Recommended Posts

Because they're trying to push their phones and tablets. I hope, and do think, the whole thing will be a huge mistake. Metro on a desktop PC is absolutely terrible. What to expect though... besides Windows Classic every Windows theme since has looked like it's designed by children.

No, no, no, and no. Metro is not a tablet UI. It was on the desktop before it was ever on a mobile device, dude. It's been in Media Center since 2004.

You really need to stop saying that. Windows Media Centre was designed for displays 10 feet away from you and remote controls. It was not the precursor to Metro. Either pull some facts where Microsoft say clearly that Metro was devised from the Media Centre UI or stop spouting this tired response.

Metro has been around and been used on traditional software way way way before it was used on a single touch device. That is why you can't pigeon hole it and claim it was made just for touch ui. It is also still being pushed on non touch devices like the Xbox 360.

Metro is just MS's centralized UI design and it just happens to work well ont ouch devices.

Well, Metro is usable, but it's lacking many things:

1. All parts of Windows previously accessible through the Explorer must be brought over to Metro.

2. There needs to be an easier way to close applications. Corners could use that big X.

3. There needs to be an easier way to bring up the address bar in IE10.

4. Metro should scroll up and down, not right and left.

I'm not against Metro as a UI paradigm - it could work, but it needs a lot of work for it to work on a desktop.

That isn't the same as running iOS natively on your Mac, and you know that. You're running it in a simulator. The Metro experience is not being run in any kind of simulator; it is being natively run on desktop and notebook PCs.

I run Windows 8 in a simulator also. No difference. iOS works with a Keyboard and Mouse. By your logic it is also a desktop class operating system, don't backtrack now you have committed to your line of reasoning.

Also the Playbook simulator is x86 and runs on PC's and inside vmware on a PC. This is a touch screen OS that can be used with a mouse and keyboard also. By your definition it too is a desktop class UI.

Because you are mistaken about Windows 8 and you don't understand it. It isn't a "tablet UI," and you referring to it as one shows that you do not understand it. They didn't separate the Metro experience from the Desktop experience because the Metro experience works very well on desktop and notebook PCs. Both are there, rather than just the Metro experience, because the Desktop is needed for some programs and features. Many of us would miss out tremendously if Microsoft didn't include the Metro experience on desktop and notebook PCs. I'd for sure switch to Mac OS X, if Windows 8 on desktops and notebooks consisted of just the Desktop experience, and that is because I quite dislike the Windows 7 and Windows 8 Desktop experiences (especially compared to the Windows 8 Metro experience).

but that's simply not true. it IS a tablet UI. full-screen start menu w/ giant icons? it's clearly a tablet UI. you have to scroll to find anything and you have to use the scroll bar at the bottom to do so. it simply does not work well w/ a mouse and keyboard. that is the main complaint of everyone using it on a Desktop. and the fact that it takes up the whole screen means i cant multitask at all. suddenly, i cant have 2-3 Metro apps open at once. why cant i have Task Manger, Weather and IE10 running at the same time? you cannot do that in Metro. simple as that. it's not functional outside a phone or tablet.

What for you is "nothing more that a distraction" for me could be a tail -f of some log or a running watch command where a single output change is relevant.

From the sound of this, then your attention is on the tail -f command, not what's around you. If a single change is relevant, then everything else around you is a distraction until you get the information you need.

I think with all of these bickering, we all are forgetting a few things.

This is not just based on how we like Windows to look and feel, we must also think about the Microsoft OEM partners, as they are looking for Microsoft to deliver a solution to combat the popularity of of the tablet, especially the iPad. Android is not cutting it.

Microsoft must leverage what they have and fast, and what they have is Windows.

As for us, the geeks, the power users, IT implimenters and specialist, and including the pretenders, we are not really part of the broader target of Windows 8. Windows is targeted to the mass (consumers and businesses). Some of us might not like it, but let's remember what we have to do, and that is to learn what Windows 8 is all about, and spread the knowledge to whom it is intended to.

So that video that we saw about a tech writer putting his father to the test, that is absolutely true and will happen , however, are you going to put someone that you care or love in that situation, and let alone to a user that you support? Maybe as a joke - perhaps.

Another question. When will be the write time to introduce this new UI? Some of you will say never, but the industry is fast changing , new technologies coming, and Windows must adapt to survive. Windows 8 UI might not be ultimate solution for everyone at the moment, but it must start somewhere.

  • Like 1

you have to scroll to find anything and you have to use the scroll bar at the bottom to do so.

What are you talking about? If you have used Windows 8, you would simply that this ISN'T the case! Scrolling works with the mouse wheel, it works with the keyboard's directional arrows, and it works by simply moving your mouse to the edge of the screen to "push" it's away to a desired tile.

Saying that is telling us you haven't used the beta.

It is also wrong because Metro has been used since the mid 2000's in the zune software interface and media center both of which are not touch interfaces. The first time metro was used with touch was in the last year ro so, before that it was used on standard programs.

A flashy app UI and window management in a desktop environment are two whole different things.

I run Windows 8 in a simulator also. No difference. iOS works with a Keyboard and Mouse. By your logic it is also a desktop class operating system, don't backtrack now you have committed to your line of reasoning.

Also the Playbook simulator is x86 and runs on PC's and inside vmware on a PC. This is a touch screen OS that can be used with a mouse and keyboard also. By your definition it too is a desktop class UI.

I'm not backtracking, and I haven't even implied I am, so what was that comment in reference to? You run Windows 8 in a simulator, but the Metro experience is a native part of Windows itself, so that is completely different to running iOS in a simulator on a Mac. I'm not suggesting that the Metro experience is "a desktop class UI," so where did you get that idea from? I've stated that even if it works terribly on a desktop, it should still not be referred to as "a tablet UI" because it is a native part of Windows 8 on a desktop.

but that's simply not true. it IS a tablet UI. full-screen start menu w/ giant icons? it's clearly a tablet UI. you have to scroll to find anything and you have to use the scroll bar at the bottom to do so. it simply does not work well w/ a mouse and keyboard. that is the main complaint of everyone using it on a Desktop. and the fact that it takes up the whole screen means i cant multitask at all. suddenly, i cant have 2-3 Metro apps open at once. why cant i have Task Manger, Weather and IE10 running at the same time? you cannot do that in Metro. simple as that. it's not functional outside a phone or tablet.

It may be a UI that works best on tablets (although I disagree with that, at present), but it is not "a tablet UI" because it is a native part of Windows 8 on desktop PCs. Can you honestly not see what I'm saying?

It may be a UI that works best on tablets (although I disagree with that, at present), but it is not "a tablet UI" because it is a native part of Windows 8 on desktop PCs. Can you honestly not see what I'm saying?

It's best on touch, though. It's far more efficient with a finger than a mouse and keyboard. At least you can admit that.

I'm not backtracking, and I haven't even implied I am, so what was that comment in reference to? You run Windows 8 in a simulator, but the Metro experience is a native part of Windows itself, so that is completely different to running iOS in a simulator on a Mac. I'm not suggesting that the Metro experience is "a desktop class UI," so where did you get that idea from? I've stated that even if it works terribly on a desktop, it should still not be referred to as "a tablet UI" because it is a native part of Windows 8 on a desktop.

To you something isn't a Tablet UI if it can be used with a keyboard and mouse. I can use iOS and the Playbook OS with a keyboard and mouse. It doesn't matter in what circumstances it can be done. That doesn't mean those operating systems are not made for Touch UI's - Metro is designed from the start to work on Touch Screens. That is the whole point of Metro. The mere fact it can be used with a mouse and keyboard doesn't change that. It just means it is a Touch UI that can be used by a mouse and keyboard.

No one here is disputing the fact that Metro can be used by a mouse and keyboard. But that wasn't what it was created for. That isn't the reason they came up with that design language. It is obvious to even a layman that the whole inception of Metro was to answer the touch screen conundrum. UI controls on a desktop OS are too small for fingers they needed something bigger and that is what brought Metro in to existence the necessity for a better touch interface to windows. The mere fact it works with Mouse/Keyboards is Microsoft's attempt to have their cake and eat it too. They don't want to go Apples way of creating two operating systems.

From the sound of this, then your attention is on the tail -f command, not what's around you. If a single change is relevant, then everything else around you is a distraction until you get the information you need.

Maybe you don't do IT work or at least not the same kind of work I do, but when I tail a log or throw a watch to a command it's to monitor the results of what I'm doing somewhere else. My focus in on my work, and my work involves keeping track of plenty of things at the same time.

You are pushing the You don't need that? again. I think it should be obvious that I know what I need better than you.

To you something isn't a Tablet UI if it can be used with a keyboard and mouse. I can use iOS and the Playbook OS with a keyboard and mouse. It doesn't matter in what circumstances it can be done. That doesn't mean those operating systems are not made for Touch UI's - Metro is designed from the start to work on Touch Screens. That is the whole point of Metro. The mere fact it can be used with a mouse and keyboard doesn't change that. It just means it is a Touch UI that can be used by a mouse and keyboard.

No one here is disputing the fact that Metro can be used by a mouse and keyboard. But that wasn't what it was created for. That isn't the reason they came up with that design language. It is obvious to even a layman that the whole inception of Metro was to answer the touch screen conundrum. UI controls on a desktop OS are too small for fingers they needed something bigger and that is what brought Metro in to existence the necessity for a better touch interface to windows. The mere fact it works with Mouse/Keyboards is Microsoft's attempt to have their cake and eat it too. They don't want to go Apples way of creating two operating systems.

It is not a Tablet UI because it has been around ALOT longer than it's use on tablet or touch devices. It is a UI that just happens to work well on touch devices but that was never the original use of the UI. It has been used on actual dekstop software alot longer than it's use as a touch UI.

It's best on touch, though. It's far more efficient with a finger than a mouse and keyboard. At least you can admit that.

I can't say that for sure until I've used it for a few months and until I've tried all of the tasks I usually do (including software developing) using it. So far, I've found it great and I haven't had any problems using it with a mouse and keyboard.

I wouldn't say you're wrong for saying that, though, as I am just mentioning my own experience :)

It is not a Tablet UI because it has been around ALOT longer than it's use on tablet or touch devices. It is a UI that just happens to work well on touch devices but that was never the original use of the UI. It has been used on actual dekstop software alot longer than it's use as a touch UI.

Prove it. Show me where Metro as we know it today was used on desktop computers before Windows Phone showed up.

And actually use facts please.

To you something isn't a Tablet UI if it can be used with a keyboard and mouse. I can use iOS and the Playbook OS with a keyboard and mouse. It doesn't matter in what circumstances it can be done. That doesn't mean those operating systems are not made for Touch UI's - Metro is designed from the start to work on Touch Screens. That is the whole point of Metro. The mere fact it can be used with a mouse and keyboard doesn't change that. It just means it is a Touch UI that can be used by a mouse and keyboard.

No one here is disputing the fact that Metro can be used by a mouse and keyboard. But that wasn't what it was created for. That isn't the reason they came up with that design language. It is obvious to even a layman that the whole inception of Metro was to answer the touch screen conundrum. UI controls on a desktop OS are too small for fingers they needed something bigger and that is what brought Metro in to existence the necessity for a better touch interface to windows. The mere fact it works with Mouse/Keyboards is Microsoft's attempt to have their cake and eat it too. They don't want to go Apples way of creating two operating systems.

No, that is completely incorrect. I haven't suggested that in any of my posts. I have always meant that the Metro experience cannot reasonably be referred to as "a tablet UI" because it is a native part of Windows 8 on desktop PCs, not just because it can be used with a keyboard and mouse.

Maybe you don't do IT work or at least not the same kind of work I do, but when I tail a log or throw a watch to a command it's to monitor the results of what I'm doing somewhere else. My focus in on my work, and my work involves keeping track of plenty of things at the same time.

You are pushing the You don't need that? again. I think it should be obvious that I know what I need better than you.

It seems you an I have two different definitions of multitasking. Which is fine, but even as an IT student, I have yet to have a need to focus on a multiple windows at once.

No, that is completely incorrect. I haven't suggested that in any of my posts. I have always meant that the Metro experience cannot reasonably be referred to as "a tablet UI" because it is a native part of Windows 8 on desktop PCs, not just because it can be used with a keyboard and mouse.

It is like talking to a brick wall. I'm done.

Prove it. Show me where Metro as we know it today were used on desktop computers before Windows Phone showed up.

And actually use facts please.

Metro was used in the Zune desktop software and Media Center way before touch devices. You threw in that comment "as we know today" to try and diffuse my statement which you knew was correct.

"As we know today" has nothing to do with it. Metro UI has evolved and been used under many different scenarios for years thus another reason it cannot be pigeon holed into strickly a touch interface.

Heck and even the Current Metro UI "as we know today" is being used on the Xbox 360 is not a touch device.

Metro was used in the Zune desktop software and Media Center way before touch devices. You threw in that comment "as we know today" to try and diffuse my statement which you knew was correct.

"As we know today" has nothing to do with it. Metro UI has evolved and been used under many different scenarios for years thus another reason it cannot be pigeon holed into strickly a touch interface.

It is nice for you to admit you were wrong. Thank you.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • I think there will be a 27H1 for actual users of 26H1 The 25h2 supports ARM too : Snapdragon X, Snapdragon X Plus and Snapdragon X Elite
    • Poll: Grand Theft Auto VI price predictions, cast your vote by Pulasthi Ariyasinghe After years of waiting, Rockstar will be solidifying the launch date of Grand Theft Auto VI with the launch of pre-orders next week. While the studio has confirmed a date for this occasion, it is yet to attach a price to the highly anticipated game. So let's see what our readers think it will cost at launch. The Grand Theft Auto VI pre-orders will kick off on June 25 for digital and physical editions. Unless some last-minute changes happen, the release date will be November 19, 2026, across Xbox Series X|S and PlayStation 5. Unfortunately, there's still no information about a PC version from the developer or the publisher Take-Two. Now the question becomes, how much will Grand Theft Auto VI cost at launch? The game is predicted by some analysts to be the biggest launch of an entertainment product ever. With the amount of hype that has been built behind it and with ballooning development costs, Take-Two may price this Grand Theft Auto entry differently from other AAA titles. The current price of a AAA game is $69.99. That norm almost rose to $79.99 before calming down. But with such a massive release, Grand Theft Auto VI may be the game that pushes the boundary again. It's also possible that Take-Two keeps the price relatively low to increase the number of players that jump in early and keep them hooked on Grand Theft Auto Online to spend on microtransactions for years to come. Keep in mind that the below poll is asking for a prediction of the standard edition price, not a deluxe or any other special edition that Take-Two will introduce for additional benefits. Also, there is also the chance of the company splitting up the campaign and online portions. If you think that will happen, put your vote on what you think will be the total cost of the two. Poll Poll: How much will Grand Theft Auto VI cost? $59.99 $69.99 $79.99 $89.99 $100 or more Submit Vote If you have a very specific prediction in mind, sound off in the comments below.
    • Would you please fix your graphics. They are outdated and don't fit the article.
    • The Light of Life? We actually do glow till our Death, study finds by Sayan Sen Image by Rafael Rendon via Pexels A study by researchers at the University of Calgary has found that living organisms produce an extremely faint light known as ultraweak photon emission, and that this glow appears to drop significantly after death. The research was published in the Journal of Physical Chemistry in April 2025 and quickly drew widespread attention, leading to more than 200 news stories about the findings. Ultraweak photon emission (or UPE), sometimes called biophoton emission, refers to tiny amounts of light released by living cells as a result of normal biological activity. A photon is the basic particle of light, and researchers say every living system examined so far, including plants and animals, has been found to emit these photons. The glow is far too faint to be seen by the human eye. “I suppose it has a little to do with people being reminded of auras,” says Dr. Christoph Simon, PhD, one of the authors of the study and a professor in the Department of Physics and Astronomy in the Faculty of Science. “It is a fact that living beings glow. It’s a very weak glow, but it’s there and visible with very sensitive cameras.” According to the study, the light involved is extremely weak, ranging from 10 to 1,000 photons per square centimetre per second across a spectral range of 200 to 1,000 nanometres. For comparison, a nanometre is one-billionth of a metre and is commonly used to measure wavelengths of light. Detecting emissions at such low levels requires highly specialized equipment. To study the phenomenon, researchers used electron-multiplying charge-coupled device (EMCCD) and charge-coupled device (CCD) cameras. These imaging systems are designed to detect extremely small amounts of light, including individual photons, while minimizing background noise. The technology allowed researchers to capture signals that would otherwise be impossible to observe. The team worked with the Human Health Therapeutics Research Centre at the National Research Council of Canada (NRC) in Ottawa to examine photon emissions in mice. Researchers took two-hour exposure images of the animals before and after death and compared the results. “We saw that the level of light that they emit – this biophoton glow – is distinctly different between living and dead animals,” says Dr. Daniel Oblak, PhD, an associate professor in Physics and Astronomy and the corresponding author of the study. The images showed a clear decrease in photon emissions after death across the entire body of each mouse. According to the researchers, this provided direct evidence that living and dead tissue produce different levels of ultraweak photon emission. “It’s a very small amount and it’s, of course, very tricky to detect,” Oblak says. The study grew out of discussions between Simon, whose research interests include quantum biology, and Oblak, whose work focuses on detecting light for quantum communication experiments. Quantum biology is a field that explores whether processes described by quantum physics, which studies matter and energy at very small scales, may also play a role in living systems. “Since I work as a quantum physicist on light detection for quantum communication, I thought that experimentally we have a lot of the tools to be able to detect the light,” Oblak explains. The researchers also investigated UPE in plants and found that the light changed in response to stress. When plants were exposed to higher temperatures or physically injured, their photon emissions increased. Chemical treatments also affected the glow. Among the substances tested, the local anesthetic benzocaine produced the strongest emission response when applied to injured plant tissue. These findings suggest that ultraweak photon emission is closely linked to biochemical and metabolic activity inside living organisms. Metabolism refers to the chemical reactions that allow cells and organisms to stay alive and function. Because these reactions change when an organism experiences stress, injury or disease, researchers believe UPE may provide a way to monitor those changes. The researchers stress that the glow is a physical and biological phenomenon, not a metaphysical one. Oblak says more research is needed to understand exactly how the light is produced and what information it may reveal about the condition of living tissue. “We must understand what that is to figure out what’s happening,” he says. “If we can understand how that relates to certain influences on the body – stress, diseases – then that could be used as a diagnostic tool.” The researchers believe the technique could eventually help scientists study health and disease without invasive procedures. Because UPE can be measured without adding dyes, markers or labels, it may offer a way to monitor whether tissue is healthy, damaged or alive. In plants, it could help researchers better understand how organisms respond to injury, heat and other forms of stress. While the work is still in its early stages, the study demonstrates that ultraweak photon emission imaging can provide a non-invasive and label-free way to observe biological activity. Researchers say the approach could become a useful tool for studying vitality, stress responses and other important processes in both animals and plants. Source: University of Calgary, ACS publication This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.
  • Recent Achievements

    • One Year In
      hhgygy earned a badge
      One Year In
    • One Month Later
      AMV earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      AMV earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Collaborator
      ryansurfer98 went up a rank
      Collaborator
    • One Month Later
      Eurosoft10 earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      513
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      171
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      82
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      74
    5. 5
      Michael Scrip
      72
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!