No Metro = Windows 7 SP 2. Don't like Metro, stick with Windows 7.

[Seketh]

Before your bring the inevitable flames, please read everything.

Let's say Metro in Windows 8 was optional. One click of a checkbox and no more Metro. What would you have then? A few updates, fixes and enhancements. Isn't that what defines a Service Pack? Edit: And if you think Service Packs don't add new features, then please, read this: http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dd335036.aspx?ppud=4

Sure, you could argue that Windows 8 could get a facelift pretty much in the same way of Windows Vista to Windows 7. To you I say: Why would you still want incremental updates to a interface that's 16 years old? Isn't it time for change? If Windows 95 didn't force an UI change, then we would still be looking at something similar to Windows 3.1!

You can argue that it's a change for the worse, I argue that it's a change for the best. Truly, the only way to answer that will be in a few years, in which the market will say if Metro was a bad choice. Right now, Metro is here to stay and it's the path Microsoft has chosen for Windows 8. Deal with it.

And if you truly hate Metro, then stick with Windows 7. Because that's what you get if you take Metro out of Windows 8, a Windows 7 Service Pack 2. Why won't Microsoft release a Service Pack 2? Well, actually they might. Right now, they're devoting their resources to Windows 8, so if you don't like Metro, stick with Windows 7, no one is forcing you to buy Windows 8. Sure you might have to buy a PC with Windows 8 in it, but no one will force you to use it, if you hate Metro that much, Windows 7 will still be available for purchase, buy a copy.

If Metro truly is a pile of crap, then Windows 9 will change it. Either be it by redesigning it, or by even removing it, Microsoft will eventually have to change it, the market will force them to do that. But if Metro is here to stay in Windows 9 and Windows 10, then your only hope to use the same UI you've been using for 16 years is to keep using Windows 7, and the problem there is you, because if Microsoft doesn't change it, then it's because it became successful and most people actually like it.

Change is difficult to accept. Changing a 16 year old formula is difficult, but touch and tablets are here to stay, and Windows has to adapt. Metro is the solution Microsoft came up with. If it's the best one, that's an endless debate, but the fact is that Metro really is a solution. If it wasn't, there would be better alternatives in the market, and there aren't any. No other OS out there has an interface that works as well with mouse/keyboard and touch. I use both regularly because I have a Tablet PC (convertible), and I lose nothing by alternating between those input methods, and I've lost nothing by changing from Windows 7 to Windows 8 on my Desktop PC. Like it or not, that's the truth, you don't lose anything, you just have different methods to do the same things. Again, if it's for the best or for the worse, that's an endless debate that only time can answer.

One of the biggest complaints about Metro, even by the people that like it, is that you eventually get back into the old desktop. But is it really the "old desktop"? Isn't it more like a "legacy desktop" application? You can close it just like any other application! In the end, it's a "legacy desktop" application in order to maintain compatibilty, because once those third-party applications get by the thousands, many people won't even have to use the "legacy desktop" during their Windows session.

It's a "legacy desktop" to ensure a transition. It isn't "not consistent". It's "no compromise".

Bring on the flames, just try to be rational.

[articuno1au]

Troll bait.

Also, Windows 8 is a LOT different under the hood when compared to Windows 7. The Metro interface is just what people are choosing to rail against.

Even if I wanted the old interface, I would still update to 8 for the speed improvements.

[McKay]

A Service Pack is generally bug fixes all piled into 1 huge update, not a new aero theme, a new lockscreen, system changes to explorer and the file copymenu, or native USB 3 support. If I had a choice, I'd want to keep parts of Metro, I love the new lockscreen, and I love the Metro alert boxes that pop up when I put in a new media device.

[123456789A]

Oh, another one of these. Great.

[articuno1au]

I'm pro Windows 8 (for the most part), and when I saw this I was like "Really.. Again?".

I would pay hefty sums of money for the mods to insta-lock these topics.

[torrentthief]

vista sp2 came out 3 monhs before win 7 went rtm so i'd expect the same with win 7 sp2 and win8. Win 8 is due in october i believe so i'm sure within the next 3 months we'll get win 7 sp2.

[bogas04]

A Service Pack is generally bug fixes all piled into 1 huge update, not a new aero theme, a new lockscreen, system changes to explorer and the file copymenu, or native USB 3 support.

built in MSE , faster boot up and overall UI , new cursors and icons , new task manager , better support for touch , ARM support and what all!

[Ambroos]

Well with Windows Vista you had SP2 and the Windows Vista Platform Update. Those two things together brought a lot of new things in Windows 7 to Windows Vista. If we're lucky Microsoft will be doing something similar for Windows 7.

[Seketh]

Oh, another one of these. Great.

I'm pro Windows 8 (for the most part), and when I saw this I was like "Really.. Again?".

I would pay hefty sums of money for the mods to insta-lock these topics.

I know it's getting tiring, but hey, I'm also getting tired of anti-metro posts and articles, and this discussion won't stop anytime soon.

built in MSE , faster boot up and overall UI , new cursors and icons , new task manager , better support for touch , ARM support and what all!

And if you exclude the "better support for touch" and overall UI, which is Metro, isn't that a Service Pack? As Ambroos said, we've seen it before with Vista SP2.

[.Neo]

Let's say Metro in Windows 8 was optional. One click of a checkbox and no more Metro. What would you have then? A few updates, fixes and enhancements. Isn't that what defines a Service Pack?

Service Packs usually don't bring new functionality to Windows, so to answer your question: No, it wouldn't define a Service Pack.

Right now, Metro is here to stay and it's the path Microsoft has chosen for Windows 8. Deal with it.

So far I haven't heard of any Windows 8/Metro-related suicides so apparently people are dealing just fine. They just won't upgrade or switch to another platform. Life will go on. Your title doesn't do anything but state the obvious.

[Seketh]

Service Packs usually don't bring new functionality to Windows, so to answer your question: No, it wouldn't define a Service Pack.

Oh really? For example, some features of Vista SP2:

• Adds Windows Search 4.0 for faster and improved relevancy in searches.
  
• Contains the Bluetooth? 2.1 Feature Pack supporting the most recent specification for Bluetooth Technology.
  
• Ability to record data on to Blu-Ray? media natively in Windows Vista.
  
• Adds Windows Connect Now (WCN) to simplify Wi-Fi Configuration.
  
• Enables the exFAT file system to support Coordinated Universal Time (UTC) timestamps, which allows correct file synchronization across time zones.
  

So far I haven't heard of any Windows 8/Metro-related suicides so apparently people are dealing just fine. They just won't upgrade or switch to another platform. Life will go on. Your title doesn't do anything but state the obvious.

Then why do I constantly keep seeing "I wish Metro was optional" posts then? I mean, in almost every news that come out about Windows 8, people write that in the comments.

[butilikethecookie]

For the millionth time: Windows 8 with Metro is mildly decent. It is not a finished product. It has bugs, quirks, giggles and the whole bit because it is beta. The only reason why it is available is for developers to build Metro apps and see where their product is heading. I've very sure the Gold Master edition will contain thousands of bug fixes, enhancements, new features, icons, cursors and all the pretty stuff. Microsoft is famous for throwing that type of stuff in at the last moment. Take the alpha versions of Windows Vista for example (below). Did Windows Vista final look like this? No. Microsoft is trying to focus on more important things like the core OS--not if an animation or an older app is lagging or not.

Release the trolls (God help me) At the least read my post and talk to me like a civilized human. Thank You.

[Seketh]

@butilikethecookie: I fully agree with your post, but let's be fair, Metro is a change only comparable to the jump from Windows 3.1 to Windows 95, don't expect it to change that much from RC to Gold. I believe we will mainly see aesthetic changes, not interface, the recent news about the changes in the Windows Store is an indication of that.

[ATLien_0]

The problem is,

If it were optional then would anyone really use it or know about it. ?

Say it were a separate app like Media Center once was or Frontrow in OS X, would as many people still use it then?

Or say it was separate, wouldn't that be a redundant way of running the OS.

Apple and Microsoft are both toying with the Hybrid OS idea. Apple now has Launchpad as well, which can be compared to in a way the Metro Start Screen

The only other option would have been for Microsoft to add the improvements in to the desktop side like the new lock screen, aero, and ribbon and leave it at that for the desktop. For Tablets the Metro App could be left in Windows, but run only in a tablet enviro

[xendrome]

Before your bring the inevitable flames, please read everything.

Let's say Metro in Windows 8 was optional. One click of a checkbox and no more Metro. What would you have then? A few updates, fixes and enhancements. Isn't that what defines a Service Pack?

Not this many features - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Features_new_to_Windows_8

[butilikethecookie]

@butilikethecookie: I fully agree with your post, but let's be fair, Metro is a change only comparable to the jump from Windows 3.1 to Windows 95, don't expect it to change that much from RC to Gold. I believe we will mainly see aesthetic changes, not interface, the recent news about the changes in the Windows Store is an indication of that.

I agree. I remember when I was a kid my dad didn't want to use a mouse. He thought DOS was more productive. Now look. Everyone uses one! People changed for the better. I think Microsoft has this set in their mind that this is the future.

[Dot Matrix]

Uhhhhhhh....?

[Seketh]

Not this many features - http://en.wikipedia....ew_to_Windows_8

And now let's take Metro out:

Language and Standards support - Metro (WinRT)

Windows Store - Metro

Metro-style user interface - Metro

New logon methods - Metro

Windows Explorer - Service Pack

Task Manager - Service Pack

New easy restore - Metro based UI.

Microsoft account integration - Needs Metro, we already have a level of integration of Live in Windows 7

Windows to Go - Service Pack

Storage Spaces - Service Pack

Device Support and Other features and changes - Service Pack

Not that far from Windows Vista Service Pack 2, isn't it? And let's not forget Windows 7 already had a Service Pack.

[Rickkins]

I'm pro Windows 8 (for the most part), and when I saw this I was like "Really.. Again?".

I'm anti Windows 8, Metro,(for the most part) and when I saw this I too was like "Really.. Again?".

[Seketh]

I'm anti Windows 8, Metro,(for the most part) and when I saw this I too was like "Really.. Again?".

Don't worry, Windows 8 RP is close, I'm sure the discussion will stop there. (/sarcasm)

[chrisj1968]

Seems like Microsoft has a large number of paid snipers here taking potshots at the "anti" crowd. This pro "change for the better" sure sounds alot like the moniker for Obama's last campaign.. "change we can believe in." If the users want the change, let them choose. I like the way my user experience is.

[SiCKX]

Kinda late to beat this horse again.

[Seketh]

Seems like Microsoft has a large number of paid snipers here taking potshots at the "anti" crowd. This pro "change for the better" sure sounds alot like the moniker for Obama's last campaign.. "change we can believe in." If the users want the change, let them choose. I like the way my user experience is.

Well, that's my point. Keep your user experience. And I'm very far from being a Microsoft employee. Just a random user.

Kinda late to beat this horse again.

Why? Has Windows 8 gone gold meanwhile?

It's like you guys think that the discussion about Metro should stop. It's just beggining, even by Windows 9, threads like this will still be showing up.

[bandit_liberty_rumble]

Windows 8 with Metro is mildly decent. It is not a finished product. [...] The only reason why it is available is for developers to build Metro apps and see where their product is heading.

If that is the case, MS shouldn't have called it Windows 8 Consumer Preview...

[Robbie Ride]

Am i right in thinking that the development of Service Pack 2 for Windows 7 is in parallel with the development of Windows 8 and Windows Server 2012? or am i wrong.