windows 8 Do you like or hate Windows 8?

[PGHammer]

Sure, if you are at the 'hunting' stage, the new menu might be helpful to the uninitiated. The claim the new screen is more customizable is silly, I think the 'show your Metro' thread is proof of that. Its demonstrably less so in many of the ways that count - its conception of hierarchy is goofed. Loose containers for pinned items is really the only change, and they really aren't very useful in their current state. Try deleting, moving or renaming anything from the All Programs menu and see how customizable it is. Try getting your app pin to stay in the location you want it to without it shuffling (or worse, having to fill additional columns because you can't just drop things in the bottom of the menu or wherever you want them). You already hit upon its lack of recent items or a conception of file content.

Shuffling around the placement of the equivalent of Desktop shortcuts isn't customization.

Ah - the *useful to the uninitiated* claim. In short, you are used to things being a certain way and don't want changes to what you are used to. That is, from what I[ve seen, the biggest reason that there's so much hatred for Windows 8 - it's different, and they don't WANT different.

[abysal]

Ah - the *useful to the uninitiated* claim. In short, you are used to things being a certain way and don't want changes to what you are used to. That is, from what I[ve seen, the biggest reason that there's so much hatred for Windows 8 - it's different, and they don't WANT different.

Ah yes, that afraid of change claim; one of the favorite (hollow) fall back arguments of the metro zealot. The reason people don't want these changes is because the new Metro program manager interface and search is no better than what it replaces (start menu), and in some cases is even inferior in functionality. It's as simple as that really.

[Dashel]

So are you saying that it does not - by default - allow subgroups? I have news for you - the subgroup has existed since Windows NT 4.x (when NT and 9x shared the same shell) and that behavior did not go away - Windows 7 still retains it, and, as you so quaintly put it, because it's always been there.

It should be about work - not futzing around ordering your Start menu.

Subgroups weren't your point, oh master of obfuscation. You said:

The deeper you have to go into the Start menu, the more it overhangs the desktop. You wind up rearraging your desktop shortcuts to compensate.

It is false any way you cut it unless you are talking pre-Vista. Stop bringing up things that have nothing to do with the point at hand FFS. Secondly, do you just throw your documents into a single folder too and not futz with them? Do you not position your desktop shortcuts in a certain way? Do you allow any program to just dump its crap wherever it feels like? The classic Start Menu items are no harder to organize/customize/access than any other file/folder. There is also nothing really different about apps and file access so I fail to see why doing it for one is ok but spending minimal time on the other is verboten.

Additionally, there is still no sign of how Metro will tackle the file/folder issue. None. If there were people on these forums wouldn't be trying to invent it. Right now its completely dependent on Windows Explorer and the Desktop for so much. So you have what clearly feels like two different OSs bashed together, with one having a scant % of the functionality of the other.

Its just hilarious that you keep spouting off complete 'techy' bull**** to prove we should take your ramblings seriously. ("the subgroup has existed since Windows NT 4.x (when NT and 9x shared the same shell" durka durka)

[Shadrack]

Just out of curiosity to you people who "hate" Windows 8:

Would you still "hate" Windows 8 if there was an option to re-enable the Start Menu from Windows 7?

I'm really surprised that there isn't an option to do this considering almost all previous versions of Windows had some option to enable a UI throw back to the previous versions. For example the Control Panel in Windows XP or even the "Classic" UI and "Classic" Start Menu in Windows XP (and Vista?).

[MorganX]

Just a thought, considering we're close to 90-days of general availability, there's almost no major apps or games with announced Windows 8 support, enhancements, or native Metro goodness. Considering the major changes, this is surprising.

[Dashel]

Would you still "hate" Windows 8 if there was an option to re-enable the Start Menu from Windows 7?

I don't 'hate' Win8 nor do I hate Metro. In fact I love 90% of it. I like Metro too, it has potential. Honestly, I can survive without the classic menu as well (if search wasn't fullscreen). I would still be giving up the 'recent' list and pinned content for common apps, but there is little I wouldn't sacrifice to not see that full screen monstrosity (which is always its most 'scary' and 'nightmare-ish' when you first hit it because the transition and contrast are so poor.) I'm frankly more frustrated by the guys distorting how obviously terrible and outdated it is than my own need to have it.

For example, look at the waste of space that is the new Metro Networking flyout on the Desktop. Give me something like that constrained with a single column of search results, cross indexed so the return is 'all' like Win7 and I'm happy. Allow the visual placement of a Start orb on the taskbar. Put the Charm's Settings 'gear' icon on the taskbar near the notification area (like Outlook.com). Simple changes really, I don't buy that its wasting so much dev time to preserve simple things like that, especially when the payoff of the new system will be years from now anyway.

I mean hell, you can't ask that Metro show the clock by default around here without some Mr. Helper shouting you down as a luddite.

The stubbornness is what I find most disgruntling, a couple tweaks and the vast majority of the grumbling would end. It would also better help us focus on Metro's actual state of development. Using the Desktop crutch is far too convenient. MS's history has always been giving you one generation to get used to the new while allowing the old (or a close approximation of it). Before you cite Win3.1 to Win95, that was a complete balls out change. You didn't get Win95's Start Menu but then get dropped into Win3.1 when you open an app or look for a file. Win8 is just cowardly in that regard.

PG loves to drone on about how compatible Win8 is. If they would have launched Metro that could have run them sans desktop, then I would have been impressed. Despite some backend changes, there really isn't much difference between Win7/8 desktop from an application perspective. If I have to use the compatibility tab, its invariably an older XP era product.

[Dot Matrix]

The start menu you're referring to had a lot of bugs because it wasn't kept in sync with other changes in the platform (i.e. MFU was totally broken, for one). It could not launch Metro style applications. It had no means to even represent them, because Metro style apps provide different resources. Its search infrastructure was similarly incompatible, didn't support new localization features, etc. It did not support our modern DPI scaling mechanism. It had problems with the new multi-mon features (i.e. secondary task bars). And these are just the things I remember off the top of my head. And then, even if we had put in all that effort (or just enough to keep it stumbling along), and sacrificed other features or overall quality, it would have created a disjointed experience which have been awful to use and to support.

Contrary to what you may think, we don't make these decisions on a whim.

This reply needs bookmarked. It's good to hear from Microsoft itself about why the Start Menu evolved into the Start Screen.

[Dot Matrix]

So far, Metro is a mini-OS bolted onto a far superior one.

Users once said that about the desktop when switching off of DOS.

[RottGutt]

Hate it, hate it, hate it. I will upgrade only if it includes the option to turn off Metro ENTIRELY. Remember 98lite? Hopefully it is updated for Windows 8 to let us completely remove that Metro crap.

[Dashel]

Users once said that about the desktop when switching off of DOS.

Um, DOS and Windows were separate OS's. Your fact checking inability boarders on the supernatural.

[Dot Matrix]

Um, DOS and Windows were separate OS's. Your fact checking inability boarders on the supernatural.

*sigh* the concept is the same. Had the technology been advanced enough at the time, I'm sure they would have been one.

[scaramonga]

The big MS Gamble is gonna FAIL, and badly, sorry :)

[Dot Matrix]

Hate it, hate it, hate it. I will upgrade only if it includes the option to turn off Metro ENTIRELY. Remember 98lite? Hopefully it is updated for Windows 8 to let us completely remove that Metro crap.

And what do you plan on replacing it with? If you kill Metro, and expect to have a working OS with nothing else running, you're going to have one broken OS.

[cacoe]

*sigh* the concept is the same. Had the technology been advanced enough at the time, I'm sure they would have been one.

It has nothing to do with that. Windows was a OS that ran on top of the dos environment. It was basically a DOS app that extended the capabilities of what you could do, with a GUI. I don't remember anyone complaining about it at the time :s

Even in retrospect, I'm quite glad I had to use dos on my first pc, it forced me to learn some basic command line stuff in the early days :)

[Dashel]

The concept is the same. Had the technology been advanced enough at the time.

I really think you need to expand there cause your comment is written horribly.

Win95 embedding DOS compared to Metro embedding Win7? (which is not what you said) At no point did MS stop developing DOS during the adoption of Windows and its new GUI. In fact, DOS survived all the way till Win95. So for years they were separate entities. If you were referring to embedding DOS in Win95, then your phrasing was terrible and your analogy still doesn't hold up. There was no DOS to shut-off (anymore than there is a Desktop to 'shutdown' in 8)

So lets be clear, up to Win3.x ran 'on' DOS until Win95 embedded DOS portions into it (equivalent of Metro running Win32). Its pretty clear that Win8 isn't a Win95 era revolution because 85% of it is still DOS.

[Dot Matrix]

I really think you need to expand there cause your comment is written horribly.

Win95 embedding DOS compared to Metro embedding Win7? (which is not what you said nor does that hold up either) At no point did MS stop selling DOS during the adoption of Windows and its new GUI. In fact, DOS survived all the way till Win95. So for years they were separate entities. If you were referring to embedding DOS in Win95, then your phrasing was terrible and your analogy still doesn't hold up. There was no DOS to shut-off (anymore than there is a Desktop to 'shutdown' in 8)

So lets be clear, up to Win3.x ran 'on' DOS until Win95 embedded DOS portions into it (equivalent of Metro running Win32). Its pretty clear that Win8 isn't a Win95 era revolution because 85% of it is still DOS.

Ok, put it this way, with DOS and early Windows, you still had to switch between two operating environments to get things done. Same with Windows 8.

[MorganX]

Users once said that about the desktop when switching off of DOS.

That's because when switching off of DOS, that's basically what Windows was. Though I think it "is" misguided to equate the Start Page to the Desktop.

[abysal]

Just out of curiosity to you people who "hate" Windows 8:

Would you still "hate" Windows 8 if there was an option to re-enable the Start Menu from Windows 7?

I'm really surprised that there isn't an option to do this considering almost all previous versions of Windows had some option to enable a UI throw back to the previous versions. For example the Control Panel in Windows XP or even the "Classic" UI and "Classic" Start Menu in Windows XP (and Vista?).

I'd like some thing with full indexing, with the ability for me to hit a single key for all search criteria, type my search term and hit enter all while watching a video, a game, or whatever else on another window (so no full screen switch just to search, launch a config app, or regular app). The start8 app from star dock is close, but is missing any options since it's just Metro re-sized, but use that as a concept. I don't really care about a physical start button either, but hot corners are iffy on multiple monitors. I also agree with the quoted post below.

This reply needs bookmarked. It's good to hear from Microsoft itself about why the Start Menu evolved into the Start Screen.

I agree with MS, those are all good reasons, but that doesn't solve the current gimped state of the Start Screen as I explained in previous posts. Hoping they solved some of that in RTM. I think Metro scaled & snapped to one side of the screen during search or launch of apps would be a very welcome addition, as well as combined index of categories, or the option to do that. Since I know some people like the separation of files, settings, and apps.

[Defcon]

The new Start screen is not the issue. Designing Metro only for touch devices, and then adding some token support for kb+mouse, is. For better or worse, MS has not answered any of these questions -

- why are Metro apps limited to fullscreen?

- why doesn't Metro on desktop have no chrome?

- why is the volume OSD in the top left, unlike screen center like every other OS. Actually I know why, its because on a phone the volume keys are on top left and that's where the OSD shows up. It's an insane reason to do the same on a desktop pc

- why have 2 completely different task switchers for Metro and Desktop?

- why is the gesture for closing apps in Metro so arcane?

- why is there no status bar in Metro? No widgets. No clock?

The answer to all these is of course the same - use a tablet. Which is why to date MS has never demo'd Win 8 on a non touch device, they are so proud of their touch UI.

But even in Metro and with touch, there are issues :-

- why can't I use a 2 finger swipe on my trackpad to switch between apps in Metro

- why can't I use the swipe from left/right gestures on the trackpad to launch the charms/taskbar?

Little changes can make the experience tolerable for normal users instead of asking them to learn keyboard shortcuts (which only power users use) and arcane gestures.

[BajiRav]

- why are Metro apps limited to fullscreen?

I am guessing to support a few select tablet resolutions, makes for easier scaling.

- why doesn't Metro on desktop have no chrome?

Good question, although why do we need chrome on full screen apps?

- why is the volume OSD in the top left, unlike screen center like every other OS. Actually I know why, its because on a phone the volume keys are on top left and that's where the OSD shows up. It's an insane reason to do the same on a desktop pc

That has bugged me slightly.

- why have 2 completely different task switchers for Metro and Desktop?

Agreed and I think it was another concession for touch UI.

- why is the gesture for closing apps in Metro so arcane?

It's easy when used with touch and for mouse/KB just use traditional methods. Not so bad, eh?

- why is there no status bar in Metro? No widgets. No clock?

There is a whole thread about this. I am on the "we don't really need it but it may be useful" side. Discuss it in that other thread.

Which is why to date MS has never demo'd Win 8 on a non touch device, they are so proud of their touch UI.

They did actually, plenty of times on different occasions.

But even in Metro and with touch, there are issues :-

- why can't I use a 2 finger swipe on my trackpad to switch between apps in Metro

- why can't I use the swipe from left/right gestures on the trackpad to launch the charms/taskbar?

This sounds like driver/hardware problem. There was a main page article about touch gestures in Windows 8 a while ago.

[MorganX]

I guess I don't see the point. I know that the functionality I want, and the way I want to use it isn't there. I know that without hacks and mods it won't come back. So it's easier to just not bother.

With jump lists on apps pinned to the taskbar, I'm not missing too much. Initial setup and config was annoying switching back and forth to metro, and getting to some things like control panel requires a search or making a mess of start page with legacy icons, or pinning utility icons to taskbar or on desktop. But really I don't use the Start Menu as much. Even Windows Media Center jump list is same as it was on Win 7 start menu, a little quicker since it's on the taskbar. It's good, but the Start Page is somewhat of a waste with no apps. With the new outlook.com and it's people hub and quick links if you pin it to taskbar, the Metro mail app isn't worth bothering with, especially at this stage as it's crap and the UI is crap. It's definitely built for tablet use.

[PGHammer]

Subgroups weren't your point, oh master of obfuscation. You said:

It is false any way you cut it unless you are talking pre-Vista. Stop bringing up things that have nothing to do with the point at hand FFS. Secondly, do you just throw your documents into a single folder too and not futz with them? Do you not position your desktop shortcuts in a certain way? Do you allow any program to just dump its crap wherever it feels like? The classic Start Menu items are no harder to organize/customize/access than any other file/folder. There is also nothing really different about apps and file access so I fail to see why doing it for one is ok but spending minimal time on the other is verboten.

Additionally, there is still no sign of how Metro will tackle the file/folder issue. None. If there were people on these forums wouldn't be trying to invent it. Right now its completely dependent on Windows Explorer and the Desktop for so much. So you have what clearly feels like two different OSs bashed together, with one having a scant % of the functionality of the other.

Its just hilarious that you keep spouting off complete 'techy' bull**** to prove we should take your ramblings seriously. ("the subgroup has existed since Windows NT 4.x (when NT and 9x shared the same shell" durka durka)

WinRT doesn't use files or folders. WinRT applications can - however, they have to have hooks into the rest of the OS to do so (as does any Windows application - it either hooks into Explorer or has its own container/dialog box for it). You *can* start WinRT apps via the file-association method (the same way you can start Win32 applications - that has not changed since Windows 3.x). WinRT is an API in progress - nobody has said otherwise. Further, nobody is saying that WinRT is a *heavy apps* or even *heavy games* API - those two reasons alone mean that Win32 is not going anywhere. So why *should* WinRT have to tackle the file/folder issue when by and large WinRT apps don't care - those that do will have either their own dialog boxes - or dialog box classes inherited from Explorer - to deal with it. Even WindowsRT includes Windows Explorer; therefore, how either API deals with files and folders is identical. I agree with the fact that Win32 and WinRT are different APIs - however, nobody - and especially not those that want it separated completely from the rest of Windows 8 - has explained how - or most importantly why - that would necessarily be of benefit to WinRT developers - or, in point of fact anyone outside of Apple and Google (especially Google). Do you have a vested interest in seeing WinRT (as an API) fail?

[PGHammer]

With jump lists on apps pinned to the taskbar, I'm not missing too much. Initial setup and config was annoying switching back and forth to metro, and getting to some things like control panel requires a search or making a mess of start page with legacy icons, or pinning utility icons to taskbar or on desktop. But really I don't use the Start Menu as much. Even Windows Media Center jump list is same as it was on Win 7 start menu, a little quicker since it's on the taskbar. It's good, but the Start Page is somewhat of a waste with no apps. With the new outlook.com and it's people hub and quick links if you pin it to taskbar, the Metro mail app isn't worth bothering with, especially at this stage as it's crap and the UI is crap. It's definitely built for tablet use.

It's what I've been telling folks from the beginning - Win32 hasn't gone away, and, until and unless WinRT apps develop that surpass what's available *for* Win32, they aren't really a threat TO Win32. With outlook.com (basically, a redone Hotmail) being supported *directly* by Outlook 2013 (no more add-ins!), the only third-party mail application I even need is the single-purpose Zimbra Desktop (Yahoo Mail) - Outlook 2013 itself handles all my other mail accounts. And that's the other thing - WinRT has actually lit a fire under Win32 developers - even at Microsoft; lest we forget - Office 2013, while it's actually implementing a large number of the RT Rules, is still a mostly-Win32-influenced application (even in Web App and RT forms). That fire, for some reason, could not, and was not, lit by Google being practically in Microsoft's grill (which they certainly are, at the very least, with Ice Cream Sandwich on tablets) let alone iOS (which Apple is still insisting is not trying to take on Windows). We don't know if WinRT will succeed or fail (not even Microsoft knows that); however, WinRT *is* starting to do what Honeycomb and ICS have not - light a fire under Windows developers.

[Dot Matrix]

It's what I've been telling folks from the beginning - Win32 hasn't gone away, and, until and unless WinRT apps develop that surpass what's available *for* Win32, they aren't really a threat TO Win32. With outlook.com (basically, a redone Hotmail) being supported *directly* by Outlook 2013 (no more add-ins!), the only third-party mail application I even need is the single-purpose Zimbra Desktop (Yahoo Mail) - Outlook 2013 itself handles all my other mail accounts. And that's the other thing - WinRT has actually lit a fire under Win32 developers - even at Microsoft; lest we forget - Office 2013, while it's actually implementing a large number of the RT Rules, is still a mostly-Win32-influenced application (even in Web App and RT forms). That fire, for some reason, could not, and was not, lit by Google being practically in Microsoft's grill (which they certainly are, at the very least, with Ice Cream Sandwich on tablets) let alone iOS (which Apple is still insisting is not trying to take on Windows). We don't know if WinRT will succeed or fail (not even Microsoft knows that); however, WinRT *is* starting to do what Honeycomb and ICS have not - light a fire under Windows developers.

Win32 hasn't gone away, but it has stalled with developers. When was the last time a killer Win32 app was released for Windows? I could probably name all the killer Win32 apps on one hand. EverNote, OneNote, MetroTwit, Paint.Net... One short. That's all I got.

[Noir Angel]

Win32 hasn't gone away, but it has stalled with developers. When was the last time a killer Win32 app was released for Windows? I could probably name all the killer Win32 apps on one hand. EverNote, OneNote, MetroTwit, Paint.Net... One short. That's all I got.

Mass Effect 3, Portal 2, Assassin's Creed: Revelations, Dragon Age 2, Skyrim... and those are examples just from the last year and a bit.