghastly UI.

Steve121178 said,

The major plus point is that I get instant access to my applications and never have to see that ghastly UI.

I have Windows 8.1 unmodified and I never have to see that ghastly UI either.

I have every tile unpinned except for the Desktop for the rare occasions that I accidently find myself on the Start Screen.

Lord Method Man said,

I have Windows 8.1 unmodified and I never have to see that ghastly UI either.

I have every tile unpinned except for the Desktop for the rare occasions that I accidently find myself on the Start Screen.

LOL! That is the same way I ran Windows 8 until I switched back to Windows 7.

Man, you have some nerves to be disrespecting Windows 8/Metro. It seemed like you were being targeted by fanboys left and right. Way to go in standing up for what you believe despite the prevailing bigotry.

On a side note, I actually stumble upon a sexy little Windows 8 tablet: the Dell Venue 8 Pro, and fell in love immediately! Windows 8 is pretty decent on a tablet after I installed Start8. I was going to get the Surface Pro, but it was too big and heavy for my liking. After a two weeks with this little thing, I don't think I can ever go back to an iPad or an Android device - it can do so much more and for much cheaper.

I think Microsoft may be on to something. They just need to make some adjustments and, if they do it correctly, I can foresee them not only maintaining their current user base, but also winning out in the tablet market.

Touch is fantastic for smartphones/tablets/laptops or any mobile device. You don't have to carry along anything other than the device itself and it's positioned where the aspect of touch is not a chore.

On the other hand...
Touch on the desktop can become quite bothersome since you sit upright sitting a good 1 or 2 feet away from the monitor. You essentially have to lean over to 'touch' the screen. This is why the mouse and keyboard are the preferred choice for desktop solutions.

There is an option to maintain touch for desktop and still have it practical. It's called Leap Frog. It's the only viable solution for touch on a desktop since you don't have to lean over but simply make hand gestures in the air to perform the same task as physical touch without having to lean over to the monitor.

Then again... raising your hand in the air performing gestures or even touching the screen itself on a desktop is still more physically work than the slight movements of your wrist using a mouse or keyboard.

All in all, the entire touch aspect is still just bells and whistles on a desktop which should always be looked at as an option.

I don't like the way he oppose content user & power user. A well designed interface should handle both, and with the most advanced features/customizations enough hidden, so that the casual user don't reach them accidentally.

TrickyDickie said,
What attitude?
The Start Screen is the new Start Menu. What part of this don't you understand...? lol

Except that it isn't just a menu is it. It's a completely different paradigm for applications. One that's primarily designed for touch and mobile devices, completely eschewing traditional mouse and keyboard users.

And if that wasn't bad enough, the user has to flip-flop between the Metro UI and desktop just to run desktop apps. It's a schizophrenic design that's never going to work. Either replace the desktop entirely, or unite the two. Thankfully, it looks like Microsoft has finally caught on to the latter. Switching back and forth is annoying as hell and quite a jarring experience.

But you had to go to the start menu to launch applications in previous versions. This is really no different. A screen instead of a menu...lol

simplezz said,

Except that it isn't just a menu is it. It's a completely different paradigm for applications. One that's primarily designed for touch and mobile devices, completely eschewing traditional mouse and keyboard users.

That's not true in the slightest.

simplezz said,

Except that it isn't just a menu is it. It's a completely different paradigm for applications. One that's primarily designed for touch and mobile devices, completely eschewing traditional mouse and keyboard users.

And if that wasn't bad enough, the user has to flip-flop between the Metro UI and desktop just to run desktop apps. It's a schizophrenic design that's never going to work. Either replace the desktop entirely, or unite the two. Thankfully, it looks like Microsoft has finally caught on to the latter. Switching back and forth is annoying as hell and quite a jarring experience.

I still don't see how Modern excludes mouse/keyboard users. I used it for over a year with just mouse/keyboard with no problem whatsoever. The mouse interaction is very well thought-out IMO. It's just that it's not designed exclusively for the mouse like earlier versions of Windows. How is adding additional interaction support excluding anyone?

And switching to the screen is no more "jarring" than bringing up the menu was. Yes, you briefly see the program selection rather than the program you were working on, but isn't that what your focus is on anyway? With both designs, you find the program, click to launch it, and in both cases the launcher goes away. For me at least that process is much faster with the Screen, so I'd say it takes me out of my workflow a lot less than the Menu did.

I am surprised that people still don't get that the Start Screen is a replacement for the Start Menu. That's it. No Start menu, but the Start Screen.

When you used the start menu, was it there while you used programs?
The start screen just the same thing, except you don't get the menu.
You DON'T use it to do work - that argument is crap. It's an app[lication] launcher, just like the Start Menu was - you launch applications the same way: click or hit Windows key for the Start Menu, browse and select an application to launch vs. click or hit Windows key for the Start Screen, click (or tap) a live tile to launch an application. In either case, the Start Menu / Screen and the Desktop get covered by the a program you launched.

And I know, I know, sometimes you have to scroll across to get to the app v/ application you want. Boo bloody hoo. I remember (pre Windows 7, when I just used the search feature) having to go into sub menus to find an application.

Perhaps I'm missing something, but there isn't a lot of difference. Seems a rather moot point to me.

And before you start moaning about the tiles again, you can pin Desktop applications to the Start Screen as well. And group them. And I know first hand that it works very well.

I'll give that the Store apps are a new thing on the desktop, including the new 'immersive' work-flow, but these in themselves are good for what they do. If you don't like it, use a Desktop application instead.
All the arguments about the big apps such as Photoshop etc. are also pretty moot too: If they ever do Modern versions of them fine, but if not, pin the bloody desktop version to Start and use that.

As for all this "It's for touch screens" rubbish, I have used it from the start and get on perfectly well with mouse & keyboard. That's consuming media, browsing, managing files, using Visual Studio etc. - the list goes on. And because the UI has touch in mind doesn't mean that you can't use the mouse and keyboard. What a ridiculous argument!

This is the new Windows, moaners. Get used to it or get left behind. Just stop bloody mowing about it.

Lord Method Man said,
This attitude is what caused the Windows 8 catastrophe to begin with, and why it is continuing to be a complete blunder for Microsoft.

No, not really. He makes a completely sound argument and one has to question the cognitive abilities of people who just bitch and moan about Windows 8. An OS that has a desktop environment equal to or better than Windows 7 and the irrational negative attitude towards the Modern UI which is completely optional. The Start Menu is dead. So what?

TrickyDickie said,

This is the new Windows, moaners. Get used to it or get left behind. Just stop bloody mowing about it.

The new Windows sucks hard. And don't worry, we'll stay behind for as long as we can. And in light of Windows 8 success /s, trust me, it's going to be a long time. If at Microsoft they're thinking Windows XP is having a long life, they're going to be having lots of fun when they try to get rid of Windows 7.

ParadiseLost said,

The new Windows sucks hard. And don't worry, we'll stay behind for as long as we can. And in light of Windows 8 success /s, trust me, it's going to be a long time. If at Microsoft they're thinking Windows XP is having a long life, they're going to be having lots of fun when they try to get rid of Windows 7.

I think MS must be seriously reconsidering their upgrade model. Both in light of the XP nonsense with an immense amount of machines that are not being upgraded to anything and with the fact that this isn't the 90s. Now OS is basically free or very cheap and people expected to upgrade more frequently.

Whatever major version of Windows comes after Windows 8, I suspect it will be cheap, if not free.

Did anyone actually verify his identity? I've become more and more skeptical of claims made on reddit due to the growing amount of BS from people who try to falsely pass themselves off as members of the armed forces or positions of prominence.

Wapoz said,
Did anyone actually verify his identity? I've become more and more skeptical of claims made on reddit due to the growing amount of BS from people who try to falsely pass themselves off as members of the armed forces or positions of prominence.

Looks like here is growing doubt in this case. From Brandon Live up above, and Ed Bott on Twitter.

What an astonishing lack of foresight.


Windows 8 was designed for the latter group: the content consumers. This is also where Metro stems from: it is a platform that is "simple, clear, and does one thing (and only one thing) relatively easily." Miller described Metro as the antithesis of a power user.

However, all was not doomed. Miller continued to explain that prior to Windows 8 and Metro, the two aforementioned groups had to share the same space.


So basically, the desktop was too flexible because it allowed both groups to do what they wanted to do, so they decided to dumb it down. Sounds about right.


Miller continued on to cite multiple desktops as something that was cut as a result of this. As he explained, multiple desktops has been a feature that power users have been requesting for over a decade, and it is a feature that is available in GNU/Linux, OSX, and "even OS/2 Warp has it. But Windows doesn't." It was revealed that Microsoft has tried to implement it multiple times, however it is always received poorly in user testing and confuses the casual users, who are explained to be a large part of the demographic of Windows.

And this is why I don't use Windows on a daily basis. Instead of including a feature and letting the users decide how they want to use it, they just leave it out completely. The same applies to tabbed filemanagers. I prefer to decide what I do or don't want thanks.

An interesting point here. Android has multiple workspaces, yet it doesn't confuse users.

This just confirms the mentality of Windows design decisions that I've known all along.

I'm one of the "pointing device users". I quickly adapted to using keyboard and mouse with Metro, and I consider anyone who finds it difficult to be simply inept. It's not difficult at all. The biggest problem I had with Windows 8--and they are not showstoppers for me--was that the two halves still aren't universally "aware" of each other. As many of the bits from the desktop (e.g., control panel, etc.) that finally made their way over to Metro, you still were largely talking to two different machines. There are even cases where certain apps go to sleep if you switch between the two. Fail. The other issue was that the Metro side was not nearly enough like Windows Phone, which is a much more mature implementation of Metro. Such things as multi-sharing (social broadcasting) were missing. Now, of course, we find that Microsoft stupidly is making Windows Phone more like Win RT instead of the other way around. I'm so disgusted with what they are doing WRONG with Windows Phone 8.1 that I've stopped recommending it to my friends...and I have been what most would call a fanboy. Similarly, the way Microsoft is puking the desktop all over Metro on Windows 8.1 Update 1, I've begun to lose interest in Windows 8, too. I don't want desktop memes brought to Metro. I don't need the stupid "x" on apps. I don't need the context menus from the desktop, especially how horrible they LOOK. I don't need the old Task Bar at all on the desktop, either. I need the Metro side to be 100% aware of what's happening EVERYWHERE in the OS. The desktop should now run as a VIRTUAL desktop. In fact, Live Tiles should grow up and BECOME virtual desktops, with interactivity that negates the need for most legacy programs to actually run on a full desktop. Microsoft has already added a larger tile size, so this direction makes sense. But, nope, that's not where they are going. They are largely going backwards.

The problem of having to react to a small, but very vocal group.

Like the Xbox users with Xbox One. A small group of power gamers basically spoling all the new stuff for the rest of the group.....

On a touch device windows 8 makes sense to me and to the people that I service, however on a desktop without touch most average Joe's want their old interface back or have been asking for Win 7 back.

DoctorD said,
On a touch device windows 8 makes sense to me and to the people that I service, however on a desktop without touch most average Joe's want their old interface back or have been asking for Win 7 back.
Demonstrable nonsense, since the desktop is 100% a part of Windows 8. The Modern UI works great with a mouse and keyboard and really doesn't even enter into the user experience unless one actively calls it forth. The Start Screen is incredibly useful and far better than the UI atrocity that was the Start Menu. Every element of Windows 8 is better than Windows 7.

Atlantico said,
Demonstrable nonsense, since the desktop is 100% a part of Windows 8. The Modern UI works great with a mouse and keyboard and really doesn't even enter into the user experience unless one actively calls it forth. The Start Screen is incredibly useful and far better than the UI atrocity that was the Start Menu. Every element of Windows 8 is better than Windows 7.

Oh yes and that's why windows 8.x was such a roaring success.

/s

Order_66 said,

Oh yes and that's why windows 8.x was such a roaring success.

/s

Oh Windows 8.x has been a success, with over 200 million sold, approaching 250 million. I'm sure the superior desktop experience of Windows 8.x has helped a lot there.

Atlantico said,

Oh Windows 8.x has been a success, with over 200 million sold, approaching 250 million. I'm sure the superior desktop experience of Windows 8.x has helped a lot there.

200 million sold is nothing more than the straw-grabbings of a humiliated fanboy.

This is bad comedy.

I don't like it, never did and still don't.
The more MS pushes it down my throat the more I look at my options other than Windows.

If I didn't like it on the phone, why would I like it on ANYTHING else. I wouldn't, and I don't.

I know there are those that do, and good for them, but I'm not one of them. This has gotten me to using Linux more. If I wanted a company to strong-arm me I would have gone with Apple in the beginning. I went with Windows for customization ability, and price. They've taken some of the customization away with this metro monstrosity and looking at some of their device pricing they're working at getting those Apple prices.

He can defend his work all he wants, I would, but nothing I've seen has changed my opinion about metro. If I want a tablet os, or phone os, I would have it on those devices. A desktop environment is different. This whole one ui/kernal to rule them all is stupid. At least Apple has had the sense to come out and say they will NOT be merging osx and ios!

If you ran a huge company, and had three major product lines, PC OS, Gaming, and Phone, would you take the look and feel of the worst selling of these three and push it onto all of your other products?!

Has pushing this new UI on desktop helped phone sales in the any? I don't so.

margrave said,
They've taken some of the customization away with this metro monstrosity

Yeah...right. Shows your knowledge level is over 9000!

margrave said,
This is bad comedy.

I don't like it, never did and still don't.
The more MS pushes it down my throat the more I look at my options other than Windows.

If I didn't like it on the phone, why would I like it on ANYTHING else. I wouldn't, and I don't.

I know there are those that do, and good for them, but I'm not one of them. This has gotten me to using Linux more. If I wanted a company to strong-arm me I would have gone with Apple in the beginning. I went with Windows for customization ability, and price. They've taken some of the customization away with this metro monstrosity and looking at some of their device pricing they're working at getting those Apple prices.

He can defend his work all he wants, I would, but nothing I've seen has changed my opinion about metro. If I want a tablet os, or phone os, I would have it on those devices. A desktop environment is different. This whole one ui/kernal to rule them all is stupid. At least Apple has had the sense to come out and say they will NOT be merging osx and ios!

If you ran a huge company, and had three major product lines, PC OS, Gaming, and Phone, would you take the look and feel of the worst selling of these three and push it onto all of your other products?!

Has pushing this new UI on desktop helped phone sales in the any? I don't so.

They can strong arm you into using Explorer for the past 10 years, but suddenly, adding another factor into the mix is a bad thing?

The desktop isn't going to be around forever. It's not "strong arm tactics", it's evolution.

On a side note, honestly I think Windows 8 would be doing better if the hardware on the market were better. The desktop works great with traditional keyboard and mouse, however the start screen doesn't. Yes I have used it and its a lot more jumping around with the mouse. To me touch screen laptop screens are just weird, as Steve Jobs said, pointing horizontal at a screen is not ideal. So that said, Microsoft if they want this to really take off needs to look at touch interface hardware like the Apple Magic Pad or touch based mice. I've been using OS X as my main os now for a little over a year and Apple has touch gestures down, something that isn't always perfect in Windows 8. Swiping between fullscreen apps or spaces is a great example, something Microsoft could have played around with

Well for one, I knew of it a while ago, but completely forgot they were making it. Its not like Microsoft is really marketing it or other oems like logitech really marketing these kind of mice. The Microsoft Touch mouse I would assume would be great for Windows 8

split Windows into Windows Touch Me (all ye touchy feely devices) and Windows Power (VMs, power shell, liquid nitrogen cooled monstrosities)....

mocax said,
split Windows into Windows Touch Me

Yes but people would mistake it for that other confirmed microsoft failure windows Me.

Romero said,
No thanks. If completely separate desktop and mobile OSes is what you're looking for there's always Apple.

Yeah, and I don't see Apple customers posting everywhere about how much they hate that experience...

It's all because of you, I'm feeling sad and blue
You went away and now my life is filled with rainy days
And I love you so, how much you'll never know
Cause you took your love away from me

cry: cry: .R.I.P sweet start menu.

then I found this other hotter chick. start menu who???

Edited by vcfan, Feb 18 2014, 1:50pm :

vcfan said,
It's all because of you, I'm feeling sad and blue
You went away and now my life is filled with rainy days
And I love you so, how much you'll never know
Cause you took your love away from me

cry: cry: .R.I.P sweet start menu.

then I found this other hotter chick. start menu who???

I Guess That's Why They Call It The Blues by Elton John comes to mind when I see the Start Screen. ;-)

Hmm I'm the one all my friends\family - and their friends and family look to for IT support and honestly the casual's seem to hate it more than the power users I work with, they've already learned to use it one way and now instead of a gradual change (like the start menu from 95-7 ) it took a major change and most don't want to deal with it. (which is making it hard to pull them from XP, 7 is a lot easier sale them on due to it not being such a big change).

They even cut function and dumb down the chinese input method in win8 (compare to win7 and vista), which many casual user need them. Oh great!

Though I think this is planning after the fact, lol. I'll accept it, now start putting missing functionality back in and let's forget this whole fiasco.

MorganX said,
Though I think this is planning after the fact, lol. I'll accept it, now start putting missing functionality back in and let's forget this whole fiasco.
Agree. This fiasco can be fixed.

Most self named 'power users' I've met were just slightly less clueless than most.
And I've seen a lot of those during my administrator jobs.

Almost all of them have no clue how to use e.g. Windows Explorer, or where they find their files outside the application used. But they're "power users'as they know how to use application "X' so well.

Win8 is a step forward, like Win95 was in the day. Especially with all the tablets out there Windows needed a new UI to deal with that. We all agree that MUI is great on a tablet.

Win8 is a mix, and with all the additions in 8.1 it's great for both MUI and desktop.
Eveybody who is still complaining, just is too stubborn to adjust to smll changes, or complaining because it's all they like to do.

Hey, stick with Win7 if you like that so much, but don't spread FUD.

Dutchie64 said,
Eveybody who is still complaining, just is too stubborn to adjust to smll changes, or complaining because it's all they like to do.

Hey, stick with Win7 if you like that so much, but don't spread FUD.

Or how about millions complaining because they genuinely just don't like Windows 8? Also the "Fud" has been laid on pretty thick already. Windows 8 ranks up there with Vista on the consumer satisfaction survey.

JHBrown said,
Or how about millions complaining because they genuinely just don't like Windows 8? Also the "Fud" has been laid on pretty thick already. Windows 8 ranks up there with Vista on the consumer satisfaction survey.

Oh there's plenty of FUD, spread by all kinds of self-important douchbags. But Microsoft still tops Apple in consumer satisfaction.

http://microsoft-news.com/micr...ustomer-satisfaction-study/

That's with Windows 8.

All this talk about not wanting a touch interface and being force to use tile is ridiculous. I wonder what would have happened if MS didn't include the Desktop App. MS had given us both options and we can't just be happy with it. Power users can still use the desktop and casual users can use the Modern UI. I don't see the problem. Everyone I know don't that's tried Windows doesn't have these issues discussed here. They always have questions. But most of them are happy overall. This is why Surface exist with a keyboard. Clearly Microsoft understand that we still need the keyboard. I don't see people hating on Apple for not providing a Keyboard with the iPad. People need get to just get over it and realize you have an advantage using Windows unlike other platforms.

Ricardo Alouidor said,
I don't see people hating on Apple for not providing a Keyboard with the iPad.
The iPad is a not a productivity device. It's a device that I use while on the toilet. Sure, you can play with some files and jot down a few notes, but it is not a Surface Pro. It's a toy that my daughter throws around, takes silly pictures with, and watches her movies on.

That's exactly the kind of naive thinking Blackberry had before they got obliterated by Apple and up until recently the same mentality can be applied to Balmer / Microsoft and look were they're at. iPhone revenue is more than the entire company of Microsoft. To top it off Apple has been hard at work adding more Enterprise features to iOS 7.1 and I'm sure they won't stop there.

Enron said,
Power users don't point and click on stuff. Power users use keyboard shortcuts.

Power users issue assembly commands to open start menu.

Raa said,
Don't confuse server admins and desktop admins

Don't assume server/desktop admins as being power users.
I've seen some that didn;'t deserve both titles.... ;-P

Enron said,
Power users don't point and click on stuff. Power users use keyboard shortcuts.

Speak for yourself...
I consider myself a power user, but unless I'm writing an essay, I use both mouse and kb. Sometimes even just mouse when I don't feel like moving my fingers too much or have left hand occupied with something like fapping.

BajiRav said,
Power users issue assembly commands to open start menu.
Pfft. Real power users issue assembly commands to create a start menu where there is none and then open it.

duoi said,
...I did. Again: its at the bottom of the article.

What I mean is, you provided five of his quotes in your text, but cut the one in the heading out.

duoi said,
Oh, right. I misunderstood you, sorry. I'll make sure to directly cite it next time.

No problemo!

Thanks for the article! It's a great quote by the way; it's concise and precisely up to the point! It describes exactly how I feel Thanks again for digging it out!

After reading this article one more time, it seems the guys at Redmond are confused on which direction they want to take and how to properly implement it. There seems to be a lot of jumping around and back pedaling.

JHBrown said,
After reading this article one more time, it seems the guys at Redmond are confused on which direction they want to take and how to properly implement it. There seems to be a lot of jumping around and back pedaling.

How is adding features to Metro backpedaling?

Dot Matrix said,

How is adding features to Metro backpedaling?


Weren't you complaining last week about 8.1u1 and Microsoft's "backpedalling and lack of direction"...

Raa said,

Weren't you complaining last week about 8.1u1 and Microsoft's "backpedalling and lack of direction"...
Beat me to it Raa!

Raa said,

Weren't you complaining last week about 8.1u1 and Microsoft's "backpedalling and lack of direction"...

Do you even understand the meaning of the word? Where is MSFT removing Metro from the OS? Lack of direction and backpedaling are two different things.

Dot Matrix said,

Do you even understand the meaning of the word? Where is MSFT removing Metro from the OS? Lack of direction and backpedaling are two different things.


Hey, i'm just requoting mate. Don't shoot the messenger.

Raa said,

Hey, i'm just requoting mate. Don't shoot the messenger.

Update 1 is many things, some good, mostly bad. But backpedaling it is not.

JHBrown said,
After reading this article one more time, it seems the guys at Redmond are confused on which direction they want to take and how to properly implement it. There seems to be a lot of jumping around and back pedaling.

How about they take both directions and keep improving for consumers and power users?

Crimson Rain said,

How about they take both directions and keep improving for consumers and power users?
This would be ideal.

Raa said,

Weren't you complaining last week about 8.1u1 and Microsoft's "backpedalling and lack of direction"...

His post was also based on a leaked unfinished build. They way the leak is presented it is messy. I'm betting it won't be like that on release.

Fritzly said,

Trying to do... Hopefully the execution will be the right one.

The only people i see moaning are wannabe 'Power users' who seem unaware that the inclusion of Metro doesn't actually affect them in the least.

Multiple desktops is something I have yet to see any "power user" actually use. I can't personally see that being implemented in Windows.

Glad to see Metro is going to continue on. It's a great interface for the modern era of computing. And Steven Johns, Metro is more than just a "touch interface". Everyone here should know that Metro made its debut in Windows XP MCE - ON THE DESKTOP. Please stop calling it touch only.

I am fine with Metro staying. As long as I have the option to disable the thing and never see its existence again. All we really want is better control over our operating system. We don't need Microsoft shoving the App Store and Modern UI in our face.

Dot Matrix said,
Multiple desktops is something I have yet to see any "power user" actually use. I can't personally see that being implemented in Windows.

It depends how easy it is to switch between them, and move windows between them. Like for instance, some type of switcher bar at the bottom of the screen. Multiple desktops would be "workspaces", it would help keep things from becoming a mess of windows by segregating them.

JHBrown said,
I am fine with Metro staying. As long as I have the option to disable the thing and never see its existence again. All we really want is better control over our operating system. We don't need Microsoft shoving the App Store and Modern UI in our face.

You're never going to be able to switch Metro off. They're too beneficial to the OS.

brianshapiro said,

It depends how easy it is to switch between them, and move windows between them. Like for instance, some type of switcher bar at the bottom of the screen. Multiple desktops would be "workspaces", it would help keep things from becoming a mess of windows by segregating them.

It does, but MSFT has implemented a dozen desktop controls (Show Desktop, Peek, etc) in Windows over the years, but rarely do they see use. I can't see something like this seeping in at all. Not with the rise of virtualization.

Dot Matrix said,

You're never going to be able to switch Metro off. They're too beneficial to the OS.

Classicshell says.....bollox! Install, ditch Metro UI altogether and get a familiar UI that most people can use and are happy with...

20legend said,

Classicshell says.....bollox! Install, ditch Metro UI altogether and get a familiar UI that most people can use and are happy with...

ClassicShell isn't a MSFT product. It may be able to hack the system to turn it back, but users who use it are only hurting themselves. Microsoft isn't going back to Windows 7 no matter how hard you beg. Technology is only going to march forward, not back.

He along with the other Metro team members should have left with Balmer. Metro works well with the Surface and Windows Phone. Leave our desktops and laptops alone!

JHBrown said,
He along with the other Metro team members should have left with Balmer. Metro works well with the Surface and Windows Phone. Leave our desktops and laptops alone!

Then click the desktop tile, and carry on. Is that so hard to do?

JHBrown said,
He along with the other Metro team members should have left with Balmer. Metro works well with the Surface and Windows Phone. Leave our desktops and laptops alone!

Guess what runs on Surface?

JHBrown said,
He along with the other Metro team members should have left with Balmer. Metro works well with the Surface and Windows Phone. Leave our desktops and laptops alone!

Or even better: YOU leave Windows 8 alone and quit the endless ranting.

Jarrichvdv said,

Or even better: YOU leave Windows 8 alone and quit the endless ranting.
I have. However, I have given Microsoft thousands of my hard earned money for over 20 years. I can voice my opinion on the subject matter. I also continuously install Windows 7 for users who buy new systems with Windows 8 pre-installed. Anymore advice you want to give me?

Dot Matrix said,

Then click the desktop tile, and carry on. Is that so hard to do?


That would not allow them to whine. They live and breath to whine on internet.

JHBrown said,
He along with the other Metro team members should have left with Balmer. Metro works well with the Surface and Windows Phone. Leave our desktops and laptops alone!

So clearly you don't know how to access the desktop? Oh no wait you obviously do, so why all the bitterness. At work i'd say i see the Modern UI extremely rarely.

JHBrown said,
I have. However, I have given Microsoft thousands of my hard earned money for over 20 years. I can voice my opinion on the subject matter. I also continuously install Windows 7 for users who buy new systems with Windows 8 pre-installed. Anymore advice you want to give me?

You did not pay for WIndows 8 so you don't have to complain; and every argument you put forward is ridiculous. I agree Windows 8 is not the best thing they ever did; but it definitely does not deserve this endless ranting. It's getting VERY boring for other people to just read about Windows; because the comments are just infested with troll comments :-/

JHBrown said,
I have. However, I have given Microsoft thousands of my hard earned money for over 20 years. I can voice my opinion on the subject matter. I also continuously install Windows 7 for users who buy new systems with Windows 8 pre-installed. Anymore advice you want to give me?

Do you force that upon them, or are they asking? Going back and not giving them a chance to find out if they like it sound a bit cocky to me.

Like "I know what's best for your computer, so -I- will revert back to a Win7 install for you"........

Everybody I showed how Win8 works, desktop and all, gets it within 30 minutes. Only 1 person was going back to Win7 due to software restrictions. Not a Win8 fault btw.

Jarrichvdv said,

You did not pay for WIndows 8 so you don't have to complain; and every argument you put forward is ridiculous. I agree Windows 8 is not the best thing they ever did; but it definitely does not deserve this endless ranting. It's getting VERY boring for other people to just read about Windows; because the comments are just infested with troll comments :-/
I still have not read a troll comment here until you typed the word troll. You might need a dictionary to look that word up. I have payed for 3 licenses of Windows 8. Used one for about year. Happy to be back on Windows 7 and help others who need to revert back.

JHBrown said,
I still have not read a troll comment here until you typed the word troll. You might need a dictionary to look that word up. I have payed for 3 licenses of Windows 8. Used one for about year. Happy to be back on Windows 7 and help others who need to revert back.

So you did not look up how Windows 8 works before paying 3 licenses? Good job!

Except that it works absolutely the same as Windows 7 with a redesigned way to launch programs and desktop additions. You're hating just for the sake of it. Don't bother proving me wrong because I'm not.

JHBrown said,
I still have not read a troll comment here until you typed the word troll. You might need a dictionary to look that word up

Lol at denying trolls, then trolling straight away. Good job sir!

MikeChipshop said,

Lol at denying trolls, then trolling straight away. Good job sir!

Hey Mke, you have yet to add anything of substance to this discussion. Instead you look to call people a troll for having a strong vocal opinion. Take your trolling and move along. It has been said many times by the Mods here that blatantly calling someone a troll for just posting an opinion will not be tolerated. The next one, you will be reported. Please add something to the community.

Jarrichvdv said,

So you did not look up how Windows 8 works before paying 3 licenses? Good job!

Except that it works absolutely the same as Windows 7 with a redesigned way to launch programs and desktop additions. You're hating just for the sake of it. Don't bother proving me wrong because I'm not.

You can convince yourself until your blue in the face. Majority rules and it has been established quite clearly that Windows 8 has been a thorn in Microsofts backside. Millions of others share my opinion. The proactive thing for you to do is accept the shortcomings of Windows 8 instead of preaching that Windows 8 is the best thing since sliced bread.

JHBrown said,
You can convince yourself until your blue in the face. Majority rules and it has been established quite clearly that Windows 8 has been a thorn in Microsofts backside. Millions of others share my opinion. The proactive thing for you to do is accept the shortcomings of Windows 8 instead of preaching that Windows 8 is the best thing since sliced bread.

I never said that; I'm just here to tell the world you're whining about problems that do not exist; just as many others.

Jarrichvdv said,

I never said that; I'm just here to tell the world you're whining about problems that do not exist; just as many others.
Whining? I'm a grown man with kids. If you want to see real whining I'll send you a video of a whining daughter. Furthermore, there are problems with Windows 8. It's truly baffling to me that you love a product so much that you refuse to see the same problems that many share. I could see if a few hundred were complaining, but the number of people who complain about same issues is quite large.

JHBrown said,
Whining? I'm a grown man with kids. If you want to see real whining I'll send you a video of a whining daughter. Furthermore, there are problems with Windows 8. It's truly baffling to me that you love a product so much that you refuse to see the same problems that many share. I could see if a few hundred were complaining, but the number of people who complain about same issues is quite large.

I love it so much I just sold my Surface Pro 2 to go back to a MacBook. Sorry I'm not here to defend the product, but to end the pointless discussion about this topic by a vocal group of 'so-called powerusers who are SO techsavvy they can't even adapt to a new interface /s'

I just can't stand the number of people complaining over non-issues. Metro can't be an issue as it does nothing wrong. It only enhances the accessibility of your apps; and makes your PC more usable. If the Metro apps itself don't interest you, you uninstall all of them. Yet you use words like 'they shove Metro in our faces' which is blatantly false from my experience.

Jarrichvdv said,

I love it so much I just sold my Surface Pro 2 to go back to a MacBook. Sorry I'm not here to defend the product, but to end the pointless discussion about this topic by a vocal group of 'so-called powerusers who are SO techsavvy they can't even adapt to a new interface /s'

I just can't stand the number of people complaining over non-issues. Metro can't be an issue as it does nothing wrong. It only enhances the accessibility of your apps; and makes your PC more usable. If the Metro apps itself don't interest you, you uninstall all of them. Yet you use words like 'they shove Metro in our faces' which is blatantly false from my experience.

I must admit, I am quite shocked to learn about your usage. My "go too" systems of choice are my MacBook Pro and Windows 7 machine. A few iPads and Android tablets for entertainment. I looked at the Surface 2 extensively during the holiday season and it was to bulky to be a tablet for one handed usage. Anyway, back on on topic............

JHBrown said,
You can convince yourself until your blue in the face. Majority rules and it has been established quite clearly that Windows 8 has been a thorn in Microsofts backside. Millions of others share my opinion. The proactive thing for you to do is accept the shortcomings of Windows 8 instead of preaching that Windows 8 is the best thing since sliced bread.

Just had a look, yep you're correct, in this particular thread it was more me so i'll move on. However i will point out that an OS is just an OS to me. I can see it's pros and cons quite plainly and i will point out where people are wrong or where they pass off their opinion as fact.

So, here the face of the enemy!

Actually - he's right. But! Only in design. And only on tablets. I don't know who was this moron, but someone in MS decided to replace WDM as shell to Metro. And now - all applications starting under the desktop - simply in his thread. You can go to desktop as mach as you like with Win+D! But you can't switch back to WDM as shell anymore. So, how do you like, when you can't kill hanged game or XBMC with task manager? Just because it also - part of same thread? You can switch to Metro, but if something hang on desktop - you need to kill desktop itself.

I very-very hope, that MS in Threshold will return the choice - WDM or Metro as shell. Not simply - what starting first? Or I will stick with Win7 till the end of MS.

Do you mean DWM? Anyway, it's not really true - the "Metro" parts of the OS are built on the same window manager as the desktop, and in fact the intention and implementation is that there's really only one shell, not two.

DWM, sorry. Desktop Window Manager. But unlike in Windows 7-Vista, DWM in Windows 8 used to mange desktop, but not the Metro apps. You can kill DWM, and this will not kill the Metro.

But you can simply to try kill som hang fullscrin DX apps, like game or XBMC from desktop task manager. And you simply - can't do this.

"it had to be something that was simple enough for casual users to not get confused with" - no casual user I know has ever got confused with Windows 7. The majority of the world became proficient with Windows during XP/Vista.

You don't know many casual users then.
I've helped rolling out Windows 7 to Prorail here in NL. Where the 'casual user' uses a computer. 60.000 workspaces and the amount of complaints when Windows 7 was rolled out was IMMENSE. and most complaints where "ITS A NEW WINDOWS".

A casual user doesn't know what OS they are using.

And yet they happily adjust to a iPhone or Nexus tablet %-)

I say it again, most users have NO clue what to do behind a monitor.
And when it changes even a little, they're all panicking....... ;-)

Dutchie64 said,
And yet they happily adjust to a iPhone or Nexus tablet %-)

I say it again, most users have NO clue what to do behind a monitor.
And when it changes even a little, they're all panicking....... ;-)

Because a phone is one task at a time. Windows 8 can't multitask as the applets are all full screen and no way to have more than 1 at the same time unless you run a legacy app in a desktop tile.

The UI folks only focused on content reading and minimalism and it shows. It makes a computer an appliance. Not acceptable for real work

mentas said,
I like Metro concept but iOS 7 look better.

Except they're totally different things serving different purposes. I like ham but cheese is cheesier...

I think ultimately what many have said which can look at this objectively is that the principles behind metro are valid, the desktop is a dying and increasingly irrelevant and unsupported way of computing. When was the last time ANY major company or start up-go-rocket made a native desktop app? They all decided it isn't worth the hassle and tablets/phones are where the future is for the MASSIVE consumer market which drawfs the power-user enterprise market.

However the problem isn't about the idea of the modern ui, it is a bout MSFT half baked implementation of it, which lets face it, just like apple/google's it is far from perfect.

Yet windows remains with the most potential assuming they can make the right moves as it is a LOT easier for Microsoft to polish and perfect the simpler computing side of windows than I tis for apple/android to grow the complexity of their OS and come anywhere close to convincing anybody to make desktop apps for android and iOS...specially when they are about 3 decades behind windows and facing a juggernaut of 90% marketshare penetration in the enterprise and power-user community. Not to say it cannot be done, but it is a LOT harder than MSFT's own challenge in the opposite direction. In particular, google cannot count on device iteration to keep growing. As MSFT knows, businesses and pc users do not buy a new machine every 18 months the way people buy tablets/phones, and device peripheral support is a big deal. Drivers are always the issue with macs and similar platforms, after DECADES of trying they aren't even close to matching windows.

Therefore, windows desktop itself is probably going to be the dominant and only desktop OS of any relevancy for decades. But it is only logical for MSFT to continue towards the path away from it since not doing so may cause the already weak desktop to weaken itself to the point where only IT guys at the back of server rooms know about it and how to use it. Then it will be MSFT, the IBM 2.0

neonspark said,
the desktop is a dying and increasingly irrelevant and unsupported way of computing

In the home, yes I agree. But not in business.

With Windows 9, Microsoft should cater for the corporate world with a Windows 7 esque version of the OS and they can give the modern UI to those who want a touch UI for touch based hardware.

'Windows 9 Standard Edition' & 'Windows 9 Modern' shouldn't be that difficult to produce.

But this is Microsoft. A company that tells it's users how they should be using software instead of listening and proving software that people want to use. Windows 9 will inevitably be a mash-up of Windows 8 & Windows 7 that people will still hate.

How can business not work with Windows 8?
Lock out your users from the desktop, give them a giant tile to click on to open apps. If, like most companies, you use webapps, or simple Android/iOS apps.... you can keep people within a small environment that needs minimal configuration to be secure, safe and fast.
No more need to write thousands of group policies just to have a moderate secure Windows desktop for the 1,5 apps and 3webapps most cooperate users use.

From my experience, most people who work with computers don't like the desktop, don't like the tiny fonts, don't like the small icons to click on.
And a lot of people got huge DPI settings because of poor eye sight. And we finally get a way to get most of these people to do their work easily without much confusion.

But no, they have to be told WIndows 8 sucks major balls and is the worst OS in history so they hate it without ever using it.

When I work at home or in the office what do I do on my computer?

It has:
1. Many many Windows open which Windows 7 can tab together. XP puts them on the bar too
2. When I open an app it doesn't go full screen unless I turn on autohide
3. There is no 2 different skypes or other apps with dual personalities (mobile and desktop). I tried registering a recent win 8 user and she got lost as the wrong skype popped up when registering??!
4. Users do not like search to find things. They hit uninstallers or get spammed with email talking about a document they need to open rather than finding it. I have to manually disable this in outlook
5. For power users who like instant search it is superior on Windows 7 and doesn't go full screen. Infact Vista had it it he best as it rated contents inside documents too
6. Training. I life in Florida and users who are older than 40 can't deal with change and feel threatened by it when they have deadlines. When you try to show them why things moved the response is "IT WAS FINE THE WAY IT WAS?! Can I get XP back YET? etc)

So all these things is why businesses prefer XP and Windows 7. You can re-adjust fonts and DPI as well under 7 if you have any older users with limited eye sight.

1: Can be done on 8 as well, no change. Slight improvements added to it (multi-monitor taskbar for example)
2: Still no change to Windows 8.
3: You are not required to use the Metro app. Uninstall it and its gone. Can just use the desktop app just like Windows 7.
4: Yeah they don't like to search, be it a desktop with tiny icons looking alike or a start menu with dozens of items with 5+ deep menu's. Hence the start screen. No more searching, no matter what device you use it on, a giant tile will be in their face to show them where to click or touch. And on top of that, have you still not told people "winkey/open start menu or screen+type first few letters of program you wish to use"
5: winkey+s opens a small search window on the side. It's not fullscreen, this been solved with 8.1 already.
6: Then don't, install classicshell with a classictheme (check wincustomize.com for example) and there you go, they have a "Windows 7" like OS with the latest security and features with the possibility of using their favorite websites as easier to use apps. Which will also help you, no more fixing those 30 toolbar installation, or so called "PC speed increasers" or 3 anti-virus programs running side by side.
Few easy steps you can teach a monkey (I've upgraded to win8 successfully on my grandparents computers one of which is 92) and you don't have to look back. The only work I had to do since then is helping them getting Windows 8.1 (still think MS made a stupid decision not using WU)

Shadowzz said,
1: Can be done on 8 as well, no change. Slight improvements added to it (multi-monitor taskbar for example)
2: Still no change to Windows 8.
3: You are not required to use the Metro app. Uninstall it and its gone. Can just use the desktop app just like Windows 7.
4: Yeah they don't like to search, be it a desktop with tiny icons looking alike or a start menu with dozens of items with 5+ deep menu's. Hence the start screen. No more searching, no matter what device you use it on, a giant tile will be in their face to show them where to click or touch. And on top of that, have you still not told people "winkey/open start menu or screen+type first few letters of program you wish to use"
5: winkey+s opens a small search window on the side. It's not fullscreen, this been solved with 8.1 already.
6: Then don't, install classicshell with a classictheme (check wincustomize.com for example) and there you go, they have a "Windows 7" like OS with the latest security and features with the possibility of using their favorite websites as easier to use apps. Which will also help you, no more fixing those 30 toolbar installation, or so called "PC speed increasers" or 3 anti-virus programs running side by side.
Few easy steps you can teach a monkey (I've upgraded to win8 successfully on my grandparents computers one of which is 92) and you don't have to look back. The only work I had to do since then is helping them getting Windows 8.1 (still think MS made a stupid decision not using WU)

Well then my next question is why bother upgrading to Windows at all then if I will just use it as Windows 7? Things like power off and control panel are still awkward with classic and it is another expense at work multiplied by each computer.

Microsofts academy video with the UX team showed the problem! Basically it is view content, view content, view content, to hell without anything else including menus, shortcuts, or anything that doesn't "view content"

It is like a car company saying "stay on road, stay on road, stay on road" with no doors or stereo, heat/ac, manually stick shift but with great suspensions and views of the road everywhere. Bikes are popular because of this and we want to make a car like a bike with the road immersion etc.

This is why art professors should not design software. These employees come from the anti skeumorphism all pro minimalism crowd.

Meanwhile we have a job to do and find viewing content obsession annoying when in word 2013 you can't tell where the paper ends and toolbars are as the text is all caps like stop signs in a sea of white.

Let me see if i get this.
The idea was: "Windows 7 is too difficult for basic users, only good for power users".
Solution: let's hide it!

..oh, oh, and let's have these new big colorful squares appear on any machine, no matter if it is a big desktop or a tiny tablet.

..oh, oh, oh, and let's give the users 2, no 3, no 4 different ways of performing the same task. Just to make it all simpler.

Great, so finally we have something that is both confusing for basic users AND useless for power users.

Oh. My. God.

Edited by gilez, Feb 18 2014, 10:27am :

gilez said,
Let me see if i get this.
The idea was: "Windows 7 is too difficult for basic users, only good for power users".
Solution: let's hide it!
Great, so finally we have something that is both confusing for basic users AND useless for power users.

Oh. My. God.

How is it either? I'm trying to figure out how to "power use" an app. Windows is still there underneath the start screen.

Ok, then let's make an example in another field. Can you drive a car? Each time you drive a car, do you think how to push the throttle or the brake? A power driver knows how to drive well and uses all the features, a basic driver just drives it around, automatically, because it has become an habit. You learn to perform some basic operation and stop thinking about it.

So the whole thing about Windows 7 interface being too difficult makes little sense, as all the explanation given by the designer.

What Microsoft did has little to do with design. Microsoft didn't make this choice for the sake of the customers.

The thing here is that Microsoft is very late in the mobile business and decided to take a bold step to survive. The bold step is to force its huge user base to adopt their mobile interface even on devices that are not mobile. We can scream and cry foul but we go on using Windows no matter what.

So, after having us swallow their bitter pill, they will finally and quickly have a user base for their mobile OS and for their app store. And hopefully a chance to fight Google.

Otherwise, we would have a choice to use Metro or not. They didn't give us any.

Eric said,

How is it either? I'm trying to figure out how to "power use" an app. Windows is still there underneath the start screen.

True, it's there, but more like buried to ex-Win7 users. Just wanting to quickly open the control panel is a chore with Win8, for example.

...and the most annoying thing i keep hearing from Microsoft people is this "we're so sorry, our new OS is cr*p but it will be good in the future". Ok next time
I buy Windows I'm gonna pay you in cr*p. So sorry, it's just cr*p but it will turn into good money in the future.

How sad of an excuse is that? I think Steve Jobs could have made endless jokes on Microsoft...

Edited by gilez, Feb 18 2014, 11:36am :

gilez said,
Ok, then let's make an example in another field. Can you drive a car? Each time you drive a car, do you think how to push the throttle or the brake? A power driver knows how to drive well and uses all the features, a basic driver just drives it around, automatically, because it has become an habit. You learn to perform some basic operation and stop thinking about it.

So the whole thing about Windows 7 interface being too difficult makes little sense, as all the explanation given by the designer.

What Microsoft did has little to do with design. Microsoft didn't make this choice for the sake of the customers.

The thing here is that Microsoft is very late in the mobile business and decided to take a bold step to survive. The bold step is to force its huge user base to adopt their mobile interface even on devices that are not mobile. We can scream and cry foul but we go on using Windows no matter what.

So, after having us swallow their bitter pill, they will finally and quickly have a user base for their mobile OS and for their app store. And hopefully a chance to fight Google.

Otherwise, we would have a choice to use Metro or not. They didn't give us any.

Good post! I've always said that the push for Metro by Microsoft was a way to get users to their phone products and App Store. Has nothing to do with "helping" the consumer.

IntelliMoo said,

True, it's there, but more like buried to ex-Win7 users. Just wanting to quickly open the control panel is a chore with Win8, for example.


Mouse:
Right click on start button > Control panel

Keyboard:
Win + X > P

Yes, veeerrrryyyy difficult!

gilez said,
...and the most annoying thing i keep hearing from Microsoft people is this "we're so sorry, our new OS is cr*p but it will be good in the future". Ok next time
I buy Windows I'm gonna pay you in cr*p. So sorry, it's just cr*p but it will turn into good money in the future.

How sad of an excuse is that? I think Steve Jobs could have made endless jokes on Microsoft...

Ok I might have been a tad harsh on this, but come on, why keep repeating "we are in for the long run, maybe our customers don't understand now, but they will in the future" sounds a bit pathetic. You mean you screwed us now on purpose, but for our own good? What is that supposed to mean?

BajiRav said,

Mouse:
Right click on start button > Control panel

Keyboard:
Win + X > P

Yes, veeerrrryyyy difficult!


And move mouse to lower right corner, move up > settings > control panel
AND
Winkey+R "Control"

And there is probably a powershell way too, 4! FOUR different ways to open the same control panel...Love the unfounded hate for Win8.

Dutchie64 said,


Nope, you're still confused... Or just plain stubbern.

The problem is not with me.

You see, Apple created totally NEW devices (iPhone, iPad, iPod) and gave them completely new and revolutionary interfaces.

Microsoft didn't create a new device (don't call the Surface a new device, for God's sake). They took an OS (idea copied from Apple decades ago) which has been used for decades and suddenly changed it without giving the choice of using the traditional interface instead. After that, they insisted on installing it on traditional PCs without any customization.

Having done that and seen the result, they are now backpedaling with new releases that make it more decent on a traditional PC.

I don't own a Mac, but have you seen Apple do the same with OS X? No, because they know it makes no sense.

And anyways you can do WHATEVER you want, as long as you can sell it to your customers and persuade them it's the best thing since sliced bread. It's as simple as that.

Shadowzz said,

And move mouse to lower right corner, move up > settings > control panel
AND
Winkey+R "Control"

And there is probably a powershell way too, 4! FOUR different ways to open the same control panel...Love the unfounded hate for Win8.

All very true, but they took away the simplest one for the common user: click the "start" button and click "Control Panel". You see? Too many choices BUT not the simplest one...

IntelliMoo said,

True, it's there, but more like buried to ex-Win7 users. Just wanting to quickly open the control panel is a chore with Win8, for example.

The control panel isn't buried. It's right there on the side of the screen in a drawer. Before, it was right there in the start menu. If you want the desktop control panel you just right-click the start button and it's immediately available in the context menu. This is almost literally the situation that "Who Moved My Cheese?" is about.

gilez said,
Ok, then let's make an example in another field. Can you drive a car? Each time you drive a car, do you think how to push the throttle or the brake? A power driver knows how to drive well and uses all the features, a basic driver just drives it around, automatically, because it has become an habit. You learn to perform some basic operation and stop thinking about it.

So the whole thing about Windows 7 interface being too difficult makes little sense, as all the explanation given by the designer.

What Microsoft did has little to do with design. Microsoft didn't make this choice for the sake of the customers.

The thing here is that Microsoft is very late in the mobile business and decided to take a bold step to survive. The bold step is to force its huge user base to adopt their mobile interface even on devices that are not mobile. We can scream and cry foul but we go on using Windows no matter what.

So, after having us swallow their bitter pill, they will finally and quickly have a user base for their mobile OS and for their app store. And hopefully a chance to fight Google.

Otherwise, we would have a choice to use Metro or not. They didn't give us any.

hit the nail on the head right there! if they would have just had a choice from the start, these 50 million threads/articles would never have been written. but they wanted to force people to get used to the touch interface hoping it would help their mobile sales. (the modern interface works great on touch devices, but it doesn't belong on desktops)

MikeChipshop said,
Wouldn't bother replying lads, he's clearly an Apple troll and will never be happy until everything is iOS or OSX.

Happy to contradict you, I am actually an early adopter of Windows 8 (Lenovo Yoga, more than one year of usage). Never bought a Mac. If you would mind reading my posts instead of being judgmental, that would help you I guess. Whatever.

gilez said,

Microsoft didn't create a new device (don't call the Surface a new device, for God's sake). They took an OS (idea copied from Apple decades ago) which has been used for decades and suddenly changed it without giving the choice of using the traditional interface instead. After that, they insisted on installing it on traditional PCs without any customization.

The traditional interface is still there! The desktop is still present.
No longer the only option =/= gone!

In fact, it's in QuickTask (right-click on the Windows logo in the lower left) And via Settings (Charm Bar) and you can even Runbox your way to it (as you can in previous versions of Windows). They took ONE method away - the Start menu.

gilez said,

Happy to contradict you, I am actually an early adopter of Windows 8 (Lenovo Yoga, more than one year of usage). Never bought a Mac. If you would mind reading my posts instead of being judgmental, that would help you I guess. Whatever.

I did read your posts. I didn't pull it out of thin air you know. Try reading your own posts back then you'll see what i'm getting at. Here's a few lines just for you...

"You see, Apple created totally NEW devices (iPhone, iPad, iPod) and gave them completely new and revolutionary interfaces"

"I don't own a Mac, but have you seen Apple do the same with OS X? No, because they know it makes no sense."

"How sad of an excuse is that? I think Steve Jobs could have made endless jokes on Microsoft..."

So sorry if i don;t believe you, but i don't. What you basically just said in the post I'm replying to is "I'm not racist, I've got a black friend".

MikeChipshop said,
Wouldn't bother replying lads, he's clearly an Apple troll and will never be happy until everything is iOS or OSX.
Typical reply when someone doesn't like that Windows 8 is getting pelted with stones. It's ok not to like a product you know!

MikeChipshop said,

So sorry if i don;t believe you, but i don't. What you basically just said in the post I'm replying to is "I'm not racist, I've got a black friend".

Which part of "I never bought a Mac" you didn't understand?

The message of my posts is simple: the real issue with Windows 8 is not about how good or bad Metro is (I actually do like it). It is about how badly the transition between Windows 7 and 8 was managed.

The designer from Microsoft who defends the logic of the 2 OSs completely misses the point of why Windows 8 was an embarrassing moment for Microsoft.

And the point is, as Buttus also said, that if they simply made a TRANSITION between Windows 7 and 8 all customers would have welcomed the new OS. They didn't. They took away the Start button and just told us it was for our own good. Basically, they were a bit bitchy like Apple does (happy now?) but without having the charisma and innovative product to give them the right to be so.

Having said that, I honestly don't care about it any more and I'm sure they understood the mistake. Thanks.

JHBrown said,
Typical reply when someone doesn't like that Windows 8 is getting pelted with stones. It's ok not to like a product you know!

Just so you know, it's quite alright for someone to like a product also...

gilez said,

All very true, but they took away the simplest one for the common user: click the "start" button and click "Control Panel". You see? Too many choices BUT not the simplest one...


Yeah moving mouse to the OTHER bottom corner is much harder. Still 2 clicks, nothing changed.
It was 2 clicks before, its 2 clicks now. It just switched a corner.
Also how often do average joe's require access to a control panel? Or power users even (power users should know how to open Control Panel items through CMD or Win+R.)

gilez said,

The problem is not with me.

You see, Apple created totally NEW devices (iPhone, iPad, iPod) and gave them completely new and revolutionary interfaces.

Microsoft didn't create a new device (don't call the Surface a new device, for God's sake). They took an OS (idea copied from Apple decades ago) which has been used for decades and suddenly changed it without giving the choice of using the traditional interface instead. After that, they insisted on installing it on traditional PCs without any customization.

Having done that and seen the result, they are now backpedaling with new releases that make it more decent on a traditional PC.

I don't own a Mac, but have you seen Apple do the same with OS X? No, because they know it makes no sense.

And anyways you can do WHATEVER you want, as long as you can sell it to your customers and persuade them it's the best thing since sliced bread. It's as simple as that.

Nope, it's still you. Just looking at your comment on copying Apple, you're massivly confused. Stop trolling please...

gilez said,
Let me see if i get this.
The idea was: "Windows 7 is too difficult for basic users, only good for power users".
Solution: let's hide it!

..oh, oh, and let's have these new big colorful squares appear on any machine, no matter if it is a big desktop or a tiny tablet.

..oh, oh, oh, and let's give the users 2, no 3, no 4 different ways of performing the same task. Just to make it all simpler.

Great, so finally we have something that is both confusing for basic users AND useless for power users.

Oh. My. God.

Windows has always generally had multiple ways of doing things, and people generally stuck with what made sense to them, or with how they were taught in the case of many basic users.

So why is having multiple ways of doing things now suddenly a bad thing? In every other version of Windows it was considered a strength.

DConnell said,

Windows has always generally had multiple ways of doing things, and people generally stuck with what made sense to them, or with how they were taught in the case of many basic users.

So why is having multiple ways of doing things now suddenly a bad thing? In every other version of Windows it was considered a strength.

yup... i still don't understand why people are so against choice!

DConnell said,

Windows has always generally had multiple ways of doing things, and people generally stuck with what made sense to them, or with how they were taught in the case of many basic users.

So why is having multiple ways of doing things now suddenly a bad thing? In every other version of Windows it was considered a strength.

Then why did they omit allowing the choice of either metro start or start menu? progman was available in win95 and classic start was available from XP-Vista.

Answer - arrogance. And I hope it bites them in the *ss

trek said,

Then why did they omit allowing the choice of either metro start or start menu? progman was available in win95 and classic start was available from XP-Vista.

Answer - arrogance. And I hope it bites them in the *ss

The option for Program Manager was so well hidden I was only recently made aware of it. If it was really a choice, why wasn't it in the "Express Setup"?

And "classic Start" is still the textmaze, so it wouldn't have helped my problem with the UI in XP-Vista. You can paint a turd a different color, but it's still sh*t. Being given the "wonderful" choice of Start Menu A or Start Menu B is no choice at all if you don't like the Start Menu at all.

Now, you have a choice of using one, the other or both of two different UIs. 2 different user experiences, with the Screen as the linking element between them. It's a pretty nice setup IMO, especially when tools to hide/replace the Screen with a textmaze is well-supported. The tools I had to use to avoid the textmaze were never as nice as what the mazelovers have for 8.

I honestly feel like that fact that you posted this is somewhat tabloid-ish. His opinion was very well rounded and courteous.

The "User" testing needs to be thrown out and replaced. And instead, have the ux designers submit their biggest incremental ideas. Also, I was part of this discussion and think the fact that Pwnies was willing to do this was a noble gesture.

Hi Pulagatha, I apologize if it came off tabloid-ish-- this is my second article for Neowin.

I thought it was worth posting given that most of the things Jacob said were fairly significant. He confirmed the tick/tock cycle of Windows, that the Microsoft team are aware of it. He explained the reasoning behind the decisions that were made, and justified them fairly well. He also helped identify a potential road map for future iterations of Windows, which I thought was worthwhile. I tried to convey his message the same way he did: by taking a seemingly negative position and then moving towards a neutral one.

Most of what he said was his personal opinion and not some Microsoft policy. There is no intentional tick/tock cycle of Windows, for example, at least not as any high-level official plan.

Pretty interesting. I agree it was necessary, but it could've been executed a bit better. But Win9 better impl those many MANY power features, and not just be a refinement OS. Win 8.1 already did that, so I expect power user features to be implemented. Windowed modern apps (like zune software) would make the windows desktop look beautiful. And bring back shadows to windows, just not as intense as the win7 shadow. Also, the shadow impl for icon text should be fixed - it look jagged on some displays.

Power users scream the loudest on the internet, and the power users always recommend to the casual ones. As it stands now, with the power users ignored, they may recommend win7 or other OS' instead. That's why win7 did well - because the power users liked it.

Torolol said,
i DO hope windows/metro will became irrelevant.

Just don't use it. There's enough alternatives, free or commercial.
So keep constructive in this thread or go away. Enough trolls already...

Simply, you should just use Desktop mode! There, your wish came true!

Torolol said,
i DO hope windows/metro will became irrelevant.

It's crucial for the future. Kids who are 3-7 years old now will never [want to] use a desktop based OS. If they won't start the change, and mature Metro, they will end up serving just us old folks in 15 years. It's better to lose this generation to Linux (as if most will switch, I assume most will just find a way to handle Windows), and gain the next generation for Windows.

And you've surveyed enough kids that are 3-7 years old to be in a position to make this generalised statement?

Kids grow up too, they're not going to want to use a touch interface to do something that a keyboard is the obvious choice for (think an essay for example).

Raa said,
And you've surveyed enough kids that are 3-7 years old to be in a position to make this generalised statement?

Kids grow up too, they're not going to want to use a touch interface to do something that a keyboard is the obvious choice for (think an essay for example).

So keep writing essays with a keyboard. That is in the article..
They even put multiple options for that in their tablets. There are keyboard covers and a USB port.

Eric said,

So keep writing essays with a keyboard. That is in the article..


Exactly, and that's what's going to happen. People suddenly saying that touch is the future and keyboards/mice will "become extinct" is laughable at best.

Raa said,

Exactly, and that's what's going to happen. People suddenly saying that touch is the future and keyboards/mice will "become extinct" is laughable at best.

For now... Microsoft already missed a lot of the last 10 years. Now they're future-prepping. Nothing of the old Windows paradigm is missing from Windows 8 except the Start menu and that can easily be emulated by third-party solutions. On tablets it's unnecessary and a hindrance.

Raa said,
And you've surveyed enough kids that are 3-7 years old to be in a position to make this generalised statement?

Kids grow up too, they're not going to want to use a touch interface to do something that a keyboard is the obvious choice for (think an essay for example).

1. No one said keyboards won't be around, or useless. You can attach a wireless keyboard to a tablet and write. In less than a year you will be able to do it on Office for iPad. Don't mix the need for a keyboard and usage of desktop based OS.

2. I'm just speculating, just like you are speculating that kids will continue to use a desktop based OS.

3. My sisters, and all of the kids around me (7-14) don't even use the computer. It's JUST for writing to school. Everything they do is on their phone OS or Tablet OS. Solve the "Office" problem, add a wireless printer and you can get rid of the desktop computer for all they care. One of my sisters is still using Vista, she has zero desire to upgrade, as she's using it so little she can't see the point of upgrading. This is a trend that I see around me with younger users.

I simply use BOTH! And that's the beauty, as I barely boot my laptop as a productivity tool, I am always ready to work on the Desktop. But my Tablet's UI, makes me sometimes try to use the laptop as entertainment, all I waste is one clic and I am in Tablet mode. W8 is simple and great!

Raa said,

Exactly, and that's what's going to happen. People suddenly saying that touch is the future and keyboards/mice will "become extinct" is laughable at best.

Raa said,
And you've surveyed enough kids that are 3-7 years old to be in a position to make this generalised statement?

Kids grow up too, they're not going to want to use a touch interface to do something that a keyboard is the obvious choice for (think an essay for example).

Why do you keep acting as if it's an either-or situation? Modern works just fine with mouse and keyboard, and Windows 8 supports them at least as well as touch. What's wrong with having both options and using whichever one is best suited to what you're doing at the time?

You keep acting as if one form of interaction prevents the other somehow. If anything they're complementary.

Raa said,

Exactly, and that's what's going to happen. People suddenly saying that touch is the future and keyboards/mice will "become extinct" is laughable at best.

They're not the future in and of themselves, but certainly are a part of it. Shouldn't Microsoft make it a built-in option sooner rather than later?

You're still acting as if the two interaction styles are mutually-exclusive. They aren't.

elangab said,

3. My sisters, and all of the kids around me (7-14) don't even use the computer. It's JUST for writing to school. Everything they do is on their phone OS or Tablet OS. Solve the "Office" problem, add a wireless printer and you can get rid of the desktop computer for all they care. One of my sisters is still using Vista, she has zero desire to upgrade, as she's using it so little she can't see the point of upgrading. This is a trend that I see around me with younger users.

This right here.

Awesome article! This article cleared up some questions about why and how - and it makes all the pieces fall into place for me.

I've said it before, I've never had an issue with Windows 8 or its start menu. I have always gone straight to Desktop and the experience there has always been like working in Windows 7. There's barely any difference whatsoever.

Pwrmad said,
Awesome article! This article cleared up some questions about why and how - and it makes all the pieces fall into place for me.

Unfortunately it doesn't explain why Metro is the interface for Server 2012. If it is indeed a dumbed down UI for casual users, what's it doing on an OS for the enterprise? It just makes no sense whatsoever.

simplezz said,

Unfortunately it doesn't explain why Metro is the interface for Server 2012. If it is indeed a dumbed down UI for casual users, what's it doing on an OS for the enterprise? It just makes no sense whatsoever.

Unity. There is very little code difference between Server and Desktop OS.

Because most of the meat of controlling a server - and especially Windows Server - hasn't been in the Start menu since Server 2003. Even Control Panel is used less and less in Windows Server - one of the three OSes I run in rotation is Server 2012R2. In fact, since Server 2008, you can install Windows Server without a GUI at all - it's called a Core install. (This is something that all of Server 2008's successors - including 2012R2 - retains; I use the GUI method due to unfamiliarity with Windows PowerShell.)
The other reason for the far-simpler UI in Server 2012R2 (and Windows 8, for that matter) has to do with another trend that started even earlier - remote operation. How much bandwidth does it require to access a Windows 7 desktop remotely and get work done (compared to Windows 8.1)? While Windows 7 is a relatively lighter UI compared to Vista., ModernUI's graphical reset is super-simple, and thus requires little bandwidth compared to 7. Running both versions in a VM drives the point home with a jackhammer. And remoting 8 (or Server 2012, even with a full GUI install) is not a bandwidth pig.

simplezz said,

Unfortunately it doesn't explain why Metro is the interface for Server 2012. If it is indeed a dumbed down UI for casual users, what's it doing on an OS for the enterprise? It just makes no sense whatsoever.

Because the difference between Windows 8/Pro/Enterprise/Server is not more than a few settings in the installer.

It's anti-power user. I understand why they need to defend this atrocity but making comments like that simply piss power users off.

Steve121178 said,
It's anti-power user. I understand why they need to defend this atrocity but making comments like that simply piss power users off.

Speak for yourself. I am a developer that use a PC all the time for productivity purposes, and I love Windows 8.

ffMathy said,

Speak for yourself. I am a developer that use a PC all the time for productivity purposes, and I love Windows 8.
Where do you spend the majority of your time in Win 8 while using it for "productivity purposes" ? Desktop or Start screen?

ffMathy said,

Speak for yourself. I am a developer that use a PC all the time for productivity purposes, and I love Windows 8.

So you love flipping between the Modern UI and the desktop all the time? How much time do you waste per week simply navigating on your OS?

For me, Windows 8 is ok for home use. I love the enhancements to the actual desktop, but the rest is an absolute train wreck.

Whoever thought the Modern UI was fit for a server OS needs a damn good beating. A touch UI for a server? Madness.

Steve121178 said,
It's anti-power user. I understand why they need to defend this atrocity but making comments like that simply piss power users off.

Depends on how you define power user. If you mean you can look over the screen and see up to date information without clicking anything, Id say that's power user.

ozzy76 said,
Where do you spend the majority of your time in Win 8 while using it for "productivity purposes" ? Desktop or Start screen?

No one said you need to keep staring at your start screen. Most of us still are on the desktop to be productive; that doesn't make the Metro interface worse.

Stop whining.

Jarrichvdv said,

Stop whining.

If I could remotely strangle people who use the word 'whining' on Neowin, I'd be a happy man.

It's not whining - it's having a different opinion to yours. Empathy - give it a try some time.

Steve121178 said,
It's anti-power user. I understand why they need to defend this atrocity but making comments like that simply piss power users off.

So they need to design the OS for power users who are like less than 1% of their total user base?

Power users who get pissed off by this are the ones who matters ever less because they lack vision and ability to think critically.

I spend most of my 'Productivity' in the Desktop, but I rarely boot my laptop, so basically I waste NO time whatsoever. I really like the idea of bigger monitors and Kinnect to control most 'Touch' or 'Touchless' apps, so W8 is just the best at that. All without sacrificing absolutely NO productivity, in fact, improving it a lot. I agree that most users are reluctant to change, even if it improves their live, how silly is that!

ozzy76 said,
Where do you spend the majority of your time in Win 8 while using it for "productivity purposes" ? Desktop or Start screen?

Steve121178 said,

So you love flipping between the Modern UI and the desktop all the time? How much time do you waste per week simply navigating on your OS?

Far less than I did navigating the Start Menu.

How is flipping between desktop and Modern any different from switching between programs or bringing up the old Menu? I really don't understand the distinction. It's all just switching between programs.

Steve121178 said,

So you love flipping between the Modern UI and the desktop all the time? How much time do you waste per week simply navigating on your OS?

For me, Windows 8 is ok for home use. I love the enhancements to the actual desktop, but the rest is an absolute train wreck.

Whoever thought the Modern UI was fit for a server OS needs a damn good beating. A touch UI for a server? Madness.

Flopping back and forth? There's no such thing. You know, both can co-exist, right? I have Metro applications snapped to the side of the desktop, and opening the Metro Start Screen is no different than opening the Start Menu. It works just the same.

ozzy76 said,
Where do you spend the majority of your time in Win 8 while using it for "productivity purposes" ? Desktop or Start screen?

Depends on what I'm doing. If I'm typing up a document, I'm on the desktop since Metro Office hasn't been released yet. If I'm doing remote support, I'm using Metro Teamviewer or the Remote Desktop app. If I'm researching something on the web, that's generally a 50/50 split. Certain sites work better with desktop IE or Firefox.

Edited by DConnell, Feb 20 2014, 10:08pm :

If Microsoft had come out with this sort of explanation in the first place then I think the reaction to Win 8 would have been more favourable.

I do wonder what the thinking was behind burying the shutdown/restart options, as it seems you needed to be a power user to find them (I had to google it when I first got Win 8) which goes against what was said.

Vambo said,
If Microsoft had come out with this sort of explanation in the first place then I think the reaction to Win 8 would have been more favourable.

They didn't need to, it was obvious from day one is was for "content consumers", not for computer users. Basically its nothing more than a modern newspaper with video. Something to be passively consumed. Not a productivity tool.

Vambo said,
If Microsoft had come out with this sort of explanation in the first place then I think the reaction to Win 8 would have been more favourable.

I do wonder what the thinking was behind burying the shutdown/restart options, as it seems you needed to be a power user to find them (I had to google it when I first got Win 8) which goes against what was said.


I thought this at first as well, until I decided to think about the decisions behind it.

Look at your PC. It has a power button physically on it, right? There is your answer. It is actually way more intuitive for new users. A software power button is rarely seen on phones, tablets etc.

For desktop users however, it might have still been a problem.

Since first pre-beta image leak? Umm, no, since the first outing of the Metro UI on Windows. Which was way before that article that is linked.

You can't base an opinion on a dev build, there have been many dev builds of Windows that eventually got dropped (Longhorn being a fine example of this). It's accurate in that the decision was made to stick with it past the dev stage, and that article covered a "pre-beta" two months before a public preview.

Steven P. said,
You can't base an opinion on a dev build, there have been many dev builds of Windows that eventually got dropped (Longhorn being a fine example of this)

That doesn't change the fact that the reaction was "mixed" since the first outing of the Metro UI. Unless we are talking about reaction of a certain individual, but according to the phrasing used - we are not.

agtsmith said,

That doesn't change the fact that the reaction was "mixed" since the first outing of the Metro UI. Unless we are talking about reaction of a certain individual, but according to the phrasing used - we are not.

The reaction to GUIs was mixed, too. People hated them and wanted to stay on command lines.

When you stop using your regular computer or laptop for 7 days and only using touch device like iPhone or iPad. You will feel archaic after trying to use a computer to perform basic task such as browsing the web or checking e-mail and play infinity blade III and this is how current generation kids will feel when they gradually grow up.

This is where windows metro UI is important to keep it relevant in the future. Especially kids who grew up accustomed to touch device. This is a huge different from ten years ago where majority of kids is playing PS2 and computer games.

Still finding this hard to believe (read my comment above). Touch does have merits for sure, but I can't see it being used day in-day out.
(3000 word essay anyone?)

Raa said,
Still finding this hard to believe (read my comment above). Touch does have merits for sure, but I can't see it being used day in-day out.
(3000 word essay anyone?)

haven't you seen star trek? nobody writes any more. it's all dictation son, and holodecs.

neonspark said,

haven't you seen star trek? nobody writes any more. it's all dictation son, and holodecs.


I wish!

Raa said,
Still finding this hard to believe (read my comment above). Touch does have merits for sure, but I can't see it being used day in-day out.
(3000 word essay anyone?)

Very few people writes long things anymore. That's why twitter and all those "status msgs" are so popular now. Hell, people don't even read long write ups that much anymore. Plenty of new generation kids hate to read story books (whatever type).

Raa said,
Still finding this hard to believe (read my comment above). Touch does have merits for sure, but I can't see it being used day in-day out.
(3000 word essay anyone?)

Good point, but a keyboard and mouse setup are equally poorly suited for reading (whether recreational or reviewing that presentation) on the trolley on the way to work). Which is why Windows 8 supports either/both interfaces and hybrid devices. Unless you need a massive amount of horsepower, why have a tablet and a laptop when you could have one device that works as both?

A device like the Surface, which can be used as a tablet and then converts to a laptop/netbook for typing would be ideal for all but the most demanding users.

I don't think anyone is pushing onscreen keyboards for heavy typing.

Metro became more tollerable after my Windows Phone.

However I do run apps up and need to switch when I work. I get right into my mouse and keyboard again just fine when you have 7 apps open and need stacking and not having one app go all ape full screen on you and no going back and forth to search for a file.

On a phone you only run 1 app at a time so this is mute.

Shadowzz said,

Dictation works fine already, everyone has a microphone right? Or at least most people.

Windows 9 will have it with a voice first UI, in addition to touch first, and mouse first if rumors are true.

Touch interfaces will be the norm for future generations growing up using Tablets and Smartphones. It is important if Windows is to remain relevant, that it support these future users, as well as keeping their current users.

mdtaUK said,
Touch interfaces will be the norm for future generations growing up using Tablets and Smartphones. It is important if Windows is to remain relevant, that it support these future users, as well as keeping their current users.

The future? It's still 2014 and most of us use a keyboard & mouse for our work. A touch UI is not wanted. It was never wanted. We never asked for it.

Steve121178 said,

The future? It's still 2014 and most of us use a keyboard & mouse for our work. A touch UI is not wanted. It was never wanted. We never asked for it.


Who is *we*? it's YOUR opinion, please stop trying to speak for everyone. Touch is the future, been in a school recently? iPads and smartphones everywhere you look. We have a whole generation of kids coming through who are growing up with touch. To them our preferred means of interaction probably seems archaic.

Xerxes said,

Touch is the future
And that is YOUR opinion.

I've been in schools, and I see a lot of students getting out their devices and saying while touch is nice, it's just that ; A nicety.
Quite often I see Bluetooth keyboards being attached to those touch devices...

Raa said,
And that is YOUR opinion.

I've been in schools, and I see a lot of students getting out their devices and saying while touch is nice, it's just that ; A nicety.
Quite often I see Bluetooth keyboards being attached to those tablets...


Not where I work, there are laptops but not used that much like they used too (few years back it was a different story but it's all changing). iPad with on screen keyboard is prefered medium amongst most students and teachers at the school. Even the primary kids, all the way down to ELC have iPads and always using them. Not all schools will be like this but it is a growing trend. There is nothing opinion about it, it's happening right now. Touch isn't some fad (like 3D, which pretty muched died in the arse) that will die just because some people don't like it.

exactly and it isn't as if MSFT has a choice. the desktop is disappearing not because MSFT wants it to, but because other companies and consumers decided desktop is no longer going to be a relevant way to compute outside limited business related applications and only for as long as they can't make the inevitable transition.

Steve121178 said,

The future? It's still 2014 and most of us use a keyboard & mouse for our work. A touch UI is not wanted. It was never wanted. We never asked for it.

When cars started to taken over horses as primary means of every day transportation, I'm sure there were a lot more horses long into the first few years of cars.

Xerxes said,

Who is *we*? it's YOUR opinion, please stop trying to speak for everyone. Touch is the future, been in a school recently? iPads and smartphones everywhere you look. We have a whole generation of kids coming through who are growing up with touch. To them our preferred means of interaction probably seems archaic.

'We' is any I.T. professional who wants to work as efficiently as possible.

I understand that some people like it, I get that. But some people also thought that concentration camps and slavery were a brilliant idea.

Steve121178 said,

The future? It's still 2014 and most of us use a keyboard & mouse for our work. A touch UI is not wanted. It was never wanted. We never asked for it.

Funny. That's about the same respons people gave when Win95 came out.
"We don't want a Start menu, give us the Program Manager back" ;-P

Steve121178 said,

The future? It's still 2014 and most of us use a keyboard & mouse for our work. A touch UI is not wanted. It was never wanted. We never asked for it.

I think you missed something in the article. First you don't need to use touch, second you don't even need a mouse. A keyboard can easily be used in Windows 8 as it has been able to be used in any other Windows OS. I've had Windows 8 and now 8.1 and Windows Server 2012 upon release and have never looked back. I can't wait for 9 and further. I've been doing IT support Server\Desktop etc. for over 20+ years and I've loved both OS right out the gate and believe me, they are by far the best OS to date from Microsoft. Funny how many say you can't use a keyboard but yet those who state this tend to forget (All) Windows have Shortcut keys to do everything - he mentioned in the article about the use of keyboard is simpler or as simple as it's always been. Second I've never even gone into the Start Screen except upon boot up, then I simply enter my desktop and can work as I've always done for those 20+ years. People who cry about keyboard and mouse in Windows 8.x probably don't even know the simplest of shortcut keys but yet they are calling themselves power users. Microsoft's route going forward is definitely in the right direction and as someone stated "Why?" didn't Microsoft simply state everything this individual did out the gate. To point out to others my aunt (70+) is an avid MAC user and when put on Windows is clueless. Me as a Windows user not being totally clueless on a MAC but it all depends on what people are given. If all children were given a desktop today with Ubuntu or any LINUX distro on it (Free) they'd become experts at it and would dread any other form of OS. Too each his own I guess. It all comes down to one thing in IT (Change) everyone hates it and fears it. I'm not one who does and actually embrace it.

Cellar Dweller said,

...

Lets add in the fact that most of us "Power Users" are the goto guys for their family and friends with everything IT related. We finally have an OS we can easily close down so we don't end up cleaning their systems 2 times a year.
Windows 8 has gotten more keyboard shortcuts than Windows 7 has gotten over Vista.
And suddenly I can also use touch and a mouse to do everything I want. The hotcorners are just a nice addition, I for one (and many in my surroundings) hide the taskbar, the more menu's that are hidden from view, the better.

And the start screen is nothing more then a new Interactive Desktop 2.0.
MS should've never promoted it as a new Start Menu.

mdtaUK said,
Touch interfaces will be the norm for future generations growing up using Tablets and Smartphones.

Touch interface have its use but general answer is 'No', because desktop system (vertical screen in front and hands resting on the desk) fits sitting human body much better. Microsoft designers, who think that they can win against reality are delusional. Customers must have choice. Try to imagine holding your head down or waiving your hands in the air for whole day at work and you will understand why.

And that is why the Desktop still exists and you have the ability to bypass the Start Screen if you want to, booting right into the Desktop interface.

Steve121178 said,

'We' is any I.T. professional who wants to work as efficiently as possible.

I understand that some people like it, I get that. But some people also thought that concentration camps and slavery were a brilliant idea.


IT professional without vision detected.

I worked at Toys R Us 2 Christmas's ago. The number of parents who said something along the lines of "My 2-year old doesn't understand why the magazine doesn't respond to his touch" was astounding. Touch screens are the norm for newborns, which means in 15 years it'll be the default.

mdtaUK said,
Touch interfaces will be the norm for future generations growing up using Tablets and Smartphones. It is important if Windows is to remain relevant, that it support these future users, as well as keeping their current users.

The old interface and support for traditional software is still there. Why are people so adamantly against having more options?

Dutchie64 said,

Funny. That's about the same respons people gave when Win95 came out.
"We don't want a Start menu, give us the Program Manager back" ;-P

Heck, I said that right up to the day I installed 8. Then it was "This is more like it! Goodbye menu forever!"

Crimson Rain said,

IT professional without vision detected.

I have vision, but at the same time I need to do my job. There's a lot of goodness in Windows 8 and especially 2012. Unfortunately it's garnished with a UI that people detest.

Steve121178 said,

The future? It's still 2014 and most of us use a keyboard & mouse for our work. A touch UI is not wanted. It was never wanted. We never asked for it.

...and you forget that iPad, which is exclusively a touch interface device, has penetrated the business and enterprise markets. So why can't Microsoft do the same thing?

Steve121178 said,

I have vision, but at the same time I need to do my job. There's a lot of goodness in Windows 8 and especially 2012. Unfortunately it's garnished with a UI that people detest.


No, you do not.

But do you plan on sticking with non-touch-supporting hardware forever?

I've made no secret of my loathing for virtual keyboards (regardless of OS) - however, consider that the implementation cost of touch-screen interfaces - regardless of usage case - has been dropping steadily. There are cases today where a physical keyboard makes no sense at all - and I'm not talking residential or even enterprise use, but industrial use (or automotive use). There are two (and only two) OSes that play in that area today - Windows 8 and Android. In fact, it is Windows 8 for Industry that has the biggest lead there, with Google playing catch-up. Cars don't have QWERTY keyboards - more often than not, the comfort features in automobiles - and not just luxury vehicles, either - are touch-screen displays. Touch IS being used more, due to the decrease in implementation costs - at some point, it may well be unavoidable, and far sooner than anyone expects. Windows has nothing to do with that part of it - however, it WILL need to deal with it.

mdtaUK said,
Touch interfaces will be the norm for future generations growing up using Tablets and Smartphones. It is important if Windows is to remain relevant, that it support these future users, as well as keeping their current users.

They wont at work. It is an OSHA lawsuit ready to happen if people stretch their amrs all day repetitively and a liability.

I do not need it with a mouse PERIOD. At the end of the day use computers for work. I can't image playing games like SWTOR or WOW with touch compared to my keyboard as well. Just not a quick.

sinetheo said,

They wont at work. It is an OSHA lawsuit ready to happen if people stretch their amrs all day repetitively and a liability.

I do not need it with a mouse PERIOD. At the end of the day use computers for work. I can't image playing games like SWTOR or WOW with touch compared to my keyboard as well. Just not a quick.

Major companies implement ergonomic evaluation thus the scenario of getting sued from someone is highly unlikely. However, touch devices will evolve and compliment their desktop machine when users are away from their workstation. It will not replace the desktop environment any time soon.

Major enterprises do have ergonomic evaluation thus the scenario of getting sued from an individual

sinetheo said,

They wont at work. It is an OSHA lawsuit ready to happen if people stretch their amrs all day repetitively and a liability.

I do not need it with a mouse PERIOD. At the end of the day use computers for work. I can't image playing games like SWTOR or WOW with touch compared to my keyboard as well. Just not a quick.

At work you're probably not a content consumer either though, so it makes sense that you wouldn't use metro, or would use it with voice commands. All I'm saying is that a touchscreen is not an immediate OSHA liability.

mdtaUK said,
Touch interfaces will be the norm for future generations growing up using Tablets and Smartphones. It is important if Windows is to remain relevant, that it support these future users, as well as keeping their current users.

You know kids grew up with IPODS before the iphone. Therefore we all need wheels on our laptops like this one the MacBook wheel?

http://www.theonion.com/video/...y-new-laptop-with-no,14299/

Would you actually use this for day to day work? It is silly just like the tablet UI to me.

sinetheo said,

They wont at work. It is an OSHA lawsuit ready to happen if people stretch their amrs all day repetitively and a liability.

I do not need it with a mouse PERIOD. At the end of the day use computers for work. I can't image playing games like SWTOR or WOW with touch compared to my keyboard as well. Just not a quick.

So put a guardrail around the monitor. Problem solved! :-D

And touch isn't a replacement for the mouse in a lot of situations, but is better suited than mice for others - any occasion when you're standing or don't have a flat surface to place a mouse for instance.

It's not about replacing the traditional style of interaction, but supplementing it. After all, the introduction of the mouse didn't mean the end of keyboards. It's an addition, not a replacement. Touch and mouse/keyboard are not mutually exclusive, but complementary.

Microsoft isn't trying to force us to use one or the other, they're just making both work well.

mdtaUK said,
Touch interfaces will be the norm for future generations growing up using Tablets and Smartphones. It is important if Windows is to remain relevant, that it support these future users, as well as keeping their current users.

Of course and that is why OSX and most modern linux distros shove a touch-style interface into your face as soon as you boot the machine.

/s

Order_66 said,

Of course and that is why OSX and most modern linux distros shove a touch-style interface into your face as soon as you boot the machine.

/s

Maybe not now. But what happens in 10 years when our machines are nothing more than docking stations for tablets and smartphones?

Right like I am going to carry 2 30 inch 4k monitors around that double as tablets. lol

Not going to happen for content creation.

Windows 9 based on Windows 8.1 update 1 will be a return to aero, the start menu, and all that is good for real multitaskers. Then finally folks can start leaving XP behind.

sinetheo said,
Right like I am going to carry 2 30 inch 4k monitors around that double as tablets. lol

Not going to happen for content creation.

Windows 9 based on Windows 8.1 update 1 will be a return to aero, the start menu, and all that is good for real multitaskers. Then finally folks can start leaving XP behind.

You do know you can connect stationary monitors to docking stations, and tablets... Right? And what do you mean folks will start to leave XP behind? Folks left XP behind ages ago. You need to get out of that bubble you live in, buddy.

Arkos Reed said,
Godwin !

/thread

To be fair concentration camps were an invention of the British in South African Boer wars and were also used by the US in WWII, so it may not be 100% certain that Godwin has been summoned

Those of you that say tablets have taken over businesses.

Have you seen anybody write several dozen pages or more for a contract or something similar?

Have you seen anybody program hundreds/thousands of lines of code on a tablet?

No business uses tablets like this. They use tablets for quick access of information. Businesses do not use tablets where typing for 8 hours a day is required.

xWhiplash said,
Those of you that say tablets have taken over businesses.

Have you seen anybody write several dozen pages or more for a contract or something similar?

Have you seen anybody program hundreds/thousands of lines of code on a tablet?

No business uses tablets like this. They use tablets for quick access of information. Businesses do not use tablets where typing for 8 hours a day is required.

Ok, and? What about the thousands of workers that use mobile devices daily? Don't tell me they don't exist, because I support dozens of mobile workers daily.

And what do they do on those devices?

It also depends on the business you know? How would a video production studio react if they were ONLY allowed to use tablets. Yeah, no rendering farms, no 32GB of ram + for their 3D models/video projects. No thousand dollar graphics cards.

You guys cannot make general statements like "Businesses are flocking to tablets, OMG!!!!". Most businesses use them for a secondary device, NOT a primary device.

xWhiplash said,
Those of you that say tablets have taken over businesses.

Have you seen anybody write several dozen pages or more for a contract or something similar?

Have you seen anybody program hundreds/thousands of lines of code on a tablet?

No business uses tablets like this. They use tablets for quick access of information. Businesses do not use tablets where typing for 8 hours a day is required.

Is anyone really saying that tablets have taken over businesses? I thought the argument was simply that tablets are being used more in businesses. For the foreseeable future at least heavy lifting would still be done with traditional computers.

But for presentations, sharing information, tablets are a good choice. And hybrids like the Surface are ideal for travel - works as both a tablet and regular computer. With an external monitor and keycover or a full mouse/keyboard, it's basically a full computer in itself. Even the RT is enough if you're just working on a report, or accessing a Citrix server, or doing remote support with Teamviewer. I myself have done long remote support sessions using my Surface RT.

Attach a full size keyboard and mouse to your Surface, and you can type several dozen pages just fine. And even iOS and Android have some capability for that, although it's not quite as nice as Windows.

Nobody is claiming that we should be using touchscreens for heavy-duty typing. I'm envisioning a world where touch supplements the mouse and keyboard, rather than replacing it. And so is Microsoft.

If you don't need massive horsepower for what you're doing, how is a tablet with keyboard/mouse inherently less useful than a traditional computer? Not in every case, certainly, but in some cases it could be just as good, and in some cases better. I know some users that would get into far less trouble with a Surface RT than a traditional Windows computer.

Of course, I'm basing all my statements on tablets that are designed to work with m/k as well as touch - Windows 8.x/RT tablets. Android and iPad might not work quite as well.

Tablets haven't taken over business, but they do have a place.

DConnell said,

Heck, I said that right up to the day I installed 8. Then it was "This is more like it! Goodbye menu forever!"

This is all falsely associated with people who hate change. Yes, we all have to deal with them ... or most who do IT work or support our families :-)

Practical note (not esethetic) the start screen is very bloated on what is on the screen and has a closed door syndrome if you ask a psychologist. The context of what you have on the screen is put in short term memory and is forgotten if things change in front of you. If you install Adobe CS suite you have 8 freaking pages of tiles!

Windows 8 really tries to hit this home as it was designed with "Oh users only need to view content. To hell with anything else!" if you view the youtube videos from Microsoft.

What this means is MS wants hotcorners. not taskbars for stacked apps and things are either all full screen. hidden, or in a bizarre stretched vertical side not designed for a mouse, but with touch.

Now with aesthetics Windows 8 is just plain ugly and backwards in many ways. The ugly blue and red x buttons with no transparency felt like Windows 2.0 or Amiga and Atari ST. It is a timewarp back as anti skuemorphism must mean no gradients, shadows, all flat, little to no color, etc.

We live in 2014 with computers that have more than 8 bit color now. Why not use our GPU's to the advantage considering our systems are 5,000 times more powerful!

Office 2013 is hellbent on no color too. This is not what anti skuemorphic design supposed to be. It means less simulation of the real. Not make it all 100% blinding white and get rid of options and focus on just reading content.

People use office to create content and their phones to read it. I know MS wants to break into this market but still.

Compared to Windows95 90% of people LOVED IT! Those who did not like the taskbar complained about wasted pixel space on a tiny 14 inch screen (remember those?) Those who did not like change had a fit but could see the benefit if you had more than 1 app open. Yes it was confusing at first as people got used to hitting the dimmer on the upper left hand corner to close and now had to use the buttons on the right like X :-)

Windows 8 has serious design flaws which will be addressed in Windows 9 as evident in Windows 8.1 update 1 which is putting windows 7 back in many places.

That is the issue for us who do not like the new UI.

MS seems to made the assumption that *WE ALL* will use tablets. Hell the General Manger for Windows 8 UI even said by now she imagined touch would be a requirement for *any new* pc sold just like a mouse.

She guessed wrong.

The netbook was popular a half decade ago too. Remember those? The fad went away.

... now towards 2020 I can imagine as SSDs replace mechanical drives and more legacy IE 6/XP software is moved into clouds or virtualization farms hosted anywhere we will see ALOT MORE tablets.

But we are not there yet. Detachable keyboards, 1 TB ssds, huge monitors and tablet docking stations are not really out yet. Some is coming out slowly.

A more hybrid approach to Windows 9 which returns many Windows 7 elements (yes Neowin readers this will HAVE to HAPPEN), but with touch support and applets in a universal desktop with an autohide taskbar which comes and goes depending on a mouse attached is what will be needed.

Also MS has to do something with the start screen tiles. Fine for cute phones, but what about Adobe CS 6 or Visual Studio pro that both have 8 freaking pages of tiles? A mini start menu is needed to navigate.

So tablets and updating the OS will both these things first and Windows 8 is too ahead of its time just like the Mac. People loved DOS and it frustrated Steve Jobs and led to his departure.

sinetheo said,

This is all falsely associated with people who hate change. Yes, we all have to deal with them ... or most who do IT work or support our families :-)

Practical note (not esethetic) the start screen is very bloated on what is on the screen and has a closed door syndrome if you ask a psychologist. The context of what you have on the screen is put in short term memory and is forgotten if things change in front of you. If you install Adobe CS suite you have 8 freaking pages of tiles!

Windows 8 really tries to hit this home as it was designed with "Oh users only need to view content. To hell with anything else!" if you view the youtube videos from Microsoft.
.

How is the Start Screen bloated? If anything the old Menu was far too dense. The Screen adds in some "whitespace" which makes things easier to find. Cramming everything into a textmaze was the antithesis of productivity IMO.

I also don't see how Windows 8 as a whole is solely for content consumption. Even on the Metro side it's only because the creation apps don't really exist (yet). There's nothing inherently anti-productivity about Metro, except that it's different from what has been shoved down our throats as the norm for 2 decades.

And the issue of installers dumping everything on the Screen was already fixed - in 8.1 nothing is pinned to the Screen by default. You pin what you want yourself.

I don't agree that everything has to be visible on the screen at all times. I think it's much easier to work with a less cluttered interface, where you can bring up the tools when you need them, rather than having to search through dozens of options all the time. The tools should be easy to access, but they don't have to be in my face every second. Nor do I have to have every program I use visible onscreen every second. I know it's there, an I know where to got to bring it up when I need it.

And I'm one of the ones who disliked Windows 95 - the Start Menu was the bane of my computing existence for the last 2 decades, and I'm not sad to see it gone. The taskbar was useful, but so is the Metro-style left hand sidebar - the same thing in function. And I still think moving the close button next to the Max & Min was a huge usability mistake. If Microsoft had to move it, they should have retained the need to double-click to close. I've lost so much time and work from accidentally closing programs thanks to that "improvement".

When it comes to the UI (not the architecture improvements) Windows 95 was a turd with very good publicity. It was the marketing campaign that made it popular, rather than any improved ease of use. Click "Start" to shut down? How is that even remotely intuitive? Some good ideas, but a lot of bad ones, especially the Menu, that people now accept and think as "how things should be" simply because that's what they learned on.

The main reason, I think, that people are resistant to the change is that they've invested so much effort into learning to live with the ancient desktop metaphor and the textmaze Start Menu that they don't want to have to learn something new. Even if it is actually more intuitive than its predecessor. Metro is easy to learn, consistent, and the Screen is easy to customize and organize - all areas where the "classic" design is horribly lacking.

It's like people are being offered a sportscar, but want to stick with their run-down, barely running junker because of all the investment they have in it.

Edited by DConnell, Feb 20 2014, 4:24pm :

If Windows 8.1 solved the issue of installers dumping everything in the start screen then that is good. I have not installed Adobe CS or VS 2012 on 8.1 yet but that drove me nuts.

In Windows Vista and later I just hit the start button and typed. Many older users like to see the same common apps out of habbit and it is a great way to do that. I do not like the 2 user interfaces battling each other out and hope the taskbar comes back with the start screen as the background with a mini start menu. This seems like a compromise and has a unified look and feel. Yes I like more clutter because I use thing like neowin in my jumplist for my browsers :-)

You can't do the jumplists in modern mode.

Search was a great way to avoid the textmaze, and it still works in 8.x, although the easy organization makes it less necessary to me.

I don't want the taskbar added to the Metro side, but I'll settle for the option to turn it off. I'd rather have the apps side bar become aware of individual desktop programs rather than just showing "Desktop". I'd rather Metro become more capable and standalone, not turned into another flavor of desktop.

Jumplists would be nice - maybe as a right-click/long press option? Jumplist pops up over the tile, while the unpin/uninstall options pop up at the bottom like they do now.

DConnell said,

I also don't see how Windows 8 as a whole is solely for content consumption. Even on the Metro side it's only because the creation apps don't really exist (yet).

Many creation apps exist! I use OneNote, and Evernote daily. I also do code work on the Code Writer app.

True, there are some. But it's still a far cry from the number built up from years of the traditional desktop. I may prefer Metro itself style- and usability-wise, but in terms of application support it's nowhere near where the desktop is yet.

well, I guess Metro's designer is going to defend it eh?

You've got to love the way he says - "you may not like it, but really you will", sorry buddy, the tribe has spoken, its a massive FAILURE!

And will you listen to yourself? The pointing-device-centric say it's a failure; however, there are quite a few Windows users (and long-time Windows users at that) that disagree. I get WHY the pointing-device centric don't like it - however, they aren't the only users of Windows.

dvb2000 said,
well, I guess Metro's designer is going to defend it eh?

You've got to love the way he says - "you may not like it, but really you will", sorry buddy, the tribe has spoken, its a massive FAILURE!

Yawn yawn yawn. OK we get it, you don't like it but many do and it works great for those users. Get off your horse.

Its not only the "touch" focus, its also the "small screen" focus and dumbing everything down to the lowest common denominator ( a 4" phone). No one wants those large touch tiles on a 24" dual monitor desktop. Its just stupid.

The sooner Microsoft admit their mistake, and once again separate out desktop/laptops from touch screen phones the better everyone will be. Personally I'd rather the "desktop" on tablets as well, amazingly, pretty much every tablet you see advertised, is always pictured attached to a proper keyboard anyway.

dvb2000 said,
Its not only the "touch" focus, its also the "small screen" focus and dumbing everything down to the lowest common denominator ( a 4" phone). No one wants those large touch tiles on a 24" dual monitor desktop. Its just stupid.

The sooner Microsoft admit their mistake, and once again separate out desktop/laptops from touch screen phones the better everyone will be. Personally I'd rather the "desktop" on tablets as well, amazingly, pretty much every tablet you see advertised, is always pictured attached to a proper keyboard anyway.

if you ask me, the tiles scale pretty well on a 24" display. Static icons, on the other hand - not so much. Tiles aren't the problem on a large screen - full screen apps are. .

MikeChipshop said,

you don't like it but many do and it works great for those users.

Many might, but many more do not, it would seem.

im not sure what constitutes a massive failure these days because the amount of people who throw this statement around when it comes to windows 8 is amazing. if 200 Million and growing is a failure, id certainly love to fail like this...

when statements like this are thrown around it is as if the person making the statement forgets that MS is collecting win 7 money and supporting it for the next decade or more...its like everyone was hoping that when win 8 came out suddenly 1 Billion people would all upgrade that day and the world would be awesome???

that kinda ridiculous overzealous stupidity has to go really...all fine and well to have your opinion but its usually shared without a constructive solution or recommendation and generally out of ignorance.

dvb2000 said,
the tribe has spoken, its a massive FAILURE!
If by 'The Tribe' you refer to about the >50% of the minute number of Windows users out here in techblog land who really have not even considered giving it a real and honest chance then yes, you would be correct. In the real world though (you may want to try it some time) not so much.

dvb2000 said,
No one wants those large touch tiles on a 24" dual monitor desktop. Its just stupid.

Sorry but I guess I am one of the few that prefers Metro on a 20+ inch dual monitor desktop. In fact, I find Metro on a 14-inch screen less useful (although 8.1 slightly makes it better with the extra small tiles).

I have close to 60 tiles (various sizes) on my Dell 21.5-inch 1080p display available for selection without the need for scrolling. In my old Windows 7 setup, I had to settle with pinning my favorite apps on the Start menu and the list became long. Plus, all the pinned Windows 7 Start menu items are stuck on the bottom left of the screen so I would have to travel my mouse to the bottom left. I understand many people love launching programs by typing it in the search but I find that using the mouse alone is less effort overall (I like one-handed usage at times)

People might say that Windows 7 has less mouse travel and that can be true for some users but I like to bring up the Start screen by pressing the Windows key. With my mouse cursor still on the center, I can launch any app I want quicker and I pretty much memorized the location of the apps on my Start screen.

Add in the benefits of Live Tiles (XE.com has an amazing Windows 8 app) and I see the Metro interface as a winner. It sucks at first but it works a lot better when you customize it properly.

The only thing I miss on the Start menu is the jump lists.

dvb2000 said,
Its not only the "touch" focus, its also the "small screen" focus and dumbing everything down to the lowest common denominator ( a 4" phone).

Not at all, the idea is also applied to living room environments like the XBox where you view from a distance, ie Media Center.. and ultimately it came from design prototypes for Windows XP.. 'Activity Centers' for Neptune... which didn't have touch in mind at all, just mouse and keyboard. Its also not really much different than Dashboard on MacOS except it also launches apps.

Raa said,

Many might, but many more do not, it would seem.

I have to disagree; it's just that the vocal majority are those that do not. Those that do like it; just do. They don't need to post on a forum about how much they love the new UI. Those that don't like it are the ones out in full force letting everyone know how they feel.

20legend said,

See the download stats for Classicshell......

And compare them to the usage stats for Win 8 which shows the % of those using classic shell (amongst other similar software titles) is minimal at best.

I wouldn't say that Win8 is a massive failure, and not by a stretch either. However, I never had a problem with Vista either. Either way, when it comes to an UPGRADE you would think that they add new features, but really all of the features of Metro are just a re-skinning of what is already there and in most cases, stripped down of what it was before. I think I can speak for most power users in that we are ok with a new UI, but don't take away what makes Windows great to being with. Usability, customization, having 10 ways to delete a file, choosing what I want to run and where, all of these things are severely stripped or limited in some way in Metro. Sure I can always just drop to the desktop and do what I want, but I shouldn't have to. He guy in the article says that they kept power users in mind, but they really didn't, because again, I shouldn't HAVE to drop to the desktop to accomplish my task.

Yep modern interface is so hard for everyone ....massive failure since my four year old can navigate though Windows 8 - uses touch interface and mouse when using my computer. Even tells my wife how to properly shutdown a modern app. Definitely a massive failure.

/S

MS has forgotten one thing though that we are not living in 90s anymore where consumer did not have much options. With the technological shift toward tablets, where Android and iOS has lions share, MS ca not afford to keep doing their tic tock experiment anymore. They are loosing their good will from their customers and this time they won't be forgiven for messing up things just for the sake of it.

They are right about forcing users for the exposure of Metro as normally none of them would have explored it otherwise. This shows that Metro is not implemented based on the assumption of merit where consumers would like it but based on the assumption that throw the consumers in water and they will be forced to learn to swim.

They got blinded by their milk and honey concept that they took such a stupid gamble which did not pay off and they also lost good will of so many consumers. I personally know many people who do not like Metro on their desktop and they had it on their computer for more than 6 months. I guess, it is more than enough time for some one to get used to it but a crap is a crap and does not matter from which angle you try to look at it.

Now MS has been in plan B mode to undo what they had done badly but I think it is not going to be enough this time.

Grumphus said,
My mom found Windows 8 easier. It really depends.

Yep, it is definitely a split opinion. My mom hates it, to the point of tears. I had to put a start menu replacement on it and remove all metro apps to get her to just tolerate it.

dvb2000 said,
Its not only the "touch" focus, its also the "small screen" focus and dumbing everything down to the lowest common denominator ( a 4" phone). No one wants those large touch tiles on a 24" dual monitor desktop. Its just stupid.

The sooner Microsoft admit their mistake, and once again separate out desktop/laptops from touch screen phones the better everyone will be. Personally I'd rather the "desktop" on tablets as well, amazingly, pretty much every tablet you see advertised, is always pictured attached to a proper keyboard anyway.


I have a 27" screen and those tiles look just fine on it make sit easier to find #### that i need

dvb2000 said,
well, I guess Metro's designer is going to defend it eh?

He isn't "Metro's designer." I've never even heard of the guy. Unless maybe that's a fake name. If anyone gets that title for Win8 it's Sam or Clay. But really, XDR (the design team) has many people on it. Presumably if this guy is real he worked on a couple pieces, and maybe this is his perspective on things. But do take it with a grain of salt. Some things he says have some basis in reality (i.e. the multi-desktop example, although I think there was an E7 blog post anyone could have pulled this example from). But other parts he gets wrong or at best half-right, like someone on the sidelines overhearing hallway discussions but not really being a part of the process.

Auditor, if that were true, Windows 8 would not have happened. Touch-screen support started with Windows Vista and 7, and was, in both versions of Windows, quite abysmal. (The only reason touch-screens are more common in smartphones and smaller tablets was due to implementation costs in larger sizes - which started dropping in earnest prior to Windows 8; the cost drop has, if anything accelerated. Sure, Windows 8 and 8.1 benefit - however, so do other formfactors and hardware types, including those having nothing to do with computing - such as industrial applications.)

You are thinking that every user is like you - however, that is no more the case than every user being like me.

dvb2000 said,
Its not only the "touch" focus, its also the "small screen" focus and dumbing everything down to the lowest common denominator ( a 4" phone). No one wants those large touch tiles on a 24" dual monitor desktop. Its just stupid.

The sooner Microsoft admit their mistake, and once again separate out desktop/laptops from touch screen phones the better everyone will be. Personally I'd rather the "desktop" on tablets as well, amazingly, pretty much every tablet you see advertised, is always pictured attached to a proper keyboard anyway.

Not only this. No gradients, shadows gone, color reduced or removed (look at the blinding white in Office 2013!), skeumorphism art techniques GONE, and included is this minimalism crap.

It is ugly and in 5 years from now when we re-add colors, depth, shadows, gradients, menus, and go back the way things were we will be laughing at this new trend by art professors that have plagued, youtube, the new google maps in Chrome, Office 2013, and most importantly Windows 8.

The UI is just terrible and unusuable. If portable is the WAVE OF THE FUTURE then why is Apple still making MacOSX? They are still selling believe it or not as well as their ipad. Netbooks were once the wave of the future too. Where are they now? This mobile fad thing is just that. Sure people have mobiles now but guess what? command line interfaces and unix shells have not gone away either as power users and system administrators rely on awk, sed, grep, and perl every day for the past 40 years. I can do things with image Magik shell scripts that would take weeks to learn with Adobe premiere.

Until I can:
1. Stack windows and apps on my screen
2. Use my GPU again with aero peak and snap for my running apps
3. Not have one app take over my whole d**n screen!
4. Do a search with my apps still open

I see no benefit over Windows 8? Some would say they see no benefit over XP either and refuse to leave (1/3 of all internet users). I use Windows 7 and like it the way it is and I am not afraid of change as I outlined my 4 things aboved.

Mobile future or not it makes no sense on a desktop. Also I like being headache free and Office 2013 is just pain aweful. Shame on Microsoft for forcing BestBuy to destroy all copies and cards of Office 2010! I was so angry. The fonts and ribbons eat up valuable pixels so there is a productivity loss too

sinetheo said,

Not only this. No gradients, shadows gone, color reduced or removed (look at the blinding white in Office 2013!), skeumorphism art techniques GONE, and included is this minimalism crap.

It is ugly and in 5 years from now when we re-add colors, depth, shadows, gradients, menus, and go back the way things were we will be laughing at this new trend by art professors that have plagued, youtube, the new google maps in Chrome, Office 2013, and most importantly Windows 8.

The UI is just terrible and unusuable. If portable is the WAVE OF THE FUTURE then why is Apple still making MacOSX? They are still selling believe it or not as well as their ipad. Netbooks were once the wave of the future too. Where are they now? This mobile fad thing is just that. Sure people have mobiles now but guess what? command line interfaces and unix shells have not gone away either as power users and system administrators rely on awk, sed, grep, and perl every day for the past 40 years. I can do things with image Magik shell scripts that would take weeks to learn with Adobe premiere.

Until I can:
1. Stack windows and apps on my screen
2. Use my GPU again with aero peak and snap for my running apps
3. Not have one app take over my whole d**n screen!
4. Do a search with my apps still open

I see no benefit over Windows 8? Some would say they see no benefit over XP either and refuse to leave (1/3 of all internet users). I use Windows 7 and like it the way it is and I am not afraid of change as I outlined my 4 things aboved.

Mobile future or not it makes no sense on a desktop. Also I like being headache free and Office 2013 is just pain aweful. Shame on Microsoft for forcing BestBuy to destroy all copies and cards of Office 2010! I was so angry. The fonts and ribbons eat up valuable pixels so there is a productivity loss too

1. You CAN stack apps in Windows 8.
2. Your GPU is still utilized for GUI drawing. DWM is still in Windows 8.
3. You CAN have multiple apps on screen already in Windows 8.1. They are not that hard to stack.
4. You CAN do a search from anywhere in the OS, not just on the Start Screen. The Search feature is in the Charms Bar now.

Have you even used Windows 8?

sinetheo said,

Mobile future or not it makes no sense on a desktop. Also I like being headache free and Office 2013 is just pain aweful. Shame on Microsoft for forcing BestBuy to destroy all copies and cards of Office 2010! I was so angry. The fonts and ribbons eat up valuable pixels so there is a productivity loss too

Just put it this way: Your desktop isn't going to be a desktop forever. A few years down the road, I can guarantee we'll be using form factors that are completely different from what we have today. Who knows, maybe desktops will be nothing more than docking stations for tablets and smartphones - kinda of what the Surface Pro 2 offers.

Your fear of the future is irrational. Your constant claim of the "over 40 crowed" is no reason for any one technology company to stand still. Mobility is far from a fad. Users don't want to be tied down, and the very fact that you're saying this is slightly concerning. Personally, I don't want to be stuck behind a desk under god awful office lighting all day, do you? I'd rather be out in the park next to the lake doing my work. Mobility is only going to increase, and it'll continue changing the way we do our work.

It will be forever!

I wont join the mobile revolution or whatever you kids call it.

We have work to do and wont upgrade. Mainframes are still around and so will be keyboard and mice for decades to come once this fad goes away.

It is like bikes are the wave of the future. Therefore it is time to put bike handlebars in my car and have it only have 2 wheels. Pointless.

sinetheo said,

Not only this. No gradients, shadows gone, color reduced or removed (look at the blinding white in Office 2013!), skeumorphism art techniques GONE, and included is this minimalism crap.

Err, actually gradients and shadows are used in the Metro style, and colors are very much a big part of it. Every app tile in Start has a subtle gradient drawn as its background (unless the app developer puts an opaque image over the whole thing). Xbox uses a drop shadow on the focused tile.

Getting rid of skeuomorphism does not mean getting rid of those things. It means not using them to simulate real-world objects. They're still used both for style and for functional purposes.

Apple has also decided to move away from skeuomorphism (oddly enough, using what appears to be a fusion of Aero and Metro design styles).


The UI is just terrible and unusuable. If portable is the WAVE OF THE FUTURE then why is Apple still making MacOSX? They are still selling believe it or not as well as their ipad. Netbooks were once the wave of the future too. Where are they now? This mobile fad thing is just that. Sure people have mobiles now but guess what? command line interfaces and unix shells have not gone away either as power users and system administrators rely on awk, sed, grep, and perl every day for the past 40 years. I can do things with image Magik shell scripts that would take weeks to learn with Adobe premiere.

Huh? Mac OS X is almost entirely sold on portable computers. And Apple has basically a skeleton crew working on it making small updates. What they have focused on has been mobile support (i.e. battery life improvements, trackpad gestures and manipulations, etc). They've also very slowly started pulling in iOS elements. They're really doing the exact same thing, just coming at it from a different direction (which makes sense, as they dominated the phone market, whereas Microsoft dominated the desktop/laptop market).


Until I can:
1. Stack windows and apps on my screen
2. Use my GPU again with aero peak and snap for my running apps
3. Not have one app take over my whole d**n screen!
4. Do a search with my apps still open

I don't even know what you're talking about. All of those things are in Windows 8.


Mobile future or not it makes no sense on a desktop. Also I like being headache free and Office 2013 is just pain aweful. Shame on Microsoft for forcing BestBuy to destroy all copies and cards of Office 2010! I was so angry. The fonts and ribbons eat up valuable pixels so there is a productivity loss too

I have no idea what you're talking about. Office 2013 is a great version of the product. While I do agree the default white theme is too... plain (and bright, especially on a larger display), and I do wish there were more options, the Dark Gray theme is at least a bit less bright. That's a minor personal preference thing though. It certainly isn't enough to make me want to go back to an older version...

sinetheo said,
It will be forever!

I wont join the mobile revolution or whatever you kids call it.

We have work to do and wont upgrade. Mainframes are still around and so will be keyboard and mice for decades to come once this fad goes away.

It is like bikes are the wave of the future. Therefore it is time to put bike handlebars in my car and have it only have 2 wheels. Pointless.

Then that's your prerogative. You can grab on to your Linux command lines, mainframes, and XP all you want, it's not going to stop things from moving on, and is only making you look foolish.

The keyboard isn't ever going to go away. You cannot replace tactile feedback, however the mouse isn't part of the keyboard. The mouse is a largely legacy component, left over from a bygone era. I spend 80% of my day working without one. If I can do that, so can you.

sinetheo said,
It will be forever!

I wont join the mobile revolution or whatever you kids call it.

We have work to do and wont upgrade. Mainframes are still around and so will be keyboard and mice for decades to come once this fad goes away.

No one has ever said keyboards and mice are going anywhere. Many years ago when the mouse came out we had guys like you saying that it was a useless fad for "kids" too.

It is like bikes are the wave of the future. Therefore it is time to put bike handlebars in my car and have it only have 2 wheels. Pointless.

Umm, no. It's more like saying "Hey, bikes are really catching on, and people like that whole concept of holding onto something and turning it left or right to steer. Maybe we should work that idea into our 'horseless carriages' instead of pulling on reins, even though that's what people are used to from riding horses."

MikeChipshop said,

Yawn yawn yawn. OK we get it, you don't like it but many do and it works great for those users.

Yes, all 10% of you love it. It's a shame you have to ruin it for the rest of us.

I do tech support for an ISP, and deal with tons of "computer illiterate" users every day. So far in my experience, the reaction these users have when it comes to windows 8/metro is almost universally "confusion".

Note: I use windows 8.1 on my computer at home and enjoy using it just fine. as a "power" user I don't really have a problem with windows 8/metro, I just see it as a glorified fullscreen start menu for my uses and have no issue with that. But as my comment below describes, I have seen that the attempted melding of two totally different UI's (and the context switching that this causes), use of hot corners etc... really confuses your average tech illiterate user.

Here's my comment that I posted in reply to the reddit comment that this article is about:

"I do tech support, and in my experience tech illiterate users have even more issues with win8/metro than they do with windows 7.

They get really confused by the switching between metro and desktop interfaces, the hot corners (these are the type of people that have tons of trouble understanding even basic things like keyboard shortcuts, having invisible hot corners is a nightmare for this type of user), they can't figure out how to switch between/close apps etc... Everything is just to 'obfuscated', and there is too much confusing context switching between two very different interfaces.

And the most annoying thing I've seen is the god-awful new windows mail app. I do tech support for an ISP, so a lot of what I do is walking customers through adding their isp mail account in their mail client. In windows 8 it tries to force the user to create a microsoft account before they can add any other mail account, and when they are greeted with the prompt they get extremely confused, thinking that the microsoft account is their ISP email account etc... It should not have to be my job to walk people through adding a damn microsoft account...And once you've added a microsoft account and can finally add other accounts, to add a regular IMAP account its buried under 'other' (most customers that call in having tried adding an imap account themselves, always end up trying to enter their ISP information into the 'outlook' setup, because its not obvious to them at all to look under 'other') In my experience its just a big cluster#### of confusion for tech illiterate users.

I've find it significantly easier to do tasks like this in windows 7. Its far easier and quicker to walk a tech illiterate customer through adding an IMAP account in windows live mail than it is in windows 8's default mail app.

/rant"