Lets hear it! Iimmersive UI (Start Panel) in Windows 8 (Desktop) Good?

[+Ryster Subscriber²]

its an irony that windows is moving away from windows, if you get what i mean...

i hate that the start panel is full screen. currently i use aero snap to snap videos to the right side of my screen, while doing some web browsing or work on the left side. i dont want something fullscreen to obstruct my video viewing. i mean, if you just want to find an app fast, i dont even want to see the user interface...

Have you even SEEN any of the videos?

Pinning apps like a video player to the side while you work in another app is a core feature of the Metro UI, it's just not in this build. Which is why you shouldn't be judging at this stage. This build is for DEVELOPERS only to test the platform. It's not a Customer Preview.

[Guest]

Have you even SEEN any of the videos?

Pinning apps like a video player to the side while you work in another app is a core feature of the Metro UI, it's just not in this build. Which is why you shouldn't be judging at this stage. This build is for DEVELOPERS only to test the platform. It's not a Customer Preview.

So what you're essentially saying is, we shouldn't be having this discussion at this point and the end product will be absolutely nothing like what we currently see?

[+Ryster Subscriber²]

So what you're essentially saying is, we shouldn't be having this discussion at this point and the end product will be absolutely nothing like what we currently see?

I'm not saying it'll be nothing like this, but it's clear that the vast majority of the functionality, features and a ton of polish are not done yet.

This build is for developers only. Consumers making their minds up over this build alone are psychotic.

Like you said two posts up, when this gets released and lots of apps function natively in the Metro UI, this thing is going to rock. and the classic desktop is just a keystroke away to access your "classic" apps. I for one cannot wait for Windows live messenger, skype, outlook, steam to all be built into Metro as Metro apps. If app developers do their jobs right, I should never have to drop out of Metro and I'll still have full access to info from all those services in tiles on my Start screen. I'm excited personally.

I just hope the slew of nay-saying anti-change progress-fearing muppets don't scare Microsoft into changing course... it would be a tragedy if that happened.

[~Johnny]

In it's entirety when it's complete and we're a year down the line with a slew of native apps, a whole new window manager. I understand the current crap included apps are just examples, they emphasis this plenty of times during BUILD but eventually, those apps will be replaced by real free and commercial apps that at the most fundamental level, work in the same way as the current included ones.

...and? When it's complete and we're a year down the line with a slew of native apps, there's still going to be no one forcing you to use those apps. And we've not going to stop making traditional desktop apps. If you don't want to use those new apps (though you will), you can quite simply just use it as a program launcher with bigger, easier to hit areas.

[Guest]

This build is for developers only. Consumers making their minds up over this build alone are psychotic.

(though you will)

I think I just found someone truly psychotic right here.

program launcher with bigger, easier to hit areas.

Cool, it'll match my granpa's phone!

[DrunkenBeard]

Honestly, no. I was disappointed a lot by the current implementation, so disappointed that I'm not sure I'll be actually developing for the platform. It's undoubtedly great as a tablet experience, but I don't like how you have to continuously jump between two completely different paradigms as a desktop users. I'm very excited about the desktop changes (the ribbon, new copy manager, new task manager, etc.) but the Metro start screen just adds no value to my current use of Windows, it simply doesn't address any concerns I had and isn't adding anything that may interest me. The interface is beautiful, clear pure typography and whatnot but is too restrictive for me to accept as a new way to use my PC. Now, this won't prevent me from getting Windows 8 when it hits GA, the new desktop features are already worth the investment, I just really hope I'll be able to completely ignore the Metro Start screen.

PS : That being said I'll most likely be getting a Windows 8 tablet to enjoy the Metro experience the way it's actually meant to be enjoyed.

[PGHammer]

when did apple say that? cause one's a failed attempt to bring the iOS launcher to OSX and ther other's a poor man's version of windows media center.

And exactly why did the attempt fail? It's because users in OS X are like those with any other desktop-centered UI to date - they don't want that desktop center of focus to go away.

iDevices (which run iOS) don't have a desktop - at best, they have an application launcher (and iPods don't even have that).

Even Windows Media Center was a niche-targeted desktop alternative (which has sprouted its share of clones, such as XBMC). Windows Media Center has never been the default UI in any OS that included it - not even XP Media Center Edition (it retained the default XP desktop-centered UI).

That has, in fact, been the key word - niche-focus. Everyday users are as willing to move away from a desktop-centered UI as devout Muslims are to eat at a BBQ shack - not at all.

I never said that I didn't understand what is driving the hate directed at Immersive and all other attempts to move away from a desktop center of focus on an otherwise desktop-centered OS. On the contrary - I certainly do understand it - I just don't happen to share it.

[Denos]

Not due to the fact that Vista required that much RAM to run well, specs stats and figures are sort of expected to rise and get cheaper, that's why it's standard.

Forcing everyone to buy a touchscreen monitor isn't quite the same thing as that.

I know that Vista didn't require that much RAM but it speeded the process for bigger and cheaper RAM.

You don't have to buy touchscreen monitor - that's why you have keyboard and mouse support but most of the new PCs will come with touchscreen monitors (if they want to be Win8 compatabile).

For our old computers, i think there will be system-wide speech recognition and kineckt support to help us navigate through interface (i hope that it will work with normal microphone and webcam not just Kineckt).

[~Johnny]

I think I just found someone truly psychotic right here.

Psychotic is thinking that you're just going to entirely ignore the thousands of metro style apps that come out, even the ones with genuinely useful features. There's going to be something there, even if it's something you only occasionally jump into for a quite peek.

Also, I am actually a developer, so this doesn't quite apply to me :p

[Woelfel]

So what you're essentially saying is, we shouldn't be having this discussion at this point and the end product will be absolutely nothing like what we currently see?

No, what he's saying is that people shouldn't say "I'm not going to use Windows 8 because blah blah blah feature isn't in it" when it's not even feature complete. No one is saying that we can't bitch and moan about stuff. Microsoft expects that and we should all expect that. I personally feel that they need to find a quick task switcher...but then I did with alt-tab-click. Yea, it's not as fast as a taskbar...but guess what, I'm rarely switching that much on a constant basis. Yea, I do switch apps a lot but alt-tab-click isn't going to kill me. That's just an example though. I also feel that we need more than 2 applications on the screen (in metro fashion). I have a 40in screen...I should be able to see 4 apps in corners at a time. But of course that's my opinion. Just because I can't do it (NOW) doesn't mean that I won't be I won't use the OS. Oh well. People have their opinions.

[+Ryster Subscriber²]

Honestly, no. I was disappointed a lot by the current implementation, so disappointed that I'm not sure I'll be actually developing for the platform. It's undoubtedly great as a tablet experience, but I don't like how you have to continuously jump between two completely different paradigms as a desktop users. I'm very excited about the desktop changes (the ribbon, new copy manager, new task manager, etc.) but the Metro start screen just adds no value to my current use of Windows, it simply doesn't address any concerns I had and isn't adding anything that may interest me. The interface is beautiful, clear pure typography and whatnot but is too restrictive for me to accept as a new way to use my PC. Now, this won't prevent me from getting Windows 8 when it hits GA, the new desktop features are already worth the investment, I just really hope I'll be able to completely ignore the Metro Start screen.

PS : That being said I'll most likely be getting a Windows 8 tablet to enjoy the Metro experience the way it's actually meant to be enjoyed.

That's the whole point though. If you and other app developers do you job correctly going forward, there will be no need to shift between the two paradigms. Your apps will fit neatly into metro, with their own tile that's displaying live info. That can run full screen, dockable either side. I mean answer me this... why does your app HAVE to run on the classic desktop at all in Windows 8? What's wrong with it running within metro? The classic desktop should just be for legacy apps that were not designed for metro.

Nobody yet has convinced me of any valid reasons for new apps NOT to run in Metro.

[rajputwarrior]

And exactly why did the attempt fail? It's because users in OS X are like those with any other desktop-centered UI to date - they don't want that desktop center of focus to go away.

you can't remove apps from launchpad for starters... scrolling threw pages with a mouse is only so much fun. I would hate to see someone actually use Launchpad and navigate it with just a mouse. with a magic trackpad sure, but that's because the trackpad can't emulate gestures that you woudl normally get with an iDevice.

kind of like how microsoft has done with the new start panel, ignoring the fact (so far they have) that most people use mice and non touch screen monitors... not trackpads.

[Guest]

Psychotic is thinking that you're just going to entirely ignore the thousands of metro style apps that come out, even the ones with genuinely useful features. There's going to be something there, even if it's something you only occasionally jump into for a quite peek. Also, I am actually a developer, so this doesn't quite apply to me :p

And why would it not quite apply to you?

[~Johnny]

That's the whole point though. If you and other app developers do you job correctly going forward, there will be no need to shift between the two paradigms. Your apps will fit neatly into metro, with their own tile that's displaying live info. That can run full screen, dockable either side. I mean answer me this... why does your app HAVE to run on the classic desktop at all in Windows 8? What's wrong with it running within metro? The classic desktop should just be for legacy apps that were not designed for metro.

Nobody yet has convinced me of any valid reasons for new apps NOT to run in Metro.

Microsoft themselves have even stated it's not the greatest idea to try and shove productivity apps into Metro. They're quite happy for the co-existence of the two experiences. Things like Photoshop, Office, Expression, AutoCAD, Maya, etc - thoise kind of serious productivity apps, and a lot of more complex buisness apps should stick with the classic style. It's simply not appropriate - the more complex the app is, the less suitable it is for metro.

And why would it not quite apply to you?

Hey, you quoted it :p

This build is for developers only. Consumers making their minds up over this build alone are psychotic.

I made up my mind from a developer point of view, seeing as I'm the target market of this build, and have been watching as many BUILD sessions as I can fit in, and prototyping, and I've actually highlighted quite a few developer benefits in a few threads around the place.

[Guest]

No, what he's saying is that people shouldn't say "I'm not going to use Windows 8 because blah blah blah feature isn't in it" when it's not even feature complete.

I don't believe anyone has actually done this. It's more along the lines of having issues with features which are already implemented and certain fundamental changes.

Btw, is this a dev build?

Microsoft themselves have even stated it's not the greatest idea to try and shove productivity apps into Metro. They're quite happy for the co-existence of the two experiences. Things like Photoshop, Office, Expression, AutoCAD, Maya, etc - thoise kind of serious productivity apps, and a lot of more complex buisness apps should stick with the classic style. It's simply not appropriate - the more complex the app is, the less suitable it is for metro.

I'd like to see a source for this because it's been my biggest concern. I've been keeping an eye out for info on more complex apps since immersive UI was first announced and I'm pretty sure they never mentioned this anywhere on the blog.

Hey, you quoted it :p

Yes, I did quote it, so why does it not apply to you?

[+Ryster Subscriber²]

Microsoft themselves have even stated it's not the greatest idea to try and shove productivity apps into Metro. They're quite happy for the co-existence of the two experiences. Things like Photoshop, Office, Expression, AutoCAD, Maya, etc - thoise kind of serious productivity apps, and a lot of more complex buisness apps should stick with the classic style. It's simply not appropriate - the more complex the app is, the less suitable it is for metro.

I was actually thinking more of your average home user, those who just run web, email, facebook, twitter, messenger, music, games, etc..... but still... even those sorts of productivity apps can instantly launch on the classic desktop just by clicking them on the metro start screen. I don't really see a problem. Those apps could even have some sort of dual mode where basic functionality exists within metro (like viewing a document, image or pdf), and you can then launch the full interface on the classic desktop to do editing. Microsoft are just providing the frameworks... it's up to the developers what they do with it.

[Guest]

I was actually thinking more of your average home user, those who just run web, email, facebook, twitter, messenger, music, games, etc..... but still... even those sorts of productivity apps can instantly launch on the classic desktop just by clicking them on the metro start screen. I don't really see a problem. Those apps could even have some sort of dual mode where basic functionality exists within metro, or you can launch the full interface on the classic desktop. Microsoft are just providing the frameworks... it's up to the developers what they do with it.

If they made a very basic version of Photoshop to run under metro, I doubt I'd ever use it so I'd be constantly jumping between metro and explorer.

Do MDI apps even make sense in metro? I don't think they do. Productivity apps in general seem to be pointless endeavours.

[~Johnny]

Btw, is this a dev build?

Yes this is a dev build... hence being called "Windows 8 Developer Preview".

I'd like to see a source for this because it's been my biggest concern. I've been keeping an eye out for info on more complex apps since immersive UI was first announced and I'm pretty sure they never mentioned this anywhere on the blog.

It's not been mentioned in the blogs - it's been mentioned in the actual BUILD conference sessions by a number of speakers who have been talking about how and why to develop Metro apps. I'll try an link you to a couple in a bit when the one I'm watching it done, but they've all pretty much stated that buttons, toolbars are menus still have their place - they still work fantastically, and in many circumstances they're better than the metro style. One of the sessions also talks about what kind of app should be developed for each environment.

Yes, I did quote it, so why does it not apply to you?

Because I'm not a consumer making up my mind. I'm a developer quite excitied about getting to work! :p

[DrunkenBeard]

That's the whole point though. If you and other app developers do you job correctly going forward, there will be no need to shift between the two paradigms. Your apps will fit neatly into metro, with their own tile that's displaying live info. That can run full screen, dockable either side. I mean answer me this... why does your app HAVE to run on the classic desktop at all in Windows 8? What's wrong with it running within metro? The classic desktop should just be for legacy apps that were not designed for metro.

Nobody yet has convinced me of any valid reasons for new apps NOT to run in Metro.

Hi,

I am not fundamentally against Metro, I just don't like how it is implemented in the build they gave developers. To be more precise : When you log into your Windows session, you are presented with the new Metro Start screen. Now say I want to open my favorite web development IDE, I can just click on the icon and it will open it in the regular desktop (first paradigm shift). Now I want to start my local web server, I click the Start Menu and the Metro Start sceen appears (second paradigm shift), I click my web server shortcut and the regular desktop appears again. All in all, I had to jump 3 times between Metro and the normal desktop just to open 2 programs. Again, this may change in the future (and I hope it does), but currently it's extremely counter productive.

Another thing that I noticed (could be wrong though as I didn't really try it enough yesterday) is how mouse interaction inside the Metro paradigm is non intuitive. On a tablet you swipe from one edge of the screen to bring the app bar, on the desktop you ... right click ? The scroll bars are also very annoying. They could have at least made it possible to scroll by pressing the left mouse button and dragging, it feels a lot more natural and it was actually the first thing I tried to do.

It's clearly an unfinished product and there's nothing wrong with that, It would have just been better if they really talked deeply about how the regular and metro experiences are going to live together inside a desktop non-touch screen because that's what most people are using to run Windows and it's certainly not changing in the foreseeable future. At this point, I just don't see why anyone would use Metro on anything but a tablet/phone/thouch pc.

[+Ryster Subscriber²]

If they made a very basic version of Photoshop to run under metro, I doubt I'd ever use it so I'd be constantly jumping between metro and explorer.

Do MDI apps even make sense in metro? I don't think they do. Productivity apps in general seem to be pointless endeavours.

Still I don't see the problem... taking your example of a photo editing package for example (not Photoshop per se, most home uses wont have access to that) but a medium priced photo editor. In metro it could open images, have basic touch-up tools, rotation, crop, etc.... stuff the average user does all the time.... and an instant transition out to the full app for precision work etc. It's not like the transition from metro to desktop is jarring at all.... it's instant, not laggy. I don't see the problem.

[Guest]

Yes this is a dev build... hence being called "Windows 8 Developer Preview".

Because I'm not a consumer making up my mind. I'm a developer quite excitied about getting to work! :p

Developers are also consumers... as in, you're going to be buying it based on the merits of it's development options. Sounds like a superiority complex to me!

Btw, thanks for pointing out it's a dev build, I really didn't notice before hand. Easy to miss though.

Still I don't see the problem... taking your example of a photo editing package for example (not Photoshop per se, most home uses wont have access to that) but a medium priced photo editor. In metro it could open images, have basic touch-up tools, rotation, crop, etc.... stuff the average user does all the time.... and an instant transition out to the full app for precision work etc. It's not like the transition from metro to desktop is jarring at all.... it's instant, not laggy. I don't see the problem.

The thing is, I would expect the new MS Paint to do that already! It's like saying Metro MS Word will have the feature set of notepad. It makes the metro version almost totally pointless.

[+Ryster Subscriber²]

Hi,

I am not fundamentally against Metro, I just don't like how it is implemented in the build they gave developers. To be more precise : When you log into your Windows session, you are presented with the new Metro Start screen. Now say I want to open my favorite web development IDE, I can just click on the icon and it will open it in the regular desktop (first paradigm shift). Now I want to start my local web server, I click the Start Menu and the Metro Start sceen appears (second paradigm shift), I click my web server shortcut and the regular desktop appears again. All in all, I had to jump 3 times between Metro and the normal desktop just to open 2 programs. Again, this may change in the future (and I hope it does), but currently it's extremely counter productive.

Another thing that I noticed (could be wrong though as I didn't really try it enough yesterday) is how mouse interaction inside the Metro paradigm is non intuitive. On a tablet you swipe from one edge of the screen to bring the app bar, on the desktop you ... right click ? The scroll bars are also very annoying. They could have at least made it possible to scroll by pressing the left mouse button and dragging, it feels a lot more natural and it was actually the first thing I tried to do.

It's clearly an unfinished product and there's nothing wrong with that, It would have just been better if they really talked deeply about how the regular and metro experiences are going to live together inside a desktop non-touch screen because that's what most people are using to run Windows and it's certainly not changing in the foreseeable future. At this point, I just don't see why anyone would use Metro on anything but a tablet/phone/thouch pc.

But why would you want to hit Start (the second paradigm shift in your example). Surely you'd have the shortcuts to your most used apps either on the desktop, or pinned to the taskbar just like on Windows 7? If you're going to be working almost entirely in classic desktop apps, there's only the one shift to the classic desktop, then you stay there.

But I concur on your other points (bar the last)... what we see now is clearly unfinished and lacking the majority of the features and UI polish such as non-touch interaction... it's a shame you cant scroll around (yet) by dragging the mouse for example... I'm sure it'll come though.

The last point though I fundamentally disagree with. For your average home use who just uses the web, email, messenger, games, twitter, basic document editing, etc... there really is no need to drop out of metro at all if the apps are written to support it. I fully agree that Metro isn't really for power users who do complex tasks like full photo editing, programming, web development, etc. But I guess that's why it's so easy to switch between the metro and classic desktop.

[~Johnny]

Developers are also consumers... as in, you're going to be buying it based on the merits of it's development options. Sounds like a superiority complex to me!

That wasn't the point. The point was saying consumers shouldn't be making up their minds yet, and in context because the experience is incomplete - it's us developers that make the experience whole. Until we're ready, consumers can't get the big picture. Hence "developer preview" and not "BETA".

[+Ryster Subscriber²]

That wasn't the point. The point was saying consumers shouldn't be making up their minds yet, and in context because the experience is incomplete - it's us developers that make the experience whole. Until we're ready, consumers can't get the big picture. Hence "developer preview" and not "BETA".

Well said Johnny. The interface is missing upwards of 50% of it's features, 100% of support apps, and most of it's polish. It is developers who will make metro great.

At this early unfinished/unpolished stage with no apps written for it and most of the features missing... the poll results are actually quite encouraging... 44% for vs 56% against at time of writing this. I'm sure as more features are put in, apps are written, bugs removed, and polish applied, those percentages will tip way past 50% with the majority actually liking it :) There's also the "afraid of change" and "takes a bit of getting used to" factors to consider.

[Guest]

That wasn't the point. The point was saying consumers shouldn't be making up their minds yet, and in context because the experience is incomplete - it's us developers that make the experience whole. Until we're ready, consumers can't get the big picture. Hence "developer preview" and not "BETA".

I haven't made my mind up, I'm commenting on what I already know. It's part based on what I've seen in the dev preview and part what Microsoft have put out there independently to that.

BTW, as you keep saying, this is not a finished product. You use that to convince and reassure every naysayer that they will eventually love it. Don't you think there is any chance at all that Microsoft will make such a change that you will change your mind about liking it? I think it is short sighted to think any different. Everything is a possibility. I may end up loving it, it could take the computer world by storm. It could also be the next Vista.

BTW, does the green metro UI background remind anyone else of the Whistler beta title bars? :)