Building the Windows 8 UI

[HawkMan]

but the fragmentation makes it optimized for the desired use.... not "jack of all trades master of none" approach.

if I run a tablet I don't want 6+GB of overhead on the device when I can use it for music or movie storage. that other stuff won't be needed in that.

same goes for professionals. they don't want the extra metro clutter. and why waste disk space on it?

Except fragmenting it would make everything slower actually. and it wouldn't take much space, most likely Win8 will have the same install size if not smaller than Win7.

and noone wants fragmenting, this whole unified UI is what everyone, ESPECIALLY proffesionals which you appear to be anything but, want. It's what they've been waiting for. one UI across their computer phone and now pad.

Imagine a designer with a high power tablet PC. he sits at a meeting showing off some designs, using the regular desktop and powerpoint and some live browser demonstrations. He then heads off back to his office, flips it together screen up, or like the transformer takes off the keyboard, and goes off checkign mail and info using the metro UI extremely efficiently. back at the Office he goes back in desktop mode, fires up Photoshop and uses the multitouch+digitizer screen to sketch and draw changes to his designs. Then he goes home, converts back to pad mode and uses it to surf while lounging in the sofa.

People don't want windows fragmentation or many SKU's they want as few and as simple SKU's as possible.

And you lack a clear understanding of bloat and performance. by building this together in one shell that's what makes it perform well and integrate well. by dividing it like you want, you're going to reduce performance.

[Ci7]

If you have Windows editions A,B,C, then it may happen that software vendors have to develop 3 different versions of the same program. This is bad for MS, software companies and users.

According to what MS said about hardware requirements, it wont be any higher than what it is now for Windows 7, possibly less.

found the article which just say that in PCmag about spec

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2386339,00.asp

kinda surprised

/me forgot about dropping 32bit edition , try again 6 years later :/

[remixedcat]

But wouldn't you want stuff optimized as much as possible for your chosen device, to exploit the full capabilities of the device instead of it being meh in performance? I like to get the best performance out of my devices.

and in the pro field performance matters.

also...

Pros don't need that silly metro crap and they don't want employes being distracted by it.

and hawkman.... your scenario may look great on a commercial, but we don't live in a commercial..... the ads make it look so glamouros to use that stuff.... but its different then the commercials...

just like those car ads where if you by an SUV you'll be promised these epic journeys to some epic mountain ranges if you buy them.... it's just the same.... commercial fluff. not everyone will be taken on an epic voyage if they buy that SUV... not everyone's lives are like those ads. LOL.

[Jan Veteran]

But wouldn't you want stuff optimized as much as possible for your chosen device, to exploit the full capabilities of the device instead of it being meh in performance? I like to get the best performance out of my devices.

and in the pro field performance matters.

also...

Pros don't need that silly metro crap and they don't want employes being distracted by it.

and hawkman.... your scenario may look great on a commercial, but we don't live in a commercial..... the ads make it look so glamouros to use that stuff.... but its different then the commercials...

just like those car ads where if you by an SUV you'll be promised these epic journeys to some epic mountain ranges if you buy them.... it's just the same.... commercial fluff. not everyone will be taken on an epic voyage if they buy that SUV... not everyone's lives are like those ads. LOL.

How would you know what a Pro wants, because you certainly don't put yourself across as being professional.

[remixedcat]

seriously on the tablet are you ok with the OS taking up 15+GB (on a 32GB [this would be the average spec for mass consumption] SSD not leaving much room for vids or music or "apps") or would you rather have it take up only 800MB (on a 32GB SSD) if really optmized for it. that's why fragmentation would bring you, more disk space and less bloat for a tablet.

[~Johnny]

But wouldn't you want stuff optimized as much as possible for your chosen device, to exploit the full capabilities of the device instead of it being meh in performance? I like to get the best performance out of my devices.

and in the pro field performance matters.

also...

Pros don't need that silly metro crap and they don't want employes being distracted by it.

They don't want their employee's being distracted by applications? .___. Maybe they should just make them work on pen and paper then. This new UI isn't going to distract them everyday all the time constantly - maybe for like first half hour they'll play around, but after that they'll get back to work - employers don't care. What they do care about is that it performs better.

That, and Microsoft is working very hard on optimizing Windows 8 for ARM devices, which is why they're working closely with hardware partners and trying to control /influence the decisions of what processors and sensors to use. And to be frank, most people who would get this as a tablet would greatly appreciate that it's a proper, full version of Windows. Gives them the option to do whatever they want, install whatever they want - or they could just not care and stick with this tablet optimised UI and not give a damn. Either way they're not going to hate it.

Also, a Windows 7 install is typically <6GB, not 15GB. Still big - but as Microsoft have said they've also made Windows 8 slimmer than Windows 7 - and on the ARM platform a lot of the legacy compatibility code may not be needed.

[Ci7]

seriously on the tablet are you ok with the OS taking up 15+GB (on a 32GB [this would be the average spec for mass consumption] SSD not leaving much room for vids or music or "apps") or would you rather have it take up only 800MB (on a 32GB SSD) if really optmized for it. that's why fragmentation would bring you, more disk space and less bloat for a tablet.

SSDs are not cheap enough for a full desktop OS to be used to be a tablet device.

try 128GB SSD buddy

edit

Gartner: SSDs will reach mainstream prices in 2012

According to a report by PCWorld, Gartner believes solid-state drives will finally reach mainstream pricing next year -- a proposition that has taunted hardware buffs for eons. The research outfit estimates that by the second half of 2012, mainstream flash-based storage drives will reach $1 per gigabyte, putting them well within the grasp of most consumers and not just well-funded enthusiasts.

Intel's current-generation 80GB 320 series SSD (essentially an updated second-generation X25-M) is priced at $180, or about $2.25 per gigabyte. That price only goes up when you start looking at models outfitted with SATA 6Gb/s, such as Intel's 510 series or OCZ's Vertex 3 line. By comparison, it's not difficult to find 1TB and 2TB hard drives for less than a dime per gigabyte.

While SSDs have become more affordable over the last few years, Gartner expects NAND flash prices to fall by 30% this year followed by another 36% next year. Those declines are attributed to the rise of tablets and other electronics that ship with flash storage. Not only are consumers buying more flash chips, but they're demanding higher capacity solutions. Both are causing manufacturers to increase their output, which will eventually push prices down.

[SoyoS]

seriously on the tablet are you ok with the OS taking up 15+GB (on a 32GB [this would be the average spec for mass consumption] SSD not leaving much room for vids or music or "apps") or would you rather have it take up only 800MB (on a 32GB SSD) if really optmized for it. that's why fragmentation would bring you, more disk space and less bloat for a tablet.

Windows 8 will support SSD drives, those come in significantly higher capacities than 32GB, also didn't you just say Windows will take up 6GB, why the jump to 15?

[remixedcat]

starts at 200 for an el-cheapo 128GB SSD a really good one will set you back about 300-400. I would not touch those el-cheapo SSDs.

and 15 GB will be the average footprint for a "modest" install. 6GB is when you've added nothing to the OS or not did much. That is just a base install. Not to mention your PF usage (if any) and browser settings, cache, bloat, favs, plugins, addons, etc) and your TEMP and TMP dirs, etc... This is why you cant install windows on a drive that just matches the install you have 'breathing room" and you need 15-20 GB of that including the OS.

I have a 32 GB partition for my windows install and it has 800 MB left and that's NOT including photoshop or games or most heavy programs. My base server 2008 install was 8GB.

most people allocate a 50GB partition for 7 and they fill it up quick.

This is why droid will dominate the tablet market. it's optimized very well and gets the job done. ipad will be second and then windows (possibly)

[+Frank B. Subscriber²]

seriously on the tablet are you ok with the OS taking up 15+GB (on a 32GB [this would be the average spec for mass consumption] SSD not leaving much room for vids or music or "apps") or would you rather have it take up only 800MB (on a 32GB SSD) if really optmized for it. that's why fragmentation would bring you, more disk space and less bloat for a tablet.

You're assuming too much before knowing the details.

The new UI makes sense in many scenarios. Being able to have the same experience on PC/tablet/phone? Hell yes. And: From the looks of it they're avoiding the mistake Google are making with Chrome OS: Windows 8 will be cloud-enabled, sharing settings and selected user files over the cloud rather than cloud only.

For the longest time people have asked MS to cut compatibility ties and revamp Windows from the ground up. That's exactly what they are doing now.

[SoyoS]

starts at 200 for an el-cheapo 128GB SSD a really good one will set you back about 300-400. I would not touch those el-cheapo SSDs.

and 15 GB will be the average footprint. 6GB is when you've added nothing to the OS or not did much. That is just a base install. Not to mention your PF usage (if any) and browser settings, cache, bloat, favs, plugins, addons, etc) and your TEMP and TMP dirs, etc... This is why you cant install windows on a drive that just matches the install you have 'breathing room" and you need 15-20 GB of that including the OS.

I have a 32 GB partition for my windows install and it has 800 MB left and that's NOT including photoshop or games or most heavy programs. My base server 2008 install was 8GB.

most people allocate a 50GB partition for 7 and they fill it up quick.

Nothing is going to change it now so either embrace the change or stick with what you got. You as the consumer have the final choice.

[HawkMan]

starts at 200 for an el-cheapo 128GB SSD a really good one will set you back about 300-400. I would not touch those el-cheapo SSDs.

and 15 GB will be the average footprint for a "modest" install. 6GB is when you've added nothing to the OS or not did much. That is just a base install. Not to mention your PF usage (if any) and browser settings, cache, bloat, favs, plugins, addons, etc) and your TEMP and TMP dirs, etc... This is why you cant install windows on a drive that just matches the install you have 'breathing room" and you need 15-20 GB of that including the OS.

I have a 32 GB partition for my windows install and it has 800 MB left and that's NOT including photoshop or games or most heavy programs. My base server 2008 install was 8GB.

most people allocate a 50GB partition for 7 and they fill it up quick.

This is why droid will dominate the tablet market. it's optimized very well and gets the job done. ipad will be second and then windows (possibly)

I like how you keep iterating your own points despite the fact they've been disproven several times now. And at the same time you ignore everything everyone else says and just keep on iterating.

And again, it won't affect performance, that's why they're building it into one system one shell, to avoid performance loss. which using an addon and fragmentation system like your would incur.

[Jan Veteran]

starts at 200 for an el-cheapo 128GB SSD a really good one will set you back about 300-400. I would not touch those el-cheapo SSDs.

and 15 GB will be the average footprint for a "modest" install. 6GB is when you've added nothing to the OS or not did much. That is just a base install. Not to mention your PF usage (if any) and browser settings, cache, bloat, favs, plugins, addons, etc) and your TEMP and TMP dirs, etc... This is why you cant install windows on a drive that just matches the install you have 'breathing room" and you need 15-20 GB of that including the OS.

I have a 32 GB partition for my windows install and it has 800 MB left and that's NOT including photoshop or games or most heavy programs. My base server 2008 install was 8GB.

most people allocate a 50GB partition for 7 and they fill it up quick.

This is why droid will dominate the tablet market. it's optimized very well and gets the job done. ipad will be second and then windows (possibly)

You make me laugh, so far the iPad has destroyed any tablet sales from any company, if you think Android has a chance in it's current form then you must be crazy.

[remixedcat]

also for MS to put this much into tablets is a stupid idea to begin with becuase not everyone has them and if they do they only use them like 1 or 2 hours a day....

why bother sacrificing so much just to get on the stupid tablet race....?

not many people want to sink 600 bucks into a deveice they will use for only 2 hours a day? in this economy... not really. most would rather use that to upgrade thier pcs or save it.

[Ironman273]

I'm referring to the tablet space in regards to boot-up time, not the PC space, where it's not as important (IMO). I believe the demo was running on X86 architecture, not SOC/ARM.

Edit: Also, in regards to the use of the desktop on PCs -- I simply don't see why anyone on earth would use the Start Screen instead of the desktop environment, unless they're technologically incompetent. Multitasking on the primary tile interface is slow (compared to the desktop interface), and you're missing access to all the classic programs that aren't using the new programming language. For example, if I want to play a game, I'm going to need to go into the desktop. If I want to run a virus scan, gotta go to the desktop. If I want to just browse Steam, gotta go to the desktop. If I want to do any video or photo editing, gotta go to the desktop. Any sort of Office-related tasks? Gotta go to the desktop.

It's pointless to even have the Start Screen for a lot of PC users.

Regarding your edit. What I'm saying is that the new UI is the desktop. In your examples: to play a game there'd be a Game live tile that would house all your games. You would click on it to expand it and then click on the game you want to play. You could also pin the game's icon directly on the desktop and launch it from there. Your anti-virus would have an icon on the desktop also, just like what you probably currently have. And Steam would have it's own live tile also. IT would update with news on the tile and when you click it it would open into what you know today as Steam. Once you start these programs they would go full screen. You could Alt+Tab to other applications, including the desktop again. I would imagine that on a desktop, with more screen real estate you'd have a persistent Start button and it makes sense to put it on the side since most monitors are widescreen nowadays. The Start bar would probably have notification icons on it too, so things like the anti-virus you mentioned could probably be run from there.

Like someone else mentioned, people have been saying that Microsoft should start fresh from the ground up and this is what they've done. Sure, programs need to be re-written to take advantage of this, but a couple of years into using it pretty much everything will have been converted over. I remember when programs first switched from Windows 3.1 to Windows 95. There was a period where you could see which programs were written for Windows 3.1 and which were new.

[Jan Veteran]

also for MS to put this much into tablets is a stupid idea to begin with becuase not everyone has them and if they do they only use them like 1 or 2 hours a day....

why bother sacrificing so much just to get on the stupid tablet race....?

not many people want to sink 600 bucks into a deveice they will use for only 2 hours a day? in this economy... not really. most would rather use that to upgrade thier pcs or save it.

2 hours a day for how many days? That sure is worth it.

[~Johnny]

also for MS to put this much into tablets is a stupid idea to begin with becuase not everyone has them and if they do they only use them like 1 or 2 hours a day....

And it's also worth noting people would use their tablets more (and a lot more people would use them), if you could do more with them. These Windows 8 tablets would let people do far more with them then the iPad currently does, and it's suddenly become a much more attractive and useful device for many people.

[George P Global Moderator]

It's a sure thing, 100% that the old Start Menu will still be a option, and then people who don't want to use the start screen won't. I say this because the start screen won't work if you're under a preset screen res of 1024x768 iirc? MS already said this, if you have a netbook with a lower res screen, like a small 10" etc that does something like 1024x600 at best then you will just get the normal desktop because the space isn't right for the start screen. In those cases the start menu willl just kick in like always. I thus don't see why there wouldn't be a setting there for users to pick. Remember XP when it first introduced the new Start Menu? They still had the option for the old one for those who wanted it. I expect the same again. Win8 is the transition OS, it's like the XP as far as the start menu goes. I expect a bigger change to the desktop itself as time goes on to match the new start screen as well. Maybe in Win9 though.

You also have to keep in mind that we're only seeing a small part and that more work is being done.

[remixedcat]

@ jan

not for 600.... for me that covers most of my living expenses for a month... (yes i'm that good with money!)

for that 600-700 spent on a device that I use for only 2 hours a day tops, that has depreciating value very quickly, I can remodel 3 or 4 rooms of a house for that. Thus increasing the value of real property.

I would (and most would) only pay 150 and then 200 tops for a tablet device. that is more realistic in this day and age.... tell me... would a 200 dollar tablet run that full windows 8 and have that same fluid experience? if so then I would actually look into getting one. I've been wanting a windows tablet actually

[Ci7]

starts at 200 for an el-cheapo 128GB SSD a really good one will set you back about 300-400. I would not touch those el-cheapo SSDs.

and 15 GB will be the average footprint for a "modest" install. 6GB is when you've added nothing to the OS or not did much. That is just a base install. Not to mention your PF usage (if any) and browser settings, cache, bloat, favs, plugins, addons, etc) and your TEMP and TMP dirs, etc... This is why you cant install windows on a drive that just matches the install you have 'breathing room" and you need 15-20 GB of that including the OS.

I have a 32 GB partition for my windows install and it has 800 MB left and that's NOT including photoshop or games or most heavy programs. My base server 2008 install was 8GB.

most people allocate a 50GB partition for 7 and they fill it up quick.

This is why droid will dominate the tablet market. it's optimized very well and gets the job done. ipad will be second and then windows (possibly)

did you even bother too look at the article i quoted two post above?

not many people want to sink 600 bucks into a deveice they will use for only 2 hours a day? in this economy... not really. most would rather use that to upgrade thier pcs or save it.

the device we are talking about would basically slaughter netbook for lunch ,taking over it place and would put and dent on laptops sells !

i am personally thinking to dump my laptop next year for one of those , much practical

[jbrooksuk]

I'm imagining the scenario of the designer at work, but as me, a developer.

It would be so cool if I could come to work with a netbook or a tablet or something, connect my monitors up, my keyboard and mouse then get straight to work using the touch interface in the new start menu and the desktop in my other monitors.

Man, I've never wanted a tablet before, but looking at that and the potential possibilities makes me want one, now!

[~Johnny]

@ jan

not for 600.... for me that covers most of my living expenses for a month... (yes i'm that good with money!)

for that 600-700 spent on a device that I use for only 2 hours a day tops, that has depreciating value very quickly, I can remodel 3 or 4 rooms of a house for that. Thus increasing the value of real property.

I would (and most would) only pay 150 and then 200 tops for a tablet device. that is more realistic in this day and age.... tell me... would a 200 dollar tablet run that full windows 8 and have that same fluid experience? if so then I would actually look into getting one. I've been wanting a windows tablet actually

$200 for a decent tablet is not a realistic price, in anyones mind. You crazy? Maybe $400 - but considering Microsoft are personally vetting which processors are used they will most likely not allowing anyone to run processor's that can't handle the OS fluidly. I think they've pretty much learned from the iPhone and iPad, and demonstrated with their own Zune HD and Windows Phone 7 software, that they know consumers want fluid, speed software that just works, and they're going to try and get that to everyone.

[Ironman273]

the device we are talking about would basically slaughter netbook for lunch ,taking over it place and would put and dent on laptops sells !

i am personally thinking to dump my laptop next year for one of those , much practical

I really believe my next "laptop" will be a tablet because of this demo. It makes a tablet practical. iPad is a great device, but it relies too much on the apps built for it. They have gotten a lot of support, but it won't get to the point of Windows apps.

[andrew_f]

The new UI sure is pretty and looks great for tablets. I have some concerns though:

From the demos they showed, it looked as if the mouse emulated the finger. This is quite a natural way of doing it, but I find when using the Windows Phone 7 emulator I often click on the wrong things and swiping with the mouse becomes incredibly tedious. It's a natural motion for our fingers, but not a mouse.

It also looks like the most number of Windows you can have on the new experience at once is two. One with roughly 20% of the screen width and one with 80%. This is better than tablets today - but awful compared to PCs. It's a huge step backwards. It seems like we'll be unable to run have IE, Office, Twitter, Zune or whatever combination we want floating in this new experience - let alone on dual monitors.

Of course, we could drop back to the old experience. But that's exactly what it is - and old experience. It may not be quite deprecated officially, but it sure looks like it's going that way sooner or later.

So I guess my reaction is one of excitement for touch devices, but extreme doubt for desktops and laptops. We may get a prettier, easier to develop for OS - but what we'll be able to do on it would be more limiting. Something like Chrome OS with a tab-bar as a psuedo-task bar could potentially become the more productive operating system.

[jakem1]

The new UI sure is pretty and looks great for tablets. I have some concerns though:

From the demos they showed, it looked as if the mouse emulated the finger. This is quite a natural way of doing it, but I find when using the Windows Phone 7 emulator I often click on the wrong things and swiping with the mouse becomes incredibly tedious. It's a natural motion for our fingers, but not a mouse.

It also looks like the most number of Windows you can have on the new experience at once is two. One with roughly 20% of the screen width and one with 80%. This is better than tablets today - but awful compared to PCs. It's a huge step backwards. It seems like we'll be unable to run have IE, Office, Twitter, Zune or whatever combination we want floating in this new experience - let alone on dual monitors.

Of course, we could drop back to the old experience. But that's exactly what it is - and old experience. It may not be quite deprecated officially, but it sure looks like it's going that way sooner or later.

So I guess my reaction is one of excitement for touch devices, but extreme doubt for desktops and laptops. We may get a prettier, easier to develop for OS - but what we'll be able to do on it would be more limiting. Something like Chrome OS with a tab-bar as a psuedo-task bar could potentially become the more productive operating system.

The demo at D9 showed the two panes resizing to any proportion that the user wanted. You could very easily have a 50/50 split if you wanted. This view will only be available to tablets and desktops/laptops will continue to allow you to run applications in fully resizable windows .