Windows 8, enough after about 2 hours

[libertas83]

Please tell me WHY they should always be full screen? I'm not on a phone or a tablet, I'm on a f*cking big screen PC.

Technical answer, because they are not part of the Explorer shell and not the same runtime engine at all. It's not a matter of full screen vs window apps here, it's a completely different shell that opens the Desktop shell on top of it for backwards compatiblity. Hopefully, they have plans to make windowed environments work better in the future, but for now the answer is not a simple as we would like.

Think of it as DOS vs Windows. With Windows 9x, you had to exit Windows to get real DOS and run apps. The other option was to to run CMD which is an emulated (crippled version) you could open with Windows still running, but not all apps were compatible with that version (hence why DOSBox is around).

We are re-living that same situation here with Metro vs Dekstop (Explorer.exe). The main difference here is that you don't run an emulated Desktop shell and don't have to exit out of Metro to get to it.

Your last phrase tells me you did not read anything I wrote in my last comment. I KNOW I can open many windows in the Desktop, but I have to switch to the Start Page each time I want to open something.

No, you don't. You can pin apps to the taskbar or really a quick-lanch bar at this point and run them. The pinned shortcuts feature of the Start Menu is the main thing I miss as not all of us want all our common apps pinned to the taskbar. You also have a task switcher in both the taskbar and the top left. The top left replacing ALT-TAB functionality and is in Metro and Desktop consistently.

+1 This. Metro apps aren't for the PC screen; they're for a phone or a tablet. And only that form factor! In a Windows environment you should always be able to minimize a Window or have it tiled with others or be able to switch to another one quickly. Now, it's true that the app side bar on the left hand side helps with some of that, it's still designed for something on a touch device. Not a PC with a big monitor.

This I strongly disagree with part of this statement. Full Screen apps are a great thing for bigger monitors, even better actually. When you get to larger monitors, you need the screens pushed back further to get a good view on them. A full-screen start menu solves a big problem there in that it makes it more readable. That is the whole idea on why Media Center is great because people don't sit close to their TVs and still need to read it at a distance.

I do agree that being able to have Windowed apps is important and why I will be focused on the Desktop more than Metro for most things, especially web browsing as I have screens open all the time waiting for things while I read other news. I just think the over-reaction to say full-screen apps have no place on a PC monitor is bogus. You are going to the other extreme in that statement.

My overall feeling on the changes is that they are preparing for a major computing shift, and no tablets is not it. Tablets is yesterday's technology. The real future is everywhere computing. You see this in the Surface Computer and in many showcases by Microsoft of NUI and future office environments. The idea of a Window app doesn't make sense in those worlds in the same way as its more like a document. Windows chrome looks way out of place. Anyone watch Leverage and how they use the Surface computer? It uses Windows 7 and while cool technology, it is odd and doesn't fit right with all that chrome. Metro is about real-world design and the future is to blend apps with the real world. Full-Screen apps won't work on these environments either so eventually they will have to allow Windowed modes as well, but they probably couldn't do it all in this release.

Let's take a step back to Vista and Longhorn. Longhorn was supposed to usher in a new design language and runtime too (WPF) but because they took so long to release it, nobody moved to it. They learned with WPF/E (Silverlight) to stop building a complete framework that takes years and do something iterative and release it. Reminds me of Chrome actually. When it first came out, I remember people not liking it because it didn't have all the features of a standard browser, but they released it anyway and built on top of it. Microsoft has to do that with Metro and start with a phase 1 and continue that wotk in the future.

[techguy77]

Here's the thing. The apps aren't for the PC screen in your opinion. In a Windows environment you should always be able to minimize a window or have it tiled with others or be able to switch to another one quickly, in your opinion.

Windows wasn't always like that. That was something they added that people had to get used to and fought against because they weren't. You're not use to working this way. Had this OS been designed and implemented 12 years ago, I guarantee you wouldn't be saying what you're saying now. Why? Because, you'd be so used to working in this manner that you wouldn't give it a second thought.

The only part of the "less productive" argument I can sorta understand is the limit on number of open windows. Now, I could see a 1-1-1, or 2-1, or 1-2 configuration. That would be two smaller windows on either side of the larger, or two smaller windows on the left of the larger one, or two smaller windows on the right of the larger one.

Also, each open desktop app should appear individually inside the preview pane so when clicked it goes directly into that app, not the desktop first and THEN you have to click on the app.

Outside of that and some rough patches here and there, I'm quite good with Win 8. 'Tis my main OS on my main box right now.

You are delusional. On my 27" screen i have 4 windows opened and chat overlapping one...something that is not possible in Metro. Metro is designed around Windows Phone interface which is for Desktop pretty retarded. What is even more funny is that with Metro you have no idea what's running unless you remember what you opened.

Technical answer, because they are not part of the Explorer shell and not the same runtime engine at all. It's not a matter of full screen vs window apps here, it's a completely different shell that opens the Desktop shell on top of it for backwards compatiblity. Hopefully, they have plans to make windowed environments work better in the future, but for now the answer is not a simple as we would like.

Think of it as DOS vs Windows. With Windows 9x, you had to exit Windows to get real DOS and run apps. The other option was to to run CMD which is an emulated (crippled version) you could open with Windows still running, but not all apps were compatible with that version (hence why DOSBox is around).

We are re-living that same situation here with Metro vs Dekstop (Explorer.exe). The main difference here is that you don't run an emulated Desktop shell and don't have to exit out of Metro to get to it.

No, you don't. You can pin apps to the taskbar or really a quick-lanch bar at this point and run them. The pinned shortcuts feature of the Start Menu is the main thing I miss as not all of us want all our common apps pinned to the taskbar. You also have a task switcher in both the taskbar and the top left. The top left replacing ALT-TAB functionality and is in Metro and Desktop consistently.

This I strongly disagree with part of this statement. Full Screen apps are a great thing for bigger monitors, even better actually. When you get to larger monitors, you need the screens pushed back further to get a good view on them. A full-screen start menu solves a big problem there in that it makes it more readable. That is the whole idea on why Media Center is great because people don't sit close to their TVs and still need to read it at a distance.

I do agree that being able to have Windowed apps is important and why I will be focused on the Desktop more than Metro for most things, especially web browsing as I have screens open all the time waiting for things while I read other news. I just think the over-reaction to say full-screen apps have no place on a PC monitor is bogus. You are going to the other extreme in that statement.

My overall feeling on the changes is that they are preparing for a major computing shift, and no tablets is not it. Tablets is yesterday's technology. The real future is everywhere computing. You see this in the Surface Computer and in many showcases by Microsoft of NUI and future office environments. The idea of a Window app doesn't make sense in those worlds in the same way as its more like a document. Windows chrome looks way out of place. Anyone watch Leverage and how they use the Surface computer? It uses Windows 7 and while cool technology, it is odd and doesn't fit right with all that chrome. Metro is about real-world design and the future is to blend apps with the real world. Full-Screen apps won't work on these environments either so eventually they will have to allow Windowed modes as well, but they probably couldn't do it all in this release.

Let's take a step back to Vista and Longhorn. Longhorn was supposed to usher in a new design language and runtime too (WPF) but because they took so long to release it, nobody moved to it. They learned with WPF/E (Silverlight) to stop building a complete framework that takes years and do something iterative and release it. Reminds me of Chrome actually. When it first came out, I remember people not liking it because it didn't have all the features of a standard browser, but they released it anyway and built on top of it. Microsoft has to do that with Metro and start with a phase 1 and continue that wotk in the future.

Sorry it has nothing to do with DOS and Windows 95 as Comparison. WinRT is pretty retarded not to say pile of crap compared to Win32.

I just don't understand why it's such a big deal to open a full screen start menu for a second to open an application

I really don't get it

It is a big thing because it breaks flow especially in cases of real time monitoring certain processes or testing

They're changing with the times. They need an OS that can play well with a wide range of hardware - keyboard, mouse, Kinect, touch, etc... - without the need for multiple operating systems. Think of it as one OS to rule them all. The old Start Menu doesn't have a shot in Hell at working with all of that.

They didn't have to go that way at all because idea of having touch in Windows for Desktop is pretty retarded.

[libertas83]

You are delusional. On my 27" screen i have 4 windows opened and chat overlapping one...something that is not possible in Metro. Metro is designed around Windows Phone interface which is for Desktop pretty retarded. What is even more funny is that with Metro you have no idea what's running unless you remember what you opened.

You can still use desktop for all apps. You can still have 5 windows opens and chat. That is how I intend to use it as well. I have two 24" monitors. I was just leaning back a minute ago, and found it hard to read the UI elements so a full-screen app is useful at times.

Also, this is not a phone interface. Go actually watch Microsoft concept videos, this has been a long-time coming and transitions Microsoft for the day when PCs won't exist. It has been an outstanding question as to how Microsoft would handle it or ditch Windows. They are doing the groundwork now.

Sorry it has nothing to do with DOS and Windows 95 as Comparison. WinRT is pretty retarded not to say pile of crap compared to Win32.

Do you know what a Shell is? DOS was a shell. Program Manager and Explorer were shells for Windows. Metro is a new shell. In all instances, the shells had radical changes that made them not compatible with each other. I was doing a comparison to the last major shell shift that happened with Windows. To say that has nothing to do with this topic is short-sighted.

This is exactly like the transition of Windows 3.1 DOS days to Windows 95. Actually it is better because the desktop is not emulated, it is the full working thing that you can transition to quickly.

It is a big thing because it breaks flow especially in cases of real time monitoring certain processes or testing

Nothing prevents you from doing that. Don't use Metro Apps. It's that simple. Microsoft will get the idea that people need Windowed apps from the telmetry when all of us are running in that way and not using Metro.

They didn't have to go that way at all because idea of having touch in Windows for Desktop is pretty retarded.

I constantly need a touch surface and Kinect as well. For example, I like to interact on a drawing board to diagram the technical work-flow of apps or the architecture of a system. I want to do that with Visio and save it as a document. Touch to rescue where I can draw it on a LCD touch-screen, once the apps support it.

I like to move around, get up, and still want to interact with my computer. Kinect can help with that. Presentations, same thing. There are numerous applications for full-screen apps and touch.

Let me be clear about something, I agree that Windowed apps in Metro is crucial in the long-run. However, I think everyone making the argument that there is no need for them or have no use for them are just as short-sighted. The key here is choice. We should be able to do choose it, but technically you can't restore a Metro app to a Window because it doesn't exist in the Desktop. It's not the same Shell. They could create 2 desktops but I bet that would be even more confusing.

Just stop using Metro apps, including metro IE, metro Mail, metro Chat, if you don't want it! That simple people. I'm sure that they will re-do all of the Desktop at-some point to add those features back in, but if we want to wait another 3 years for them to do it, then wait. Microsoft can't wait and has to release something.

[TruckWEB]

The reality distortion field just moved to Microsoft with Windows 8. I'm amazed by the amount of people "loving" the new Start Screen, full screen Metro, and everything else that is "wrong" with Metro.

The improvement in the Desktop are quite nice, and I do like them. But I'll never say that I like Metro.

Seems like MS is going to hit gold with Win8....

[encarta]

The reality distortion field just moved to Microsoft with Windows 8. I'm amazed by the amount of people "loving" the new Start Screen, full screen Metro, and everything else that is "wrong" with Metro.

The improvement in the Desktop are quite nice, and I do like them. But I'll never say that I like Metro.

Seems like MS is going to hit gold with Win8....

Exactly. I want the option to COMPLETELY remove the metro. Kernel improvements (and other like copy dialog, new task manager, etc.) are great. But as far as I can see, most of the people dislike Metro, or even hate it. So I hope MS will listen and realize that they're making a huge mistake with this crappy double tablet-desktop UI.

[King Lizzle]

MetroTwit, Zune, and Windows Media Center disagree. :)

MetroTwit is inspired by Metro and is a very effective Twitter client but it is a desktop app and I can resize, minimise or maximise it. Without those options it would lose its usefulness.

Fine, let's say for argument's sake that full screen apps are the way of the PC future, since tablets and phones require them and they're getting so popular that now they need to be on everything. But to me, the loss of the Jumplist functionality on a Start Menu is counter-productive. They only had it on one OS and now it's gone because they want your PC to look like a giant touch phone. That's the problem I have with it. 12 years ago, the GUI in the OS was still designed with the PC in mind. Windows 8 is the first operating system with a UI designed first for a tablet/smartphone, then tweaked so that it's halfway usable in a Desktop / Laptop non-touch environment. So, you don't have Jumplists anymore in the Start Menu. It's as if Microsoft said, "Sorry, we know you all really liked it and we really talked it up in Windows 7, but if you want it now it's only on the Taskbar." I'm sorry, that is a step back.

Agreed that the loss of jump lists on the Start Screen is a step back. That was a very useful feature and the only way to retain that in Win 8 is to pin apps to the taskbar instead of the Start Screen

[King Lizzle]

No, you don't. You can pin apps to the taskbar or really a quick-lanch bar at this point and run them. The pinned shortcuts feature of the Start Menu is the main thing I miss as not all of us want all our common apps pinned to the taskbar. You also have a task switcher in both the taskbar and the top left. The top left replacing ALT-TAB functionality and is in Metro and Desktop consistently.

The left app switcher could have been a great new feature for all users if they'd included individual desktop apps on it instead of just one "Desktop" pane. If they hadn't crippled it that way I'd probably have ended up using that instead of the taskbar to switch between apps. In its current form it's just another thing I wish I could disable.

[Guest xiphi]

The thing about MetroTwit and Zune is that they were made with a mouse and keyboard in mind. WMC was designed with a controller or remote in mind. Metro does not apply to one specific device type. The issue with the Start Screen and other elements that are Metro in Windows 8 is that they are designed for touch, not a mouse and keyboard. The proof is in the amount of padding nearly every element has. There's so much of it that I think it takes away from the content. One perfect example is the network connections menu: It went from a decent sized popup in 7 to a bloated space wasting sidebar in 8. It's highly inconsistent, as well, considering the Action Center, Power Options, and Volume still retain their 7 look.

[PGHammer]

Your last phrase tells me you did not read anything I wrote in my last comment. I KNOW I can open many windows in the Desktop, but I have to switch to the Start Page each time I want to open something.

Says who?

You don't have to go to the StartScreen to open anything - not even a Metro app.

If you have a Windows logo key (WinKey) on your keyboard, hit that key and type the name of the application or app you want to run.

Works with every single application I have installed - both Metro and non-Metro - from Outlook to Osmos to Oracle VirtualBox to VMware Workstation 8 to Solitaire to PinballFX2 to Cut the Rope. (Note that only the last three are Metro apps - the first four decidedly are not.)

My base is the desktop (same as in Windows 7) - the only difference is that the Start menu has been replaced (QuickTask has most of the major shortcuts the Start menu had, and a few that it lacked - therefore, I need it why?).

I heard exactly this sort of anger when applications (and later, games) started getting rid of desktop shortcuts (first by making it optional, later by not even permitting that). The howls of protest could be heard from one end of Neowin to the other.

Basically, what you want is a service pack for Windows 7 - not Windows 8.

Your last phrase tells me you did not read anything I wrote in my last comment. I KNOW I can open many windows in the Desktop, but I have to switch to the Start Page each time I want to open something.

Says who?

You don't have to go to the StartScreen to open anything - not even a Metro app.

If you have a Windows logo key (WinKey) on your keyboard, hit that key and type the name of the application or app you want to run.

Works with every single application I have installed - both Metro and non-Metro - from Outlook to Osmos to Oracle VirtualBox to VMware Workstation 8 to Solitaire to PinballFX2 to Cut the Rope. (Note that only the last three are Metro apps - the first four decidedly are not.)

My base is the desktop (same as in Windows 7) - the only difference is that the Start menu has been replaced (QuickTask has most of the major shortcuts the Start menu had, and a few that it lacked - therefore, I need it why?).

I heard exactly this sort of anger when applications (and later, games) started getting rid of desktop shortcuts (first by making it optional, later by not even permitting that). The howls of protest could be heard from one end of Neowin to the other.

Basically, what you want is a service pack for Windows 7 - not Windows 8.

[XerXis]

Because it's disruptive to the workflow? It's awkward?!

Hey to each there own. In the end, I'll be happy to stick with Win7 if the final release of Win8 is not to my liking. And there is OS X.... !!!

How? what is the difference in your workflow between opening the start menu or start screen? Both take your focus, both require further input. Please explain

[PGHammer]

Why don't you put the shortcuts you want on the Start screen instead of the desktop? Shortcuts on the desktop are very hard to reach. They can be obscured by many layers of windows. If you're already in the desktop you can use the "show desktop" button, but this is far more disruptive to your desktop workflow than opening Start and then dismissing it. And I if you aren't in the desktop already, they're even harder to get to.

Contrast that with the Start screen, where anything you put there is two clicks away, no matter where you are in the system. And it can fit far more than the old start menu, with much easier mouse targetting.

That's already the way it works. Any app can post those "toast" notifications, and you'll see them, regardless of where you are. The Mail app preview does not have this implemented, but other apps like the Messaging app do, so you can see it in action if you use that and you get an IM.

Actually a lot of XP machines are just kiosks. Many not even recognizable as XP (i.e. ATMs, movie theater ticket kiosks, etc). These are rarely replaced (why bother), and never upgraded.

The Messaging app certainly does - I get Facebook chat messages/alerts that way. They are, by design and default, in the upper right corner and VERY noticeable - you can't ignore an alert except deliberately. (My FB alerts, by example, are white text on a purple background.)

You can even tag-team the alerts with a traditional application (such as Facebook Messenger for Windows - or even the Facebook chat add-on in Yahoo Messenger, or the chat section of your Facebook homepage - mine is part of my home tab group in desktop IE10).

Most of the included Metro apps are decidedly pre-beta at best - Microsoft has, in fact, pointed this out. However, some of them have some features that are decidedly useful right now - even if you can't use the entire app.

[Petvas]

Exactly. I want the option to COMPLETELY remove the metro. Kernel improvements (and other like copy dialog, new task manager, etc.) are great. But as far as I can see, most of the people dislike Metro, or even hate it. So I hope MS will listen and realize that they're making a huge mistake with this crappy double tablet-desktop UI.

There is an option: Get a Mac

[migo]

There is an option: Get a Mac

Horrible idea, Apple is forcing their own changes on unhappy users. Just as many Mac users want to stick with 10.6 as Windows users want to stick with 7.

[Dot Matrix]

The reality distortion field just moved to Microsoft with Windows 8. I'm amazed by the amount of people "loving" the new Start Screen, full screen Metro, and everything else that is "wrong" with Metro.

The improvement in the Desktop are quite nice, and I do like them. But I'll never say that I like Metro.

Seems like MS is going to hit gold with Win8....

Then don't use the fullscreen apps.

[justmike]

I don't find it anymore disruptive or distracting as the Start Menu. Windows Key > Type "yourprogramhere" or "developernamehere" > Enter. Boom.

And you can do that faster than dragging things to the desktop or toolbar from the start menu for users that need a shortcut?

[Petvas]

Horrible idea, Apple is forcing their own changes on unhappy users. Just as many Mac users want to stick with 10.6 as Windows users want to stick with 7.

Not true. You cannot compare Apples approach to what Microsoft is doing with Windows 8. Apple believes that mobile devices need a different GUI than Computers. Microsoft thinks they are all the same. This is just plain wrong and Microsoft is making a huge mistake here by risking the company's revenues...

[encarta]

There is an option: Get a Mac

I'm a web designer/developer, but I'm also a heavy gamer. So that's not an option for me.

EDIT: But I agree, Apple's approach is almost perfect.

[Dot Matrix]

Not true. You cannot compare Apples approach to what Microsoft is doing with Windows 8. Apple believes that mobile devices need a different GUI than Computers. Microsoft thinks they are all the same. This is just plain wrong and Microsoft is making a huge mistake here by risking the company's revenues...

Well, think about it. Microsoft is doing just that. With WoA you will only have Metro, but on the desktop, if you don't want the fullscreen apps, you don't have to use them. But the Start Screen isn't going anywhere. Face it, the start button is gone, if you *really* wanna play ignorant and bring it back, there are ways to do so, but the start button/menu doesn't play into Microsoft's plans for Windows anymore. And frankly, why should it? It's an outdated paradigm, and has been since Vista. We all knew this was coming, I don't understand why this is a shock to people.

And you can do that faster than dragging things to the desktop or toolbar from the start menu for users that need a shortcut?

I have all my programs pinned to the taskbar and start screen, just like I did with Windows 7, and I have yet to change any of my old habits, because I changed them with the release of 7. I honestly haven't had to really use (browse) the Start Menu in ages.

[Petvas]

I am not shocked. I know Microsoft very well. I used to work for them and I still cooperate with the company. I just believe that each device needs its unique user interface. Marrying all devices together is wrong.

[Southern Patriot]

It's not disruptive or awkward, it's just not what you're used to.

Which is the pretty much the definition of disruptive and awkward.

[migo]

Not true. You cannot compare Apples approach to what Microsoft is doing with Windows 8. Apple believes that mobile devices need a different GUI than Computers. Microsoft thinks they are all the same. This is just plain wrong and Microsoft is making a huge mistake here by risking the company's revenues...

Look at the stupid **** Apple is doing with the address book app that looks like a moleskine, and the cork tear away calendar - they're taking having a visual that is inviting to touch and throwing it on to an OS that doesn't exist on hardware with a touchscreen (Axiotron Modbooks don't count).

Microsoft is going for a unified look, but they're using a minimalist, digital appropriate design language that works well on any platform, and going with a consistent appearance. Technically Apple is going for that same consistent appearance, but the way they're doing it is really bad.

[Mayhem]

not sure if already posted

ViStart 2.0 Build 3807 released

* Added Support for Windows 8 (experimental)

* Added Support for left,top,right taskbar on all OS's

* Fixed Windows 8 Shutdown bug

http://lee-soft.com/vistart/builds/ViStart%207.zip

worked, it doesn't require the new toolbar trick but still dont have the ability to Pin

[Southern Patriot]

Windows wasn't always like that. That was something they added that people had to get used to and fought against because they weren't. You're not use to working this way. Had this OS been designed and implemented 12 years ago, I guarantee you wouldn't be saying what you're saying now. Why? Because, you'd be so used to working in this manner that you wouldn't give it a second thought.

Huh? The ONLY version of Windows that didn't allow for windows on the screen to overlap was 1.0, and even that allowed you to tile multiple windows.

[migo]

Which is the pretty much the definition of disruptive and awkward.

No, it isn't.

[Dot Matrix]

I am not shocked. I know Microsoft very well. I used to work for them and I still cooperate with the company. I just believe that each device needs its unique user interface. Marrying all devices together is wrong.

That would fail harder than anything so far. Then what of Windows on the desktop? If you were Microsoft what would you do to try and revive a stagnant market?