windows 8 Do you like or hate Windows 8?

[PGHammer]

>>I think it's hilarious that people are comparing the Desktop->Metro change to the DOS->Windows change.

Going from DOS to Windows wasn't just about getting a GUI. It was also about... well, windows. I.e., MULTITASKING.<<

Agreed, they are not comparable. But, DOS->Windows was more about the GUI. Total paradigm shift. Multitasking took years. Time slicing came first, lol.

>>Metro goes in the opposite direction. It's an anti-multitasking UI. Especially if you have a large monitor and lots of screen space to work with.<<

Yes and no. It multitasks just fine. But MS believes the majority only need one and 1/3 window at a time. I have to say most of the time they are right. And there is an option for the rest of us, the desktop. In fact, most apps that you would want to have MDI still run in the desktop environment which is why I don't believe the desktop will go away. Somehow MS will make a metro MDI or they will keep the desktop environment as it is.

>>* Full-screen UI. Want multiple apps to be visible? Your options are very limited and practically useless.<<

Same answer as above. And because of this, apps that are better with MDI won't go metro IMO.

>>* Task switching is much more difficult with the lack of a taskbar. (Speaking of taskbar, that's unable to launch Metro apps... so what's wrong with keeping an unable-to-launch Metro Start Menu if you're already keeping an incompatible-with-Metro taskbar?)<<

The taskbar is fine, I just hate the app bar and kinda liked flip3d but I'm sure I'm in the minority, most probably never Win-Tabbed. Alt-Tab and the taskbar still work though. And you can task switch from the desktop to an open metro app. You can also snap a metro app tot he desktop but I don't know why you would want to, lol.

>>* Full-screen Start Screen is disruptive to the workflow, unlike a small windowed Start Menu.<<

I haven't found it to be so. Initially I felt same but once you switch, hardly ever see start menu (Start Page).

>>* Things that used to take up a small window (like a file picker) now takes up a full screen. Again, very disruptive.<<

Seems that way because we're critiquing it. But when you're in the file picker, full screen or not, you're 100% focused on the file picker, so it actually doesn't matter.

>>One word: multitasking. Rather, the blatant contempt for the concept of multitasking that Metro demonstrates. This is going a step backwards. <<

All I can say is I know what you're feeling. I felt the same. You are 100% correct in what you are experiencing and your feelings are justified. All I can tell you is if you grin and bear it, in a week it won't matter. There will be minor nuisances for sure, but it's just not as bad as it initially seems.

Some applications that exist as MDI apps *also* exist in WinRT (Amazon's Kindle e-reader also has a WinRT version in the Windows 8 App Store); OneNote MX is, in fact, an RT version of the MDI OneNote.

It's still *horses for courses*, folks - MDI will live on where it makes sense (and it still does, not only for a lot of desktop users, but even for a lot of general usage - it's why I still run the still-extant - and MDI - Kindle Reader for Win32, even on Windows 8; same applies to Adobe's own Reader).

By and large, RT apps don't scale resolutionally upward well; however, the same can be largely said (in the opposite direction) of Win32 applications (and especially Win32 games) - they don't scale resolutionally *downward* well.

It's also why I mentioned portables as a crossover point - not just tablets and slates, but even traditional notebooks that are running Windows 7 today. WinRT apps can run on these computationally-lighter and graphically/resolutionall-starved computers where a tranditional (MDI) application or utility will have issues.

[PGHammer]

And why can't they offer Windows 8 Tablet Edition on the 'great tablets and convertibles' and give my ol' desktop with dual monitors an OS that's optimized for it?

Make Metro like Media Center on the desktop. Run the Metro apps windowed, surrounded by the native serious Win32 apps.

It's easy, sure, but again, WHY should I be doing extra work to get around the fact that this OS is designed for something else? Why does Microsoft think that someone who is using the desktop to open a music file wants to play it in a full screen interface? Why do you have to redo the associations in order to, say, play music while doing serious work in the desktop.

Oh, and if you open something with an unrecognized extension from the desktop, you get this weird Metroesque non-dialog dialog in the middle of the screen that asks you what you'd like to open it with.

You're basically saying that Windows 7 *itself* should be its own self-contained niche. If you are insisting that WinRT (as an API) should be a niche API, then you are applying the same thinking to Win32.

I hate to remind you, but that (pre-Windows 9x) was exactly the case. Win32 *started* as a niche API, and was only used by the *heavy-lifting* operating system called Windows NT.

[Brandon Live Veteran]

He wouldn't have a word processor in which he could write his cover letter and resume. He wouldn't be able to multitask and have his cover letter in one window, and the job ad he's applying for in another window on the screen at the same time.

That's simply not true. You can run a browser and word processor side-by-side, or use desktop apps.

He couldn't combine multiple files into a single PDF to send an employer. Etc

Again, you're talking about an unreleased platform. If there isn't a (non-desktop) app for that yet, what makes you think there won't be?

Would the email client even let him send an attachment?

Yes, it would. As many as you like, of any file type, from anywhere on the system. This isn't iOS.

But in Windows 8, the non-productivity, 'let's browse Facebook/maps/music stores/etc on a 10.1" 1366x768 screen' interface is front and center.

What has you classifying WinRT apps as having "non-productivity" interfaces?

Not kept in a little box. Front and center. And it never really goes away (try connecting to a WiFi network from the desktop! Oh look, the whole right of your screen is taken up by a Metro-flavoured network connection tool.

Are you just complaining about the visual style now?

Try opening a music/movie file from the desktop... the default media player is the METRO one.

And?

And the lock screen that expects a SWIPE gesture... with a mouse.

No, it does not. I get the feeling you haven't actually used Windows 8.

Windows, for TWO DECADES, was a platform for productivity computing. Writing resumes or school papers. Writing the next great American novel. Designing the next large jet aircraft. Coding the next Facebook or Flickr. Etc. Every day, hundreds of milion of people go to work/school/etc and use Windows to create things (even if they're only TPS reports). Now that platform is buried behind an interface for 10.1 1366x768 screens.

Windows is just as great at those things as ever (more so, in fact). And now it's better at some other things too. I do not see why you have a problem with that.

[PGHammer]

But in Windows 8, the non-productivity, 'let's browse Facebook/maps/music stores/etc on a 10.1" 1366x768 screen' interface is front and center. Not kept in a little box. Front and center. And it never really goes away (try connecting to a WiFi network from the desktop! Oh look, the whole right of your screen is taken up by a Metro-flavoured network connection tool.

You don't have to use any apps. Once you boot, Win-D to go to desktop and you will rarely see the Start Page. Everything else is the same re: desktop environment. Yes, all these little nuisances are a drag. But if good Metro apps ever show up, and there are great tablets and convertibles like the Surface, it just may be worth the annoyances on the desktop. It's early.

Try opening a music/movie file from the desktop... the default media player is the METRO one.

Agreed. But I give them credit, it's easy to change which app opens media files when more than one app is available. I love the Metro notifications.

And the lock screen that expects a SWIPE gesture... with a mouse.). Yes, with some effort, you can minimize your encounters with Metro, but it never fully goes away.

I love the lock screen on my desktop. No more third party utils for a custom logon/lock screen. I was upset just like you until I realized you don't have to swipe. Hit any key or click the mouse button. No swipe. And yes, all of this confusion and discovery is Microsoft's fault.

Media players - And the same complaint used to be made about Windows Media Player (in fact, it was the basis for the original lawsuit by the EU) - however, it's actually far easier to change in 8 than in 7; in my own case, the default player for most media content on *my* Windows 8 PC is VLC (which was, in fact, my default in 7).

Lock Screen - It took a while to realize that the Lock Screen was banishable with a keypress (not even Ctrl+Alt-Delete - the Enter key or even the spacebar will do). Basically, FAR easier than 7 by default.

Multiple visible applications - this is, in fact, the biggest benefit for MDI; Windows 8 still supports MDI applications, and I only replaced one (AWS Weatherbug) with an RT app (AccuWeather.com) for the reason that it annoys me far less with clutter than AWS Weatherbug. But I am also on a *desktop* - portable computer users (notebooks, for example) likely will find RT apps more useful than I (or you) would *because* their lack of screen real-estate plays right into RT's wheelhouse.

Windowable RT apps - There's no such critter; which is why MDI applications (which are windowable) still make sense on desktops. (API restriction, more or less.)

Please - as much as you're saying that you want your old desktop back, Windows 7 wasn't a niche OS in the sense of being what you wanted; in fact, there hasn't been such a hyperniche version of Windows since the original Windows NT. However, even NT moved more into tthe general-purpose track with NT Workstation 3.51 "Son of Daytona" - the last version of NT with the 3.x UI. (Windows 7 was - and is - the default OS on the SAMSUNG Serie3s 7 Slate - where the keyboard is optional, not standard.) Windows historically doesn't stay in niches successfully - not even NT, it turns out.

[Brandon Live Veteran]

It's easy, sure, but again, WHY should I be doing extra work to get around the fact that this OS is designed for something else? Why does Microsoft think that someone who is using the desktop to open a music file wants to play it in a full screen interface? Why do you have to redo the associations in order to, say, play music while doing serious work in the desktop.

I do not understand. It's not like you have to keep the music app visible.

Oh, and if you open something with an unrecognized extension from the desktop, you get this weird Metroesque non-dialog dialog in the middle of the screen that asks you what you'd like to open it with.

Again I can't figure out if you're complaining about functionality or visual styling. This is exactly the same thing that happened in Win7, it's just that now there's a modernized version of the dialog with cool new features.

[VivM]

I do not understand. It's not like you have to keep the music app visible.

So let me get this straight. You're supposed to Alt-Tab away from the desktop into your FULL-SCREEN media player just because you want to fast forward or pause your music?

Again I can't figure out if you're complaining about functionality or visual styling. This is exactly the same thing that happened in Win7, it's just that now there's a modernized version of the dialog with cool new features.

It's not a dialog box with a frame, buttons indicating the action you want to take, etc. It's this weird new ... thing.... that serves the purpose of a dialog box, but doesn't look/behave exactly like a dialog box has behaved since... oh, MacOS 1.0.

[VivM]

That's simply not true. You can run a browser and word processor side-by-side, or use desktop apps.

Again, you're talking about an unreleased platform. If there isn't a (non-desktop) app for that yet, what makes you think there won't be?

So you think that productivity apps with the maturity of 20+ year old software like Word, Excel, Photoshop, etc will magically appear in this 'Metro' style in the next 6 months or a year?

It certainly hasn't happened in iOS world. I'm sure you can find a word processor with the same functionality as 1984's MacWrite for iPad, but there certainly aren't equivalents to MS Word, QuarkXPress, Photoshop, etc on OS X.

What has you classifying WinRT apps as having "non-productivity" interfaces?

Well, let me ask you this. What productivity apps has MS demoed for Metro?

Office? Nah.

WordPad? Nah.

Paint? Nah.

The only one I know is OneNote.

What are they demoing? Consumption apps. Music stores. Facebook clients. E-book readers. The same type of software you find on iOS/Android/etc.

If you can create things with Metro apps, where are the productivity apps?

No, it does not. I get the feeling you haven't actually used Windows 8.

I've run every preview, plus RTM, on a dual boot desktop system with an E8400, 8G of RAM, discrete graphics, 1600x1200 monitor, etc. I've played with it, WANTING to like it. And I just want to scream every time. It takes 10 minutes to figure out that 'restart' is hidden in this charms bar. (In all fairness, RTM does have a little tutorial in the installer telling you about the corners.) The Metro/non-Metro UI is confusing. You whack desktop... and oh wait, there's no way to launch things other than a) opening folders like on classic Mac OS, or b) going back to the Metro start menu (until c) you manually place shortcuts somewhere).

Then you decide you want to give Metro a shot. You spend 10 minutes trying to change the weather app to Celsius (it's not in the charms bar setting, and it doesn't use the OS regional settings - you have to 'right-click' in the Metro app, and then suddenly you get a 'use Celsius' button). You open the Music app... and it tells you to use the desktop to populate the library.

I've been an early adopter of every MS OS since I bought Win95 on Aug. 24, 1995. But not this time. This thing requires more adaptation than.. all previous MS OS migrations combined. And why should I adapt? Because MS is trying to shove a one-size-fits-all model down my throat because they're horrified that Apple has shipped 80M iPads (including my white iPad 3...) and they've sold nearly zero tablets?

The crazy bit is, instead of giving me a reason to eBay my iPad and get a Surface, this thing makes me want to ebay my x86 hardware and buy a retina MacBook Pro. Whoops.

Windows is just as great at those things as ever (more so, in fact). And now it's better at some other things too. I do not see why you have a problem with that.

Windows 8 is 'just as great at those other things' if one accepts that it is possible to ignore Metro. Change the file associations so no Metro apps are triggered when using the desktop. Pin your shortcuts to the desktop taskbar. Etc.

So, basically, you're supposed to spend an hour or two "fixing" Steven Sinofsky's #1 design decision for this OS if you want to keep using Windows as a serious, multitasking, windowing, keyboard/mouse productivity OS. You don't call that a problem?

[inactive]

i tried Windows 8 Pro x64 RTM in a virtual machine earlier and initial impression is definitely more negative than positive overall to put it nicely as they basically killed the general functionality of it and made doing simple stuff more of a chore/less efficient. all they really did was make it 'look' semi-cool but it's not for Desktop (and Laptop) use which is the core of Windows.

also, to much BS to relearn... i sure hope Windows 8 fails as i don't want that becoming the new standard for Windows Desktop PC's into the future as while that interface might be OK for tablet type stuff it's definitely not up to par for Desktop use.

bottom line... i could get Windows 8 free, legit or not, and i would not use it on a desktop which is pretty much all i use is desktops. Windows 7 is still easily the overall best OS from Microsoft.

this is pretty much the first OS from Microsoft i did not really care for as even though Vista i did not have to much interest in initially, but after SP1 was out it was overall better than Windows XP at that point and i used it for a while. but with Windows 8 there is not much they can do to save it based on the way it functions with interface. it's a shame though as they say it's got a bit better performance than Windows 7 but considering it's only a small amount and they basically killed just about everything else, it's just not worth using it.

o well, hopefully Windows 8 is more of a rough guide for the future and then with Windows 9 they get it functioning well for desktops again with a better interface that's not TOO different from what we are used to for ages.

p.s. makes me wonder if they trying to give Windows 8 away to help boost it's chances of success with those $39.99 deals.

[code65536]

Too bad so sad, there were technical reasons Microsoft purged the Start Menu.

Yea, I saw Brandon's post. Unlike you, I don't automatically give them a pass for that. As I've said before, the taskbar is incompatible with Metro, yet it was kept. So let's use that same bar. Start Menu doesn't have to be compatible with Metro. It just has to work as before with the non-Metro universe. I don't accept Brandon's explanation that it would've been too difficult--that's an excuse. If I was a product manager, I would not take that as an answer and I would demand to know why things were designed and architected in such a way that adding Metro would regress things so badly.

[VivM]

p.s. makes me wonder if they trying to give Windows 8 away to help boost it's chances of success with those $39.99 deals.

If the late Steve Jobs learned anything throughout his career, I think, it's that installed base is one of the most important predictors of success in technology. It's one reason whoever hits the market first tends to win (e.g. IBM PC came out 3 years earlier than the first Mac).

Why is installed base so important? Most third-party developers will go for the platform that has the biggest installed base, because it means that they have the greatest money-making opportunity. Then they'll think about supporting the #2 platform, the #3 platform, etc.

iPad has an installed base of ~80M units, I believe. Metro has an installed base of zero. If MS goes to, say, Rovio and says 'please make your Angry Birds 5' for Metro, Rovio will turn around and tell them 'Either you pay us a big amount of money, or you get in line, and we'll launch the iPad version first, followed by Android, etc, and once we've got all the low-hanging fruit, we'll consider your platform.' (And no one will buy a Surface if the latest and coolest touch apps launch a year later on Win8 than on iOS or Android)

Now, they're doing a number of things to artificially increase their installed base

1) cheap upgrades

2) every Windows system sold after release day will be counted as a Win8 system, even if it's a corporate machine that IT downgraded to W7 or even XP

3) by putting Metro front and center on Win8, they can count every Win8 system sold as a Metro system (which they couldn't do if Metro was a separate environment like Media Center that only 1% of people clicked on)

... as a result, in 6 months, they think they'll be able to go to the Rovios of the world and say 'we have 150M-capable Metro machines, Apple has 100M iPads, please develop for us first'. And then, if the Rovios start developing Metro apps before iOS, Microsoft think they'll manage to sell their tablets...

[code65536]

its a very vocal minority. mac fanboys have always had a inferiority complex and theyve always been loud because they must feel very tiny. linux fanboys and android fanboys have also joined them.

Right. People who don't agree with you are a vocal minority. Windows-hating fanboys. Why don't I call all these Metro apologists fanboys? Or claim that in reality, most people hate Metro, and it's just a small group of vocal apologists who keep defending the indefensible. Because name-calling doesn't further the discussion.

And for the record, I've been using Windows since version 3.0 (yes, 3.0, not 3.1). I hate Apple with a fiery passion, and, if anything, I'm a Windows loyalist who is disgusted by how Microsoft is throwing the very namesake concept of windows under the bus with Metro.

[code65536]

Now it seems that windows is trying to be "everything to everybody" and this might lead to "being nothing to anybody."

Precisely.

But it's not the inclusion of Metro that is the problem. It's how they went about including Metro, in a way that encroaches on space that should have been left alone.

[code65536]

That's simply not true. You can run a browser and word processor side-by-side, or use desktop apps.

And again, you are missing the point.

Yes, the desktop is still there, if people want to use Windows for things other than obsessively stalking their friends and watching inane cats. But...

1) Can you at least concede that Metro is not suitable for multitasking? And no, the current facility for running apps side-by-side is nowhere sufficient. Aside from window positioning, there is also the problem of task switching. And as VivM mentioned, even something as simple as having a little bit of ever-present UI peeking out to control music playing in the background so that you don't have to actually switch to an app to do something as simple as pause or skip to the next track.

2) Why this encroachment of the Metro UI on the "productive" UI? Why am I being forced into a full-screen thing just to launch an app, instead of a smaller, less disruptive partial-screen menu? Why shove Metro so prominently in my face and make it front-and-center?

3) This part confuses me even more: if Microsoft wants to make inroads in the iOS/Android world, what better way to do so than to offer something that neither iOS nor Android could offer? Instead, Microsoft has made the desktop in WOA all but useless by prohibiting third-party desktop software.

4) Can you promise that future versions of Windows will retain the desktop? That you will not further hamper it more than you have already done in Windows 8? That we are not going to get another "oh, that was just too hard to maintain" excuse in Windows 9 when, say, the taskbar gets the axe? I don't think I can trust that any more, given how much contempt Microsoft has shown the desktop environment with points #2 and #3 above.

All the apologists in this thread just say, "Well, the desktop's still there." Yes, it is. But I don't like that it's being treated as a second-class citizen, and especially what that might mean for the future.

It's not that I have a great vendetta against Metro; I'm okay with sacrificing multitasking and productivity if I'm on my phone or on my tablet. But I think this attempt to make a one-size-fits-all UI paradigm is fundamentally, inherently flawed.

[VivM]

You want another example of poor Metro design? In Vista/7, if you want to run something as admin, you right click on it in the start menu, and right there, you get a context menu with a run as admin menu.

In Win8, a bunch of options are displayed at the bottom of the screen. So you have to mouse all the way down to click the 'Run as administrator' option.

A big deal? Perhaps not. Indication that this was designed for small screens? Yes.

[MorganX]

So, basically, you're supposed to spend an hour or two "fixing" Steven Sinofsky's #1 design decision for this OS if you want to keep using Windows as a serious, multitasking, windowing, keyboard/mouse productivity OS. You don't call that a problem?

Yes. That is really the problem here. Windows 8 works, and a lot of it works well. But this is the core of what is generating so much negativity. I don't like it, but to be honest, I don't know that they had a whole lot of choice. No one's fault but there own that they're in the predicament of course.

[VivM]

And as VivM mentioned, even something as simple as having a little bit of ever-present UI peeking out to control music playing in the background so that you don't have to actually switch to an app to do something as simple as pause or skip to the next track.

And to add to this, on W7, using the default music player (WMP), you can simply mouse down to the taskbar, put your mouse over the WMP icon, and boom, you have pause/previous/next options, right there.

On W8, using the default music player, you have to Alt-Tab or use the Metro 'taskbar' on the left to go to the Music app, then hit the right-mouse button to display the play/pause buttons on the bottom of the screen, and then mouse all the way down to click that, then go back to the desktop.

[Brandon Live Veteran]

And to add to this, on W7, using the default music player (WMP), you can simply mouse down to the taskbar, put your mouse over the WMP icon, and boom, you have pause/previous/next options, right there.

On W8, using the default music player, you have to Alt-Tab or use the Metro 'taskbar' on the left to go to the Music app, then hit the right-mouse button to display the play/pause buttons on the bottom of the screen, and then mouse all the way down to click that, then go back to the desktop.

That's not quite true. You can bring up transport controls (for any app using the background audio API) by pressing the volume up/down keys.

[abysal]

You want another example of poor Metro design? In Vista/7, if you want to run something as admin, you right click on it in the start menu, and right there, you get a context menu with a run as admin menu.

In Win8, a bunch of options are displayed at the bottom of the screen. So you have to mouse all the way down to click the 'Run as administrator' option.

A big deal? Perhaps not. Indication that this was designed for small screens? Yes.

Yep this is one of the functions the current Windows 7 start menu was very good at. Other functions include:

• Full searchable single index: files, settings, apps, history, email (outlook). None of this non-sense Win-W, Win-F, Win-Q.
  
• Not full screen for better multitasking. It could have been improved, of course.
  
• Hover mouse for additional info without opening file / setting, app etc.
  
• Drag & Drop for fast link creation to desktop or task bar.
  
• Could be moved to different positions on the desktop.
  
• Apps in folders can be found easily, but a redesign could make it better.
  

Now don't get me wrong, Windows 8 isn't all that bad, it functions well and fast, works great on touch, and has a great tile / app interface for touch, however:

• The Windows key is nothing new, press it in Windows 7 and you perform the same functions as in Windows 8, and some even faster (such as search); yes it's true.
  
• It is false to say the Windows 8 Start screen is faster than the start menu; they are either the same or the start menu is faster performing certain functions (Search). Yeah I know, I'm saying it again because we seem to have some slow folks here.
  
• Apps can be found fairly easy, but it seems the start screen can get cluttered.
  
• There as some UI inconsistencies; such as the awkward shutdown location, and the network connections side bar, which doesn't seem to belong and wastes space.
  
• Aero glass is no more, not a deal breaker if this was the only negative.
  
• It can be viewed as aesthetically ugly, childish, and bland. (subjective)
  
• That?s really it, Win 8 is pretty much like Win 7; with slightly reduced multitasking due to the full screen start (won?t impact all users), and search is slightly less convenient since you have multiple categories.
  

* I?ve used windows 8 for a few months now, although as VM, however that should skew my opinion much. I still plan to give RTM a whirl once it?s available on MSDN.

I think the Start screen could have been implemented much better. It could have been made to snap to the left side of the screen, and allow users to swipe it right to have it go full screen (also offer a mouse click-able area to do the same).

While snapped in its smaller snapped view, full mutli-window multitasking would be possible, right click and other "legacy" start menu functions could also be preserved.

In the smaller snapped view you could have additional app shortcuts, the usual shutdown options and a fully indexed single category search field. Just a thought.

All this would have given the new crowd what they want, and without compromising too much with power users who like all those nifty start menu features.

To those of you whom like love are fanatical about Windows 8, please stop the circular arguments, and really consider what functions the Start screen does well and which it does not.

[Brandon Live Veteran]

It's not that I have a great vendetta against Metro; I'm okay with sacrificing multitasking and productivity if I'm on my phone or on my tablet. But I think this attempt to make a one-size-fits-all UI paradigm is fundamentally, inherently flawed.

It's not one-size-fits-all. That's why we have the new style of apps and desktop apps. Or looked at another way, maybe it is, but there's no need to sacrifice anything. You can use the right combination for your needs.

In my case, I have:

My tablet, which sees virtually zero desktop usage.

My home desktop which sees a little desktop IE usage but not much (I don't use this machine all that much though, bit of Mail and occasional game).

My laptop sees more desktop usage than not, but I'm using more WinRT apps as time goes on, including one of my own even though it's unfinished. I also have many providing useful notifications and tile updates.

My work desktop which sees nearly 100% desktop usage at this point (VS, Outlook, IE, cmd), though again I have apps providing at-a-glance notifications like Weather and Traffic. This is a multi-mon machine with a 30" main display. The Win8 desktop enhancements like multi-mon taskbar are really great here.

I guess you could call it one-size-fits-all in that one system is flexible enough to accommodate each of these usage patterns so well, but I think you meant something else.

[Subhadip]

Brandon Live is a logical tour de force. Love to read his posts.

Kind of wish he was on the training/marketing department!

[xWhiplash]

Yes. I'm sure that changing their OS to compete with a failed product (Windows 8) is the kind of savvy business decision that Apple would make.

Macs do not need to change to stay afloat. Apple does not proivide $300 systems like dell that are suited for grandma and grandpa. They provide computers built for professional work, that can cost thousands of dollars. I am not saying Dell or anybody else do not have computers like these. I am just saying Apple computers are mostly geared toward professionals than a $300 dell is.

As of right now, Apple knows that you cannot make a tablet type interface on the desktop. Touch screens on the desktop DO NOT WORK. Period.

I will get out of the IT industry if I am forced to program using a touch screen. It will make my arms hurt having them up in the air 8 hours a day.

Keyboard and mouse are...not....going...anywhere. The only next step would have computers read our minds. But a touch screen on a desktop WILL NOT WORK.

My neck hurts after using my iPad for over an hour.

Also, can Windows 8 lovers please stop telling us "We just hate change"? We do not. I have upgraded to the latest OS of any of my systems (OS X, Windows, and Ubuntu) the week the next one came out. I never wait until a few patches or even a service pack. When the OS is out, I get it that same week. So please, do not tell me I simply hate change with this OS.

I welcomed the changes each Windows, Ubuntu, and OS X brought in. Windows 8 is the first OS of THESE THREE GROUPS that I simply hate because of the way they treated us Desktop users.

I tried it, I did not like it. I stated my reasons. What do you want me (and others) to do? Use it for months until we are comfortable with it? No thanks. I can get my work I GET PAID FOR done much faster in Windows 7.

[VivM]

That's not quite true. You can bring up transport controls (for any app using the background audio API) by pressing the volume up/down keys.

Oh, I noticed that. But what if you're old-school and have a keyboard without volume up/down keys? I can't find a way to trigger that interface using the mouse.

[Jose_49]

And again, you are missing the point.

Yes, the desktop is still there, if people want to use Windows for things other than obsessively stalking their friends and watching inane cats. But...

1) Can you at least concede that Metro is not suitable for multitasking?

+1.

Anyone who says the contrary should be killed :p.

You can't run more than 9 metro apps (including the desktop) at the same time...

[SuperKid]

No option but I would choose "No I hate it and moved to OS X" which I did.

[VivM]

Macs do not need to change to stay afloat. Apple does not proivide $300 systems like dell that are suited for grandma and grandpa. They provide computers built for professional work, that can cost thousands of dollars. I am not saying Dell or anybody else do not have computers like these. I am just saying Apple computers are mostly geared toward professionals than a $300 dell is.

The crazy bit is, unlike Apple, Microsoft had for years and years a marketing strategy whereby professional users used the Pro/Enterprise/Business editions of Windows, and home users used Home/Home Premium.

You'd think it would have been easy to increase interface differentiation. Make the Home Premium edition more grandma/grandpa friendly, while retaining the Pro/Enterprise versions as productivity-centric. But no, they decided to shove Metro down everyone's throats...