Why do people constantly complain about Metro when it IS easier to use?

[trag3dy]

And this is why the people complaining about metro are being stupid, anyone with half a brain can take the time to think about it and realise that since this is a preview OS there aren't enough apps to cover everyone's usage. As time passes, there will be more apps, and therefore less need to switch back and forth.

So when there are more apps to cover everyone's usage can I use metro start screen not in "full screen" ? If no, then it doesn't matter how many apps they have. If yes, then it might actually be useful.

Until then why do we need a different way to perform the tasks we do now? "It's different".

[Wyn6]

From the Start screen he said. The settings charm only offers the 'Control Panel' option if you're on the desktop. On the start, screen, clicking the Settings charm and then 'Settings' only gets you to the settings for the Start screen itself. Clicking 'More Settings' gets you into the Metro settings, but not the full control panel

Right-clicking the lower left works though.

From the Start Screen to get to Control Panel, start typing "C-O-N and voila! There it is.

Settings charm? The right click wasn't accident, it was demoed IIRC.

what work flow is broken specifically by metro? It has limited "multitasking" if you mean having multiple apps on screen at once.

Conclusion: You don't like metro (and that's ok) but it belongs in Windows 8. ;-)

If you're idea of multitasking is having more than 5-7 windows open at once (desktop with 4-6 windows resized and a Metro app snapped), then yes Metro is limited. But, considering you can have the same amount of windows open on the desktop as you previously did on other versions of windows, and you can work from there... I don't get it. And, people keep saying it breaks workflow but they NEVER explain how.

As far as why I like Windows 8, I've made multiple posts on specific aspects of it in which I believe it exceeds previous versions of windows. I don't just say, "Uh... it's awesome." I back it up. But, people who say it will be the worst failure since the Titanic don't support their claims or opinions. Not that they have to but it does make your argument less valid if you are debating and don't actually support your position.

[majortom1981]

Tell me how easy it is to use with 50+ programs installed. Do you remember every programs name ? Searching takes longer. Metro is easier to use if you only use maybe 10 programs at most . For people like me who uses dozens of programs a day having all those small squares on your metro start screen is a pain to use.

Why cant they just add the start orb to the desktop app? Its not that hard to do . Wont change much but will make windows 8 much easier for those of us who have tons of programs and do a lot with or desktops.

[rajputwarrior]

IMO, this is how metro should be done and will be the only way i would ever use it.

that's actually just rainmeter with a metro looking skin. it shows information, you can set up tiles that start up apps and write notes on. it compliments the desktop experience, not perform a hostile takeover.

[trag3dy]

From the Start Screen to get to Control Panel, start typing "C-O-N and voila! There it is.

If you're idea of multitasking is having more than 5-7 windows open at once (desktop with 4-6 windows resized and a Metro app snapped), then yes Metro is limited. But, considering you can have the same amount of windows open on the desktop as you previously did on other versions of windows, and you can work from there... I don't get it. And, people keep saying it breaks workflow but they NEVER explain how.

As far as why I like Windows 8, I've made multiple posts on specific aspects of it in which I believe it exceeds previous versions of windows. I don't just say, "Uh... it's awesome." I back it up. But, people who say it will be the worst failure since the Titanic don't support their claims or opinions. Not that they have to but it does make your argument less valid if you are debating and don't actually support your position.

The problem is that every reason you come up with is a personal opinion. Subjective. What I don't get is why people care so much that others don't like Win8 metro start screen and why they insist that we have to change just for the sake of change.

If the metro start screen works great for you that's fantastic, I personally don't like it but I do like the start menu in Win7 just fine. Why can't I use one or the other? Why is that a problem for people who like metro? If they give us an option to use the old (current start screen) it won't have any impact on you.

IMO, this is how metro should be done and will be the only way i would ever use it.

that's actually just rainmeter with a metro looking skin. it shows information, you can set up tiles that start up apps and write notes on. it compliments the desktop experience, not perform a hostile takeover.

I would be happy with that "compromise". I put compromise in quotes because that would actually make sense to have it like that.

[BajiRav]

If you're idea of multitasking is having more than 5-7 windows open at once (desktop with 4-6 windows resized and a Metro app snapped), then yes Metro is limited. But, considering you can have the same amount of windows open on the desktop as you previously did on other versions of windows, and you can work from there... I don't get it. And, people keep saying it breaks workflow but they NEVER explain how.

As far as why I like Windows 8, I've made multiple posts on specific aspects of it in which I believe it exceeds previous versions of windows. I don't just say, "Uh... it's awesome." I back it up. But, people who say it will be the worst failure since the Titanic don't support their claims or opinions. Not that they have to but it does make your argument less valid if you are debating and don't actually support your position.

I do multitask a lot but going by warwagon's definition I am not a power user (because I like metro :p). I am typically running 2-3 browsers, eclipse, couple of git windows and then usual outloook, onenote, word, notepad++, 2 types of IM apps. All this stuff is running 24x7 on my workstation on 2 x 20" monitors. So yes, I multitask but most apps are not running full screen and I think that's where most people are freaked out about. I can see how I would for example quickly look at an IM window and then return to an app suitable for full screen say eclipse or onenote.

Even if all of them are running full screen, I don't see much of problem switching between them knowing how rapidly Windows 8 can switch between ..err...windows (seriously, open 7-8 apps and keep on clicking in top left corner, it's mindnumbing fast!)

[bandit_liberty_rumble]

Are people really troubled by such trivial stuff? :/

It's badly designed, that's all. It's also a direct result of the merging of two very different UIs. And it all adds up. The end result is a frustrated user. Seriously, this is obvious stuff, speak to anyone in the HCI field.

http://www.cartoonstock.com/directory/d/door_handles.asp

[Ci7]

Tell me how easy it is to use with 50+ programs installed. Do you remember every programs name ? Searching takes longer. Metro is easier to use if you only use maybe 10 programs at most . For people like me who uses dozens of programs a day having all those small squares on your metro start screen is a pain to use.

Why cant they just add the start orb to the desktop app? Its not that hard to do . Wont change much but will make windows 8 much easier for those of us who have tons of programs and do a lot with or desktops.

if you left them cluttered up sure.

organize them in different group then come back. :)

[BajiRav]

It's badly designed, that's all. It's also a direct result of the merging of two very different UIs. And it all adds up. The end result is a frustrated user. Seriously, this is obvious stuff, speak to anyone in the HCI field.

http://www.cartoonst...oor_handles.asp

I wasn't talking about metro in general but something as simple as launching control panel. :/ For general metro, I don't think it is "badly" designed but that's purely subjective and don't want to get into that.

IMO, this is how metro should be done and will be the only way i would ever use it.

that's actually just rainmeter with a metro looking skin. it shows information, you can set up tiles that start up apps and write notes on. it compliments the desktop experience, not perform a hostile takeover.

dude, that's a massive NSFW :p

[Wyn6]

The problem is that every reason you come up with is a personal opinion. Subjective. What I don't get is why people care so much that others don't like Win8 metro start screen and why they insist that we have to change just for the sake of change.

If the metro start screen works great for you that's fantastic, I personally don't like it but I do like the start menu in Win7 just fine. Why can't I use one or the other? Why is that a problem for people who like metro? If they give us an option to use the old (current start screen) it won't have any impact on you.

Actually, I don't have an issue with people not liking it. My issue is when people wish to DEBATE the merits of the new OS with their opinions but fail to support their position with any evidence, reasoning, or facts. If somebody simply chimed in and said, "I don't like it." That's their opinion. If when asked why, they wish not to elaborate or only provide a succinct not so elaborative point, that's fine too. But, when they constantly and consistently post that opinion in an attempt to counter the converse, yet fail to support that position with anything other than reiteration, that's where I have an issue.

Also, as to every reason I come up with being subjective, that would be incorrect. Now, where I use comparatives and superlatives, or simply say I like it, that's opinionated. But, when asked to explain things you can do with the Start Screen in 8 that the Start Menu in 7 and prior can't do, those are factual items. Being asked to list the new aspects which are an upgrade to 7. Not subjective. None of these things are. They are factually based on what Microsoft themselves have said they have improved upon.

[SierraSonic]

My main problem is that the start screen shows me explorer based applications, and that the search on windows 7 start menu was more comprehensive than the start screen one.

Basically, the start screen should ONLY be able to do start screen stuff, explorer should only do explorer stuff.

An easy way to solve this issue for DESKTOP USE ONLY is to return the start orb, but still keep the edge thing for the start screen, and to solve the winkey issue, we hold it for start screen, and tap it for start menu, from WITHIN EXPLORER.

From start screen a quick click will open the start screen again, and a long click will take you to desktop.

And we should just remove the desktop view from arm based tablets, seeing as x86 applications aren't compatible on arm based tablets and this compatibility layer is just completely pointless.

As for x86 tablets, we know that the desktop environment isn't great for touch, so it might as well be removed here.

[bandit_liberty_rumble]

I wasn't talking about metro in general but something as simple as launching control panel. :/

Me too...

Try sitting a user in front of a Windows 8 machine and telling her to change the system language. First of all, no discoverability. Second of all, inconsistency, confusing conceptual model (on the Start screen the Settings charm displays 'Start' and below that 'Settings', you have to know that the 'Settings' charm is application specific, and that 'Start' is an individual app, and so 'Settings' will get you into the settings for the Start screen. On the other hand, if you're using IE on the desktop, the settings charm doesn't display settings for IE, but for something called 'Desktop'. It doesn'T display a link to 'settings' though, but to something called 'control panel'. At the same time there's always a link to "More PC settings", even on the desktop, but the 'more PC settings' view actually shows less settings than the 'Control Panel'. If you're on the start screen and choose 'more PC settings' and try to change the language, you're transported over to the control panel on the desktop. Are you starting to get the problem with this? Yes, I understand the designers' conceptual model behind all of this, that doesn't make it any less convoluted, and certainly doesn't make it any easier for the 'regular Joe' to build a mental model of it in the first place.

In fact, even I get confused deciding whether I have to go into 'more PC settings' or 'Control Panel' and whether the 'Control Panel' link will be available in the settings charm (depending on whether I'm using a desktop app or not). And I even accidentally enter the settings for the Start screen instead of the global system settings. It says "Start" and "Settings" after all. Would make sense, especially when we used to enter the control panel by pressing "Start" and then "Control Panel".

[migo]

So when there are more apps to cover everyone's usage can I use metro start screen not in "full screen" ? If no, then it doesn't matter how many apps they have. If yes, then it might actually be useful.

Until then why do we need a different way to perform the tasks we do now? "It's different".

It's better. The taskbar is usually in the way, just taking up space, and get a message on WLM while it's set to autohide and it keeps it on top blocking a UI element you need to interact with. Now you can switch between open apps with the task switcher, or get access to far more than you ever could with the taskbar or the desktop along with live information that allows you to forego having to launch an app at all.

It only comes up when you want it allowing you to focus on whatever task you're doing otherwise and holds far more than it previously could. It's objectively better.

[bandit_liberty_rumble]

For the people that claim Windows 8 is easier to use, and especially the original poster who claims that it is "easier to use and understand than any previous Windows Interface" how would you actually explain the concept of settings to someone who's never used the system before. Just conceptually. As far as I can see, the user actually has to deal with four different categories of settings:

- Application specific settings for Desktop apps: Not entirely predictable how these can be accessed, but at least the same way as on W7 . So this shouldn't be entirely problematic for users of earlier versions of Windows

- Application specific settings for Metro apps, with the Desktop itself and the Start screen each counting as Metro applications: These are presented in a predictable way, yet the user needs to learn that a globally available "first-level" settings icon actually provides settings for the current app (which might be a problem on the Start screen especially, with the header only saying 'Start'), excluding apps on the Desktop, where instead the Desktop itself counts as an app.

- "More PC setting" (i.e. system-wide Metro settings): Can be reached using the same mechanism as Metro-app-specific settings

- Even more PC settings (i.e. 'Control Panel', which is also listed as an application specific setting for the Desktop, yet actually includes system-wide settings and not just settings for the desktop 'app'): It is not listed under the system-wide settings icon unless the Desktop is the currently active 'Metro app'.

I'd honestly appreciate it if someone gave a more concise yet comprehensive explanation of the different categories of settings in Windows 8. Or if someone could explain why this is altogether easier than Windows 7 (not to speak of OS X).

[migo]

That's an issue with Windows 8 being in a transitional stage to provide backwards compatibility. If you're just using Metro, the confusion of handling things differently in legacy mode and Metro isn't there.

Yes, switching back and forth is annoying and inconsistent, but the problem is with the switching not with Metro. Metro by itself is easier to use than legacy by itself.

[BajiRav]

For the people that claim Windows 8 is easier to use, and especially the original poster who claims that it is "easier to use and understand than any previous Windows Interface" how would you actually explain the concept of settings to someone who's never used the system before. Just conceptually. As far as I can see, the user actually has to deal with four different categories of settings:

- Application specific settings for Desktop apps: Not entirely predictable how these can be accessed, but at least the same way as on W7 . So this shouldn't be entirely problematic for users of earlier versions of Windows

- Application specific settings for Metro apps, with the Desktop itself and the Start screen each counting as Metro applications: These are presented in a predictable way, yet the user needs to learn that a globally available "first-level" settings icon actually provides settings for the current app (which might be a problem on the Start screen especially, with the header only saying 'Start'), excluding apps on the Desktop, where instead the Desktop itself counts as an app.

- "More PC setting" (i.e. system-wide Metro settings): Can be reached using the same mechanism as Metro-app-specific settings

- Even more PC settings (i.e. 'Control Panel', which is also listed as an application specific setting for the Desktop, yet actually includes system-wide settings and not just settings for the desktop 'app'): It is not listed under the system-wide settings icon unless the Desktop is the currently active 'Metro app'.

I'd honestly appreciate it if someone gave a more concise yet comprehensive explanation of the different categories of settings in Windows 8. Or if someone could explain why this is altogether easier than Windows 7 (not to speak of OS X).

I think you are overanalyzing and trying to find faults where there isn't one. Settings displays settings relevant to whatever is currently on the screen and then More settings takes you to "metro control panel". The extra control panel for desktop app (Microsoft had clarified it initially that desktop is now like an app) is probably just for convenience.

There aren't four variations. You are overthinking a bit too much.

[Obi-Wan Kenobi]

geez, people...it's just a prototype, it hasn't taken over the world yet....and believe me....BELIEVE ME....Microsoft IS listening (probably for the first time since the DOS to NT transition)...and they're fixing it...perfection takes a lifetime...this is just a preview for pete's sake! Calm down please! It has to get better (not that it's that bad if you know how to properly work a keyboart/mouse)....they're just (Microsoft) looking at different angles for the future Windows to be better for the consumer....this doesn't mean it's a finished product, but rather a "preview" of things to come eventually....don't like it? as of this minute, stick with vista, 7, or XP, nothing's stopping anyone. The only thing that's certain, is that everything changes.....you can either go with it and accept it, or you can stay in the past...or accept another person's opinion....give it some time, is what I say....it'll get "better", as long as folks can "re" learn the keyboard shortcuts that makes geeks....well, geeks. If you can't deal with geeks, and I mean REAL geeks, then maybe neowin isn't the proper place for one's self.....

edit: I didn't mean to step on anyone's toes or offend anyone, let me fix it like I meant it, just use what works for you. Neowin isn't the place for petty arguments....not like this, anyway...unless your'e ready to back up your words with links/experience..just sayin'....(tired of seeing endless, countless troll bait threads....enough already...if you can't handle windows 8, just stay away)

[MorganX]

I think you are overanalyzing and trying to find faults where there isn't one. Settings displays settings relevant to whatever is currently on the screen and then More settings takes you to "metro control panel". The extra control panel for desktop app (Microsoft had clarified it initially that desktop is now like an app) is probably just for convenience.

There aren't four variations. You are overthinking a bit too much.

Not overanalyzing, he's thinking to intuitively ;>. You see, all the usability studies that went into perfecting Windows 7's UI are not now suddenly VOID because Microsoft needs to enter the tablet space. Metro/Desktop Hybrid isn't bad or unusable, though it is kind of silly and cheap feeling going back and forth and the cheesey previous app bar (charm bar actually looks OK). It's compared to a UI that Microsoft invested millions studying and fine tuning. It was honed for the desktop/keybaord/mouse. That's why it sucked on tablets. Microsoft tried that and it failed. Now they're trying their tablet UI on the desktop.

Apple chose a much wiser path, the desktop is in tact, and they incorporated enough of the Tablet UI to provide consistency. MS could have done that, they chose not too.

[statm1]

Because I can't go Start -> Shutdown.

WTF.

Hover/Settings -> Shutdown

Just saying.....

[BajiRav]

Not overanalyzing, he's thinking to intuitively ;>. You see, all the usability studies that went into perfecting Windows 7's UI are not now suddenly VOID because Microsoft needs to enter the tablet space. Metro/Desktop Hybrid isn't bad or unusable, though it is kind of silly and cheap feeling going back and forth and the cheesey previous app bar (charm bar actually looks OK). It's compared to a UI that Microsoft invested millions studying and fine tuning. It was honed for the desktop/keybaord/mouse. That's why it sucked on tablets. Microsoft tried that and it failed. Now they're trying their tablet UI on the desktop.

Apple chose a much wiser path, the desktop is in tact, and they incorporated enough of the Tablet UI to provide consistency. MS could have done that, they chose not too.

You completely sidetracked the discussion. And to answer your point, do you think Microsoft is doing this change without any usability studies?

[bandit_liberty_rumble]

There aren't four variations. You are overthinking a bit too much.

Maybe I'm counting wrong?

geez, people...it's just a prototype

A prototype would have been built much earlier in the development process. We're maybe half a year away from release. This isn't a prototype.

That's an issue with Windows 8 being in a transitional stage to provide backwards compatibility. If you're just using Metro, the confusion of handling things differently in legacy mode and Metro isn't there.

True. And, for the record, I don't have a problem with Metro. In fact, I keep saying that it is a fine tablet OS and probably works somewhat well for simple computing on a Desktop PC as well (although it is far from the optimal solution).

Calling it 'transitional' though, assumes that everybody is transitioning from Desktop to Metro apps. I certainly won't be. But if that was in my future, I wouldn't see the point of using a Desktop PC/laptop anymore. I'd just be using a real tablet. In fact, I'm already using one, and it can't replace my desktop PC usage. I suspect I'm not alone in that respect. Which means that this issue isn't going to go away anytime soon. In fact, this is what they mean by a 'no compromise' solution. Nothing is taken away (except the Start menu ;) ). The problem is, that you're introducing complexity this way, which runs counter to the goal of what Metro is all about.

And, honestly, this is not really about me. I'm actually trying to figure out who they are targeting this at. I for one, am trying to have a real discussion about this, yet most of what I hear as a response is, "it's not finished", "you don't have to use it", "I like it", "it's perfect this way". On the one hand, people say it will still improve, on the other hand, they are saying that there's nothing to be improved. Which is it?

[scratch42069]

Metro is only "easy" if you haven't been using a mouse and Windows for the past decade and a half.

[Stoffel]

Maybe I'm counting wrong?

A prototype would have been built much earlier in the development process. We're maybe half a year away from release. This isn't a prototype.

True. And, for the record, I don't have a problem with Metro. In fact, I keep saying that it is a fine tablet OS and probably works somewhat well for simple computing on a Desktop PC as well (although it is far from the optimal solution).

Calling it 'transitional' though, assumes that everybody is transitioning from Desktop to Metro apps. I certainly won't be. But if that was in my future, I wouldn't see the point of using a Desktop PC/laptop anymore. I'd just be using a real tablet. In fact, I'm already using one, and it can't replace my desktop PC usage. I suspect I'm not alone in that respect. Which means that this issue isn't going to go away anytime soon. In fact, this is what they mean by a 'no compromise' solution. Nothing is taken away (except the Start menu ;) ). The problem is, that you're introducing complexity this way, which runs counter to the goal of what Metro is all about.

And, honestly, this is not really about me. I'm actually trying to figure out who they are targeting this at. I for one, am trying to have a real discussion about this, yet most of what I hear as a response is, "it's not finished", "you don't have to use it", "I like it", "it's perfect this way". On the one hand, people say it will still improve, on the other hand, they are saying that there's nothing to be improved. Which is it?

See, I still believe that for 90% of the people Win8 will actually make their lives easier. Assuming there are enough apps in the Windows Store. Most users really only use their PC's for browsing, email, playing music or video's and the occasional game.

So I think these people will barely ever get thrown back into the desktop. There will be a small learning curve because we've been used to the start menu for about 17 years. But once people get it, they will feel at home on the desktop, tablet and phone if they stick to the same ecosystem. And that's what MS is really after.

Sadly for the power users, at the moment it's a bit jarring jumping from Metro to the Desktop and back, but I actually enjoy Win8.

MS also never said they expect everybody to move to the Metro environment. They realize there are power users, who want heaps of resizable windows, and that's why the Desktop is still there in it's full glory.

From all the posts I've read so far about Win 8 I can only come to this conclusion: If you have no issue with a full start screen you will love Win8, If you feel that takes the focus away from your work you will hate it.

I just wish people would try to look at the bigger picture MS is trying to create before complaining.

Resizable Metro apps just won't work because they would never go in a suspended status that way which uses to much memory and battery power, so that will not fly on a tablet. There are heaps of little things people are complaining about, that just don't make sense in the larger picture MS is trying to create.

So that's my 2 cents for now

[Kreuger]

Why do people constantly complain about someone else's opinion?

[MorganX]

You completely sidetracked the discussion. And to answer your point, do you think Microsoft is doing this change without any usability studies?

Actually this time around, yes. I think the only usability study they're interested in is that Metro worked on phones, will most likely work on tablets, and given the current market, their needs, and Apple's headstart, they need it to be on the Desktop. I don't believe any usability study done by a third party will show that Metro needed to be on the desktop in this manner, nor is it more efficient or effective than Windows 7 Explorer UI.

I don't think it will change much by RTM, but it's hard for me to believe they would release it the way it is. Some have indicated it has already change significantly for the better claimining NDA. We can only hope.

Not sidetracking, simply explaining why the poster who created the response which led to mine was "not" overanalyzing. You can not separate why Metro is on the desktop where IMO it is clearly out of place from an assertion that it is ineffective or at the least, inefficient there.