metro Why some of us don't "embrace change" when it's not due.

[migo]

I don't think it'd be that much of a stretch for them to include jumplist functionality in the right click menu that pops up in the bottom left hand corner.

[psreloaded]

Give me a less intrusive start screen (as in not full screen forced) and multi-window.

Then I'll buy it.

(two windows doesn't qualify... :rolleyes: )

Glassed Silver:mac

+1

[Active.]

Really, this is just beta software. By the time software devs start developing for Metro, you won't just see a large icon, you will see a live tile constantly updating with information. E.g. the Chrome live tile could maybe update with information from your home page.

I didn't realize desktop apps could have live tiles as well. Is that true? In any case, I was just saying what I'd like to see. I'll be more than happy to see it turn up in the final version. I realize that this is beta software and so, that might just happen.

[spudtrooper]

But Microsoft have made the Metro experience the main part of Windows 8; the Desktop is merely an app that is accessed from the Metro experience (the main Windows 8 experience). So going back to the Start screen to select an app isn't taking you away from the main part of your computer; it may be taking you away from what you'd rather designate as the main part of your computer, but it technically isn't.

This.. end of discussion. The desktop is a metro app, its not the computer, its a metro experience. The desktop interacts as does any metro app with snap to, charm, multi task and whatnot. Once you "figure" this out, it all makes sense.. Especially if HyperV and virtualization is built in as promised, then you can virtualize any OS eventually under metro and have the same unified experience.

[Active.]

This.. end of discussion. The desktop is a metro app, its not the computer, its a metro experience. The desktop interacts as does any metro app with snap to, charm, multi task and whatnot. Once you "figure" this out, it all makes sense..

I guess we'll see how the public reacts to that.

[BajiRav]

Give me a less intrusive start screen (as in not full screen forced) and multi-window.

Then I'll buy it.

(two windows doesn't qualify... :rolleyes: )

Glassed Silver:mac

people who miss the old start menu, have you tried customizing the power user menu yet?

http://www.winsupers...sks-menu-142525

[PGHammer]

Yes.

I don't see what that has to do with what I wrote. (I should probably have been clearer that I was talking about the search field integrated into the start menu)

It's not optional since it's the first thing you see after booting up your computer.

I didn't. And Windows 2000 didn't have a search field integrated into the start menu.

OK. Whatever that's supposed to mean?!

You can search *without* a specific Search input area.

One things Windows has done (since 2000 Professional and the inclusion of Microsoft Index Server - which had been only in the Server side of Windows NT) is keep Search separated from the rest of the operating system except for one area - the Run dialog box. In its own way, that has forced restrictions into how Search can be used by the operating system.

With the Consumer Preview of Windows 8, Search is unleashed, unrestricted, and easily accessible - and especially so for keyboard users. If anything, it's easier for keyboard users than any other user group. It works for any file, any application, and every drive your computer has access to - even networked drives.

Why is unrestricted and easily-accessible Search - right at your fingertips - a bad thing?

[Dot Matrix]

The problem with this thread is that change is due.

It's about time we get rid of the chrome, the crappie that was Luna and Aero just taking up GPU cycles when a simple, borderless color will do.

It's about time we had OS control elements stay out of they way unless we're using them.

It's about time we got an OS that reflects how people use it. Look at the desktop of an average person, it has icons for various programs or websites scattered around. Some people use the desktop widgets too. Tiles do both, and let you keep them better organized while letting you have more shortcuts than would normally fit. The start screen is your desktop, and it scrolls horizontally to be your start menu as well. Search is handled by just letting you start typing.

It's about time we got rid of the drag and drop notion that requires increasingly large monitors to even handle it. See that share function in the charm bar? That's your send to/drag and drop replacement, and it works with a touchpad (drag and drop only works well with a mouse or trackball).

Change is due, and it's a good thing MS is dragging everyone kicking and screaming into the light. And guess what? Apple is doing it too. As is Gnome. KEEP is even playing with it. Android is moving out of mobiles into traditional PCs. You're not going to find anywhere to hide from the future, so quit whining about it, and learn why it actually is better. And yes, a few things still aren't polished, but they will be, maybe not until Windows 8 SP1 or SP2, but it'll get polished. Until then, you can still happilly use Windows 7 for the next few years - it will still be well supported.

This.

Guys, Apple and Canonical are both taking their respective OSs in new directions. Android is appearing on desktop and laptop models, and tablets are everywhere. The need for Microsoft to change is there. The need for Windows to change is there. Don't say it's not, because it is.

[Ice_Blue]

You can actually close the desktop just like you can with a Metro app. Grab the top and drag it down.

It isn't actually closed. When you click the desktop tile on the start screen, the desktop reappears with whatever was running on it at the time, including files being copied, downloads etc.

[Active.]

Guys, Apple and Canonical are both taking their respective OSs in new directions. Android is appearing on desktop and laptop models, and tablets are everywhere. The need for Microsoft to change is there. The need for Windows to change is there. Don't say it's not, because it is.

There is exactly one tablet that is everywhere: the iPad. And it has a purpose-built UI that doesn't even allow you to run desktop apps. Same thing (only reversed) for OS X on the desktop.

Microsoft thinks they can get away with exactly the same UI for the desktop as well as tablets, while retaining the desktop as a legacy UI, creating a strange hybrid of it all. And they have a history of failed experiments in that area.

If you like the direction MS is going into, fine, but it is not the same as what their most successful competitor is doing, which is carefully picking elements from the tablet as well as desktop side and adapting them to the other OS.

Having said that, MS may not have any other choice to stay relevant, considering the market growth happening in the area of tablets. That doesn't mean it is a great development for desktop systems though.

[Wyn6]

I guess we'll see how the public reacts to that.

I know as geeks we want to feel important, we want to feel as though what we have to say and what we do matters. And, it does to some degree in various aspects of life. But, as it stands, we are not representative of the general populace. We're not. How many geeks did you know in school? Well, compared to the non-geeks, geeks are a minority.

Eric Knorr and any other writer for Infoworld are not THE public they are PART of the public. For now, none of us have any idea how the remainder of computer users will react to Windows 8. We don't know what will or will not change between here and RTM at this point. All we know is what we know. Anyone who can accurately predict the future, let me know. We have some business to discuss.

The Technorati said that the iphone would fail. They said the ipad would fail. They said the Xbox would fail, so on and on. Yet these things have succeeded. Conversely, other tech items HAVE failed. We just don't know. Nobody will for another 18-24 months.

[Lels]

This.. end of discussion. The desktop is a metro app, its not the computer, its a metro experience. The desktop interacts as does any metro app with snap to, charm, multi task and whatnot. Once you "figure" this out, it all makes sense.. Especially if HyperV and virtualization is built in as promised, then you can virtualize any OS eventually under metro and have the same unified experience.

Well, It's true/obvious that the desktop is just an extension of Metro ,to me it still doesn't make sense. Putting a tablet expierence that designed around touch on a non touch device will never make sense to me.

There is exactly one tablet that is everywhere: the iPad. And it has a purpose-built UI that doesn't even allow you to run desktop apps. Same thing (only reversed) for OS X on the desktop.

Microsoft thinks they can get away with exactly the same UI for the desktop as well as tablets, while retaining the desktop as a legacy UI, creating a strange hybrid of it all. And they have a history of failed experiments in that area.

If you like the direction MS is going into, fine, but it is not the same as what their most successful competitor is doing, which is carefully picking elements from the tablet as well as desktop side and adapting them to the other OS.

Having said that, MS may not have any other choice to stay relevant, considering the market growth happening in the area of tablets. That doesn't mean it is a great development for desktop systems though.

I couldn't agree with this more.

[Dot Matrix]

There is exactly one tablet that is everywhere: the iPad. And it has a purpose-built UI that doesn't even allow you to run desktop apps. Same thing (only reversed) for OS X on the desktop.

Microsoft thinks they can get away with exactly the same UI for the desktop as well as tablets, while retaining the desktop as a legacy UI, creating a strange hybrid of it all. And they have a history of failed experiments in that area.

If you like the direction MS is going into, fine, but it is not the same as what their most successful competitor is doing, which is carefully picking elements from the tablet as well as desktop side and adapting them to the other OS.

Having said that, MS may not have any other choice to stay relevant, considering the market growth happening in the area of tablets. That doesn't mean it is a great development for desktop systems though.

That's just the thing. Do you want another watered-down mobile OS, running on a "me too" product? Or do you want the full power of Windows brought down to the tablet space, AND maintain compatibility with the desktop?

I for one, am enjoying this unified experience.

[Lels]

That's just the thing. Do you want another watered-down mobile OS? Or do you want the full power of Windows brought down to the tablet space, AND maintain compatibility with the desktop?

I for one, am enjoying this unified experience.

For me, I much rather the two devices stay the way they are now. While tablets are getting more powerful, they aren't as powerful as desktops/laptops still. Tablets are meant for consumption of media and I would say both Android and iOS do very well on tablets. Sure, It's neat to think the full power of Windows is coming to the tablet space to see what the potiental is there. But if that means it comes at the cost of running what IS a tablet interface on my regular desktops and notebooks, then no thanks.

[Active.]

I for one, am enjoying this unified experience.

And I have no problem with that. This is what Paul Thurrott, yes, that Paul Thurrott, has to say on the 'unified' experience though:

this two-headed, Frankenstein-like welding of two completely different user experiences?

I don't know.

[techguy77]

That's just the thing. Do you want another watered-down mobile OS, running on a "me too" product? Or do you want the full power of Windows brought down to the tablet space, AND maintain compatibility with the desktop?

I for one, am enjoying this unified experience.

There is nothing unified about Windows 8.

[Jim K Global Moderator]

Microsoft will fail if they do not give an option of using Metro or the standard Start Menu desktop. As such, hopefully they will give the user the option when they release Windows 8.

Personally, I can find use for Metro on the HTPC front (bigger icons tiles). On the desktop, I simply loath it. I've tried to like, I really have, but I just can not get over how poorly it looks. It just reminds me of some poorly designed third party desktop replacement. As Paul Thurrott mentioned, it is almost Fisher Price like.

So, they do not need to get rid of Metro but neither should the Start Menu. If I didn't want options, I would just get a Mac.

[Jason S. Global Moderator]

While I appreciate all of the passion on Neowin users, never in my life have I seem so much bitching and complaining about a piece of BETA software.

This is not that complicated.

i'd like to have you optimism, but Windows 8 is probably about 5-6 months from RTM. at this point, theyre not changing the UI design.

[TruckWEB]

Just for my personal knowledge, what's wrong with Win8 and multiple monitors? I've tried it only on a 1 monitor test PC, but I've seen lots of bad comment from people using 2+ screens....

[techguy77]

Microsoft will fail if they do not give an option of using Metro or the standard Start Menu desktop. As such, hopefully they will give the user the option when they release Windows 8.

Personally, I can find use for Metro on the HTPC front (bigger icons tiles). On the desktop, I simply loath it. I've tried to like, I really have, but I just can not get over how poorly it looks. It just reminds me of some poorly designed third party desktop replacement. As Paul Thurrott mentioned, it is almost Fisher Price like.

So, they do not need to get rid of Metro but neither should the Start Menu. If I didn't want options, I would just get a Mac.

They are rushing with Windows 8 probably due iPad 3 going to be released soon. Microsoft is trying to get a little bit of cake. Windows Tablets need to sell cheaper otherwise MS has no chance there.

[Josh the Nerd]

They are rushing with Windows 8 probably due iPad 3 going to be released soon. Microsoft is trying to get a little bit of cake. Windows Tablets need to sell cheaper otherwise MS has no chance there.

To my knowledge, there hasn't been any news about Windows 8's release date since the iPad 3 was announced. Microsoft is following the same 3-year development cycle they established with Windows 7.

[Hum]

Change for the sake of change is not always good.

We have the right to say NO to technology.

[Fourjays Veteran]

As Johnny said above, the desktop (and by extension the PC) is not going anywhere. There's no need to imagine Metro-styled, touch-centric versions of the apps you mentioned because it's not going to happen (or in the case of Office it's not going to replace the Office that you know and love).

I think you're misunderstanding the situation.

Then if the desktop is not going anywhere, why do it the way they've done it at all? It makes no sense. I could partly understand it if the desktop was there now for "legacy apps" with a view to them being replaced by "Metro equivalents" (although how exactly remains an important question). But since day one this has been my main concern with Windows 8 and the closest we get to release the more poorly thought out the implementation seems to be - Windows 8 (I will now stop referring to it as Metro because its only likeness is in visual style now) has been targeted at consumption and not production. There is nothing wrong with this in of itself for some areas, such as tablets, netbooks and home laptops/desktops used purely for games, media, internet and email.

Where it goes wrong is productivity and this is where I think it is poorly thought out. As Windows 8 lovers like to keep pointing out, change is happening and the desktop is eventually going to become obsolete in its current form. Fine, no problem. But then the answer to productivity is to just maintain the old UI system? It makes no sense. "Well the new UI that is the future and so awesome is useless for doing useful things, so here is the old UI to do all that stuff." It is an admission of a fault in the way the UI is implemented and a cheap solution to a massive problem in the Windows 8 concept.

Quite simply, what works for consumption doesn't work for production (and vice versa) and Windows 8 proves it. You could actually argue that it never really has worked - productivity on Windows to date has come at the expense of ease-of-use.

I agree, for the large majority of users the desktop is not the future. It is difficult and doesn't give them what they need easily. It is unsuitable for the devices of the modern world and cumbersome for casual tasks. However, the needs of a productive computer are entirely different. Businesses, corporations, developers, home workers, etc all require a UI that can support lots of buttons and information, multi-tasking in various ways and allow the user to decide their own workflow.

Instead of trying to merge the requirements of the traditional productivity laptop/desktop with the requirements of the consumption centric tablets/netbooks/laptops, perhaps Microsoft should have split them and therefore split their needs and futures? By doing that, they could focus on features genuinely useful for productivity in the same way they have done for consumption. You could argue that this is what they are doing by keeping the desktop there as an "app" but it still feels like a quick fix and a case of productivity coming second to consumption. I'd go as far to say that Microsoft are holding themselves back by trying to keep the two together now.

Look at it this way - a game console plays games (consumption). To develop games you need a PC (production). You couldn't develop a game on a console directly as it just isn't practical. I've never used Windows Server but I guess it is a similar situation there - it is job focused. So why should the needs of productive users be forced to conform with those of consumers?

[MorganX]

Mac OSX SL

-Click on the "A" button in the dock

-Click on Application

Mac OSX SL - 2

-Press CMD + Space

-Type Application Name

Just sayin' ;)

Windows 7 & 8

-Press Windows Key

-Type Application Name

I'm not all that big on Windows 8, but I'm just sayin' ...

[migo]

You can search *without* a specific Search input area.

One things Windows has done (since 2000 Professional and the inclusion of Microsoft Index Server - which had been only in the Server side of Windows NT) is keep Search separated from the rest of the operating system except for one area - the Run dialog box. In its own way, that has forced restrictions into how Search can be used by the operating system.

With the Consumer Preview of Windows 8, Search is unleashed, unrestricted, and easily accessible - and especially so for keyboard users. If anything, it's easier for keyboard users than any other user group. It works for any file, any application, and every drive your computer has access to - even networked drives.

Why is unrestricted and easily-accessible Search - right at your fingertips - a bad thing?

It's a great thing. Last version of OSX I used was Jaguar, so moving to Leopard left me a bit confused (I had also only used Windows in between), but spotlight was incredibly useful. Once I learned cmd+space I could find 90% of what I was looking for. That's going to have to be the main thing they teach people how to do - start to search.