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

[PGHammer]

Dude, you're talking gibberish...

I'm trying to find out exactly why you have the stance you do - however, your lack of clarification is leaving me basically to fish for what your reason for the hatred of the Windows 8 UI.

Help me out here - clear up exactly why (despite the excellent backward compatibility with non-touch applications) you hate the very idea of a neutral UI.

[Princess Katie Pixie]

What's wrong with the Metro UI in Windows 8? Even though I don't use it in the Consumer Preview. If you don't like it either stick with Windows 7 or use the Desktop that comes with Windows 8.

Simple as that.

[PGHammer]

What's wrong with the Metro UI in Windows 8? Even though I don't use it in the Consumer Preview. If you don't like it either stick with Windows 7 or use the Desktop that comes with Windows 8.

Simple as that.

I live on the Consumer Preview's desktop - something which I have pointed out time and time again.

I run pretty much the same applications and games that I ran in Windows 7.

The *only* new WinRT software that has stuck have been games - so far, not a single application or utility has stuck.

Yet I have maintained that the chance of my going back to Windows 7 remains zero.

It's not the new applications, games, or utilities that keep me using the Consumer Preview, but the better performance of the existing software and existing *hardware*.

Basically, it's the typical benchmark by which a new version of Windows *should* be judged.

[Kelxin]

The market wants portable devices,

Hate to break it to you dude, but my 55" LED TV (even with how thin it is) and my mid tower media center won't be going portable anytime in the near future.

On the other hand, if you're talking about tablets and phones, yes, they need a portable OS for a portable device, but as for my home pc, get that **** out of here.

[remixedcat]

Not to mention the "music" app for metro sucks. I want a proper media player for the ARM version, however on the windows phone market place there isn't any media players that are as good as media jukebox for the full programs and as far as apps are concerned, there are none that are close to playerpro or poweramp or winamp.

If I want a tablet I want the full media experience.

I'm sure zune or whatever the name will be in a few months... will be "ported' to metro, however they will even need to strip out some of the features of it to make it less complicated for start screen "metro".

[Dashel]

PG, I've said before and I'll say it again. Your fundamental mistake is that you and others think a GUI can be 'control scheme' neutral. All your wishy washy talk of 'bias' seems to stem from this fundamental disconnect.

[SkyDX]

Windows 7 will still be sold alongside Windows 8 until 2020. Microsoft has said it. Quite a number of us that like Windows 8 - UI and all - just fine have said it. (I myself have said it multiple times.)

However, the most vocal of the detractors (not all of them) are like any set of extremists on ANY issue - unwilling to compromise even the smallest amount.

I am well aware of that like said, I just fear that Windows 7 might just fall a bit short on the support side, no matter if it's actually still supported^^ But yeah I agree that some people in both "parties" seem to overreact quite a bit :pinch:

[KillTheIrishman]

I believe MS is dropping the ball on this one (ME and Vista flashbacks). Why not default to a desktop environment when there isn't a touch device available/present? This just seems to be a non-productive interface and MS is just flipping the finger- we'll do what we want to attitude. Seems pointless for an OS that is "supposed" to be the successor to 7. Pretty sad if you ask me.

[PGHammer]

Not to mention the "music" app for metro sucks. I want a proper media player for the ARM version, however on the windows phone market place there isn't any media players that are as good as media jukebox for the full programs and as far as apps are concerned, there are none that are close to playerpro or poweramp or winamp.

If I want a tablet I want the full media experience.

I'm sure zune or whatever the name will be in a few months... will be "ported' to metro, however they will even need to strip out some of the features of it to make it less complicated for start screen "metro".

The problem with Windows (pre-Metro) is that you had pretty much a single UI - regardless of what you ran it on. It was utterly biased in favor of the keyboard and mouse. If you even TRIED to add a different method of control, it usually broke applications, and if it broke application compatibility, the user base would scream.

Now we have Windows 8, which does NOT subtract the ability to use a keyboard and mouse, but adds touch support and makes it just as usable as keyboards and mice - if anything, Windows 8 is more (not less) keyboard-friendly than Windows 7.

As far as WinRT applications go - who in Ned said you had to use any? I don't use the Music app - or even Windows Media Player; instead, I use VLC (the same application I used in Windows 7). In point of fact, I can tell you *exactly* how many WinRT apps I run - zero. (I run some WinRT games - however, I don't run so much as a single WinRT app - from Microsoft or anyone else.). Maybe WinRT will have some compelling applications in the future - however, since it doesn't yet, I run the same applications I had been in Windows 7. However, I'm in no hurry to kick Windows 8 - despite the radical UI change - to the curb.

That's because Windows 8 gets right three things that even Windows 7 largely didn't.

1. It has better application and game performance. (We're talking the SAME applications and games I ran on Windows 7 - and on the same hardware.)

2. It can handle greater application loads than Windows 7. (Again, WinRT has diddly to do with it - I'm talking more of, and more instances of, the same applications I ran in Windows 7.)

3. Even when it throws up (and it throws up less than Windows 7), it recovers better than Windows 7 - even if it's the user (not an application, game, or the hardware) that is at fault.

Because of those three things (and none of them are small by any means), I can certainly adjust to the minor change in how the UI works under my mouse (and, in reality, the changes in the desktop itself are far more minor than the differences between 9x and 2000, between 2000 and XP or even Vista and 7 - and that's despite the Start button and Start menu being gone).

I can get why some folks can't adjust - as topsy-turvy as things are everywhere else, the Windows UI (and especially that of Windows 7) for the simple reason that it has largely been unchanged for nearly two decades, is the computer equivalent of *comfort food*. For them, the UI change is like ordering your usual buttermilk pancakes and getting buckwheat pancakes instead. Never mind that both are, in fact, pancakes, and both taste quite good with syrup (of nearly any flavor) - they aren't *buttermilk*.

[PGHammer]

PG, I've said before and I'll say it again. Your fundamental mistake is that you and others think a GUI can be 'control scheme' neutral. All your wishy washy talk of 'bias' seems to stem from this fundamental disconnect.

Just because nobody else had done it (and that was my own reason for being skeptical with the Developer Preview, and later the Consumer Preview), does not mean that it was, in point of fact, impossible.

Let me ask ALL of the detractors something - name a single company prior to Microsoft that made an honest effort to create a control-scheme-neutral user interface - for anything.

Not one single Linux or GNU desktop environment is control-scheme neutral. On the opposing side - neither Android or iOS can exactly be said to be friendly to either keyboards or mice. (Both are very much touch-biased.)

Therefore, conventional wisdom was that control-scheme neutrality was impossible.

I thought the same that you did - that Windows 8 was touch-biased, and especially in Developer Preview form.

I'll put things as succinctly as possible. I. Was. Wrong.

I have no keyboard-and-mouse issues using the Consumer Preview - didn't have any with the Developer Preview, either.

I run it on a desktop as the only operating system outside of a VM.

If I had control issues, my running all the same applications and games that I did in Windows 7 would not merely be highly improbable, it would be impossible.

[remixedcat]

PGHammer...... winRT is gonna be what you are gonna be stuck on if you don't shell out a lot of money for an intel x86 tab.

in winRT {ARM) you cannot run x86 programs... only metro winRT "apps"

[Stoffel]

Just because nobody else had done it (and that was my own reason for being skeptical with the Developer Preview, and later the Consumer Preview), does not mean that it was, in point of fact, impossible.

Let me ask ALL of the detractors something - name a single company prior to Microsoft that made an honest effort to create a control-scheme-neutral user interface - for anything.

Not one single Linux or GNU desktop environment is control-scheme neutral. On the opposing side - neither Android or iOS can exactly be said to be friendly to either keyboards or mice. (Both are very much touch-biased.)

Therefore, conventional wisdom was that control-scheme neutrality was impossible.

I thought the same that you did - that Windows 8 was touch-biased, and especially in Developer Preview form.

I'll put things as succinctly as possible. I. Was. Wrong.

I have no keyboard-and-mouse issues using the Consumer Preview - didn't have any with the Developer Preview, either.

I run it on a desktop as the only operating system outside of a VM.

If I had control issues, my running all the same applications and games that I did in Windows 7 would not merely be highly improbable, it would be impossible.

I feel exactly the same as you PGHammer. I've been running the DP and now the CP since they have been released. I don't use Metro apps on a day to day basis, except for messing around with some apps to see how things work in Metro. And you are right, things work pretty much the same as in Win7, but just slightly better. I run Win8 on a normal laptop with no touch interface and I don't feel it makes me any less productive.

It's not because it works with touch, that it automatically doesn't work with KB or mouse.

[PGHammer]

PGHammer...... winRT is gonna be what you are gonna be stuck on if you don't shell out a lot of money for an intel x86 tab.

in winRT {ARM) you cannot run x86 programs... only metro winRT "apps"

I'm quite aware of that - and that is why if I DID buy a tablet, it WOULD be an x64-based tablet (something similar to the current SAMSUNG Series 7, if not the S7 itself).

What does WinRT have to do with it? Absolutely nothing. What does Windows 8 have to do with it? Again, absolutely nothing.

Until WinRT applications prove themselves (and so far, they haven't), I won't download or use them. That means I'll be using the tried-and-true conventional applications that I'd been running in the Consumer Preview and that, by and large, I'll be running in the Release Preview next month. The lack of solid WinRT applications, however, does not mean that Windows 8, let alone the UI, has no future - far from it.

Look at my post earlier in this thread, where I compared the Consumer Preview to Windows 7+SP1 heads-up; I specifically left WinRT out of the comparison. Yet comparing the Consumer Preview to 7+SP1 strictly on common application support and hardware support, the Consumer Preview smashes 7+SP1 flat. (The last time I saw something like that was comparing Windows 2000 Professional's late betas to (of all OSes) Windows 98 Second Edition.)

Am I saying that Windows 7 was a bad OS? No - that is certainly NOT what I'm saying. (I never said that even 98SE was a bad OS - though I specifically - and quite bluntly - DID say that Windows ME was a real OS clunker.) However, by the typical metrics for an upgrade from a previous OS - hardware and application compatibility - 8 beats 7+SP1 (just as 2000 Professional stomped 98 SE).

WinRT (as an API) has promise - I've said so more than once. Right now, however, it's largely unrealized.

However, Windows 8 is far more than WinRT.

[remixedcat]

are there gonna be intel x86 tabs under 400 bucks??? most people want to have something better then the kindle fire under that price range.

[PGHammer]

are there gonna be intel x86 tabs under 400 bucks??? most people want to have something better then the kindle fire under that price range.

That is precisely why WinRT has potential.

However, WinRT applications are being measured against Win32 applications (at least by those using the Consumer Preview) and are coming up way short.

The only reason Android has been able to get away with it is that Android is biased far more than not just Windows 8, but even WindowsRT - it's biased (deliberately) toward the ultra-inexpensive no-keyboard/no-mouse form-factor (smartphones, tablets, and slates), and it largely has eschewed backward compatibility - even between ICS and Gingerbread, let alone ICS and Froyo.

If WinRT has potential at all for wide adoption, it is in the corporate/enterprise (and some in the SMB) space - for precisely the reasons that it would have issues in the general market - no compatibility with Win32, easier to lock down, and easier to secure in general.

Basically, if WinRT takes off, it will be like the old *sneakernet* migration that fueled growth of Windows itself - it will begin in the corporate/enterprise/governmental space (where the advantages of Win32 largely aren't).

[Dashel]

MS NEVER said it would be 'control neutral' though PG. You have totally distorted that idea. They have made control specific alterations to the UI to facilitate the different control schemes. There are obviously UI elements that work for one control vs another. The point of contention is that they have done an abysmal job so far (on both fronts) integrating them into a unified whole.

It is possible to have a unifed UI, as long as you create workable frameworks that benefit multiple control schemes. So far, 'old' desktop users are the ones being asked to take it on the chin for the benefit of lightweight mobile types and n00bs in general.

Pen support - weak

Desktop integration - weak.

Touch is merely average.

MS has a long history of trying to shove a square peg into a round hole. This time instead of trying to cram a full desktop OS into a mobile device, they are shoving a mobile OS into our desktops.

Now, if you guys want to circle your wagons (again) and pretend that desktop centric users aren't taking a hit to create this new paradigm, you are simply being dishonest or smoking something because its clear as day.

[Dot Matrix]

Now, if you guys want to circle your wagons (again) and pretend that desktop centric users aren't taking a hit to create this new paradigm, you are simply being dishonest or smoking something because its clear as day.

Ignoring the Metro apps, where are desktop users taking a hit? Because the desktop is still there, with features that put it over Windows 7. The Start Screen works better for desktop users than the tiny Start Menu does, not to mention works better with keyboards and mice than the old Start Menu does, by allowing greater customization, and reduces clicking.

So, tell me again, where are desktop users taking a hit?

[Arceles]

Ignoring the Metro apps, where are desktop users taking a hit? Because the desktop is still there, with features that put it over Windows 7. The Start Screen works better for desktop users than the tiny Start Menu does, not to mention works better with keyboards and mice than the old Start Menu does, by allowing greater customization, and reduces clicking.

So, tell me again, where are desktop users taking a hit?

Again, it doesn't and stop, let me quote yourself "putting selfish comments"

[Dot Matrix]

Again, it doesn't and stop, let me quote yourself "putting selfish comments"

How is asking a valid question selfish? You're going in my ignore list.

[Dashel]

Because like you are SOOO proud of proclaiming, 'desktop' apps are a dead end and the desktop itself is now treated as an app (even though it isn't). It constantly throws people who spend the vast majority of their time in the desktop space into Metro for no good reason (like searches). I don't know how we can be any clearer that we want the option to never, ever, have to see Metro unless we choose to. We love the rest of the new features in general, even Metro. Metro Start is more friendly than Win7? Maybe for 60% of the curve, but your solution seems to give the finger to the other 40% of us that don't find it better by a long shot, and in fact find it to be a detriment.

The funny part is that this will only get worse as people start to run more Metro apps, not less. It will make the jarring change even more frequent and annoying. On the flipside, you can't say Metro is very mouse friendly to begin with (huge icons, drag to close for example - don't reply, I know - don't close them durhurr). The UI it forces us into clearly favors one input over the other, which again is a detriment to those who don't have those inputs. Sorry if I'm skeptical of this touch revolution MS is anticipating. And even if they are right, it will be more than a generation of Win development before touch devices gain appreciable marketshare anyway.

I've 'accepted' any number of trade-offs over the years with MS. This is the first time the downside is so insignificant to implement, yet so annoyingly in your face, both in practice and scope, that I'm on the verge of skipping over the handfuls awesome they've added.

[Order_66]

I don't know how we can be any clearer that we want the option to never, ever, have to see Metro unless we choose to. We love the rest of the new features in general, even Metro.

^This 100%.

I welcome any and all features that windows 8 will bring, even metro, but as Dashel said we need options, don't force users to have to deal with metro as soon as windows is booted, give us the option to change that if we want to.

[Mando]

You can't run away from progress and "new" technology my friend. Eventually, you too will have to upgrade to Windows 8 whether you like it or not, when Windows 7 suffers the same fate as Windows XP and Windows 2000 before that and so on. The OS will become obsolete and nobody, including its creator, will support it any longer and therefore forcing you to update to the new and latest OS. Its innevitable. Like the Borg say: "Resistance is futile."

So in the run up to 2020 when support for Windows 7 is scheduled to be dropped, we will have to adopt metro? heheh lets just see if its still around in Windows 10+ (doubt itll get past 8 imo) ;)

I dont personally care for Metro, but i see where they are coming from, it just isn't for me, im hoping Server 8 will have it disabled cant see it on a server install tbvh.

[Stoffel]

^This 100%.

I welcome any and all features that windows 8 will bring, even metro, but as Dashel said we need options, don't force users to have to deal with metro as soon as windows is booted, give us the option to change that if we want to.

The problem with giving people a choice is that people don't like change.

So if you can turn of Metro, most people will do so just because it's different, and that way we stay stuck in the past.

Some of the detractors of Metro have said it here so many times, If they give us the option we'll turn it off and we'll turn it off on any computer we support for friends and family. With that attitude MS can never move on.

Hence, there is no choice, because MS believes Metro is the way to go. And I must admit I like the way things are moving, I'll be buying Win8 very soon after release

[Som]

^This 100%.

I welcome any and all features that windows 8 will bring, even metro, but as Dashel said we need options, don't force users to have to deal with metro as soon as windows is booted, give us the option to change that if we want to.

i agree with this as well, i don't understand thought why those who love metro so much don't want this option, its like they'd be afraid that if everyone isn't forced into using then no one will ...

[Dot Matrix]

Put it this way, did Windows 95 give you the option to turn off the "new" Start Menu? Could you run Windows 95 with the Windows 3.1 look?

No? I see....

Not only did they force people there to use a new launcher, but a new shell as well. How dare them. :rolleyes: