windows 8 Do you like or hate Windows 8?

[andrewbares]

In the end, this is an OS I'd be very hesitant to recommend to non-techies, its completely unintuitive, hard to use and frustrating in its present form. It's an easy upgrade for those who know their way around since it is much faster.

Uhmm, that's the total opposite of Windows 8 is meant to be. And Windows 8 is NOT like that in my opinion.

[Matthew_Thepc]

Uhmm, that's the total opposite of Windows 8 is meant to be. And Windows 8 is NOT like that in my opinion.

LOL, the complete differing of opinions here is amazing...some people consider it to be a completely dumbed down version of Windows completely unsuited for techies, and others consider it way to techie to even consider recommending it to a non-techie. wonder why?

[fbsduser]

I've just felt that (as a consumer OS) it's a lot better as an overall OS. I've never had an install of Linux that worked on the first try...but I've never had an install on Windows that didn't work on the first try (excluding where hardware doesn't support it/etc.). When I want to install an app I don't have to think about whether I should get it from the package manager/software center or download it off of the company's website. If I want to open Netflix, I don't have to run Windows in a VM :) I personally like installing/uninstalling software than dealing with packages and stuff. I've never had to deal with a bad registry (though I do acknowledge that other people have had to, I'm just saying that I've never had to, and I install/uninstall programs daily or weekly), and with Metro apps in Windows 8 it's now as easy (if not easier) to install apps than with the package manager/software center - open up the Store, press Install. When you want to uninstall, right click the app and press "uninstall."

But that only work with Metro apps. For desktop apps you still need to use the old method. In Linux any type of application (cli, GUI, web-app, widget) built on any libary (gtk, qt, xlibs, newt, ncurses, java) can be found in the app store. The Linux distribution packagers doesn't exclude apps for any reason at all (heck, even restricted codecs and drivers end up in the package manager).

as for DRM, I totally agree with you (except for the fact that it blocks Netflix because it doesn't have DRM :p). As for what the "ex-convict/mirrorhead nutjob that runs Microsoft" - it's not like nobody ever sees the Windows source code, Microsoft provides (through the SSI http://www.microsoft...ce/default.aspx) their product's source code to eligible companies, OEMs, Microsoft MVPs, and governments for multiple reasons (including making sure that no "ex-convict/mirrorhead nutjob that runs Microsoft [has] maliciously embedded [something] in the guts of Windoze")

Yeah. And how that give me any safety given that OEM's and MS MVP's will keep their mouth shut because they have a lot to lose if they don't (if an OEM confeses MS removes their "OEM" status and that means losing the ability to buy parts at huge discounts, which in turn would mean having to charge their customers as much as Apple does. In fact Apple computers are expensive because Apple doesn't have the "OEM" status and can't acquire it unless they stop bundling OSX and start preinstalling Windows, and if a MVP confese MS revoques their "MVP" status which means a hard financial and competitive loss) and the goverment will keep their mouth shut because they have their own "skeletons" hidden in Windows PC's and they know that MS can expose those "skeletons" the goverment agencies have,

fair enough, seeing as though you yourself have looked through all the source code (or at least parts of it). But then we get to the question - if nutjobs in Microsoft are able to hide malicious code from governments, OEMs, MVPs, etc, how would we know if they hid some malicious code in the guts of Linux? http://www.theinquir...ical-linux-2632 <conspiracy theorist>I mean, why would Microsoft contribute to Linux if they weren't involved in a huge conspiracy with other Apple and BSD to destroy Linux?!?! </conspiracy theorist>. the point is, if microsoft is able to hide code in Windows so that people can't find it when they look over it, who's to say that they haven't hidden something in linux that people can't find when they look over it?

First of all they aren't hiding anything from the US goverment, OEM's, MVP's, etc. The goverment, OEM's, MVP's, etc know what MS is doing but keep it secret for fear of retaliation (all of them have too much to risk if MS decides to retaliate against them), second The distro I have installed is one of those "Richard Stallman-approved" ones (Richard Stallman IS CONSPIRANOIC, hence if there's anyone that will triple check and triple audit ANY CODE THAT COMES FROM MS is him) which means that any malicious MS code was removed from the kernel before the kernel image got approved for packaging and uploading. Also remember that the code MS sent was "COMMITED" (as in received) but not all of it was "APPROVED" (that means that both Linus torvalds and Richard Stallman have personally reviewed it and accepted it for inclusion in the kernel codebase).

true that, complete true :p

true, until you consider Metro apps (which exhibit all of the qualities you listed).

Yes, I agree on that part, but if you look at pretty much all the surveys about win8. There's quite a lot of people who hate the Metro UI and apps.

I do <3 the "install as many programs as you want at a time" mentality, but I still prefer regular installations with an install wizard that can walk users through the steps of installing the program, and give them options along the way. I also like how in Windows everything is installed in the same place - C:\Program Files or C:\Program Files (x86), and settings are either baked into the app (in the case of .NET apps), done through the registry (in the case of most older or win32 based apps), or stored in the user's roaming settings (in the case of Metro apps) which provides a fair amount of consistency if something goes wrong and I want to find the app itself.

And when you want to back things up you end up hunting registry keys holding your settings and hunting down settings buried in libraries and binaries. In Linux just zip your user folder and all your personal settings go with you (all you need to do is use the same username and extract the archive in the new user folder). Also the "Install wizard" you prefer can hide unwanted add-ons.

true, but I've never really had to use a non-windows-supported filesystem/partition table o.o

Well. Try to fit a +3TB HDD in a non-UEFI box and tell me if you can use ALL of the disk capacity without changing from mbr to gpt.

I'm sure you can, but what I meant to ask was, is there anything big feature-wise (not just like the experience or how it's developed, but in the capabilities of apps that run on the platform, or something superior that would make it a better OS for a consumer) that's better? now, don't get me wrong, I love Linux (in fact, I'm posting this from openSUSE 12.1 with the Holo theme installed), but I sincerely fail to see really why most people would need to use Linux over Windows for daily tasks (especially when Windows doesn't require you to edit a config file just to get networking to work right :p)

If you consider that only big name comercial apps are worthy then keep your Windows. Because Not many comercial application manufacturers will make products for Linux (they would incurr in Bill Gates and Steve Ballmer's wrath).

BTW: There's no need to invent conspiracy theories about MS. Their monopolistic nature and malice and hostility towards Linux were proven in the US and EU courts (remember the Halloween Documents, the internal memo where one of the MS CEO's asked one of his employees to find surrepticiuos ways to propietarize the ACPI standard with the pupose of locking Linux out, or the "get the facts" campaign where the astroturfing and sockpuppetry was blatant, or the foxconn ACPI scandal where it was proven that MS forced foxconn to put an acpi dsdt table that was meticulously designed to throughly crash the Linux kernel. And the table was there only for Linux. There was another more generic table for "unsupported OS's", or Steve Ballmer yelling at the top of his lungs that "Linux was a cancer" and that he was going to use all of his (illegal) tricks to throughly erradicate it, or the initial draft of the TCPA standard which was mostly MS designed, and "casually" locked Linux out, or the initial version of BitLocker/BCD that came in an early version of Longhorn (even before it got called "Vista") that "just casually" rendered any Linux partition inoperable even if there were two partitions between the Windows and the Linux partition, or what about the relativelly recent SCO scandal where MS underhandedly passed money to SCO to help SCO crush Linux, or all the patent FUD (I mean, if they have those patents WHY THEY DOESN'T SHOW THEM), and those fraudulent deals with Linux distributors that were clearly meant to bring dissent within the Linux community, and the DE sabotage, and let's not forget the Best-Buy "training" material for salesmen that had blatant FUD against Linux all over the material). MS is clearly against Linux and have shown it many times.

BTW 2: The fact that you have a M$-Linux partition gathering lint doesn't make you less of a MS FANBOY and Steve Ballmer MOUTHPIECE.

[fbsduser]

First of all they aren't hiding anything from the US goverment, OEM's, MVP's, etc. The goverment, OEM's, MVP's, etc know what MS is doing but keep it secret for fear of retaliation (all of them have too much to risk if MS decides to retaliate against them), second The distro I have installed is one of those "Richard Stallman-approved" ones (Richard Stallman IS CONSPIRANOIC, hence if there's anyone that will triple check and triple audit ANY CODE THAT COMES FROM MS is him) which means that any malicious MS code was removed from the kernel before the kernel image got approved for packaging and uploading. Also remember that the code MS sent was "COMMITED" (as in received) but not all of it was "APPROVED" (that means that several maintainers reviewed it, gave the approval and passed it to both Linus torvalds and Richard Stallman who personally reviewed it and accepted it for inclusion in the kernel codebase).

Had forgotten a portion of the linux kernel review process and the "edit" timer expired on me.

[George P Global Moderator]

I don't see why people keep bringing "business" into this Windows 8 discussion. The only way Windows 8 will work it's way into business will be on devices like tablets or hybrids like the Surface. The fact is, and some people seem to overlook this time and again, business wasn't going to upgrade to Windows 8 regardless of metro, the start screen or having a start menu option etc. Any business that has already upgraded to Windows 7 or will upgrade to Windows 7 later this year and into 2013 will/was going to skip Windows 8 regardless.

MS knows this, it's always been the case, that's why taking the consumer dive now with Windows 8 was the best time to do so. Any business related advancements on the start screen/metro will come in Windows 9 and match with the next update cycle for them. Regardless of what they say upfront MS isn't taking business/enterprise into account with Windows 8, only with Windows Server really, but that's a different subject.

With all the new devices coming out soon, like the Surface and Ultrabooks with touch screens etc, Windows 8 is a clear consumer push and consumers don't use their hardware like most of the people on here moaning about "workflow" and "productivity". It's about time everyone on this tech forum realized we're the minority. That said I have no problem with the start screen, the 10-15 apps I use often are pinned to my taskbar and I don't switch back and forth between the desktop and start screen 50 times a day or whatever like some people here seem to do. Same with the start menu and Windows 7. Hell if the start menu in Win7 was just a box that showed me search results as I typed I'd be fine with that, that's all I use it for.

[Matthew_Thepc]

But that only work with Metro apps. For desktop apps you still need to use the old method. In Linux any type of application (cli, GUI, web-app, widget) built on any libary (gtk, qt, xlibs, newt, ncurses, java) can be found in the app store. The Linux distribution packagers doesn't exclude apps for any reason at all (heck, even restricted codecs and drivers end up in the package manager).

Yeah. And how that give me any safety given that OEM's and MS MVP's will keep their mouth shut because they have a lot to lose if they don't (if an OEM confeses MS removes their "OEM" status and that means losing the ability to buy parts at huge discounts, which in turn would mean having to charge their customers as much as Apple does. In fact Apple computers are expensive because Apple doesn't have the "OEM" status and can't acquire it unless they stop bundling OSX and start preinstalling Windows, and if a MVP confese MS revoques their "MVP" status which means a hard financial and competitive loss) and the goverment will keep their mouth shut because they have their own "skeletons" hidden in Windows PC's and they know that MS can expose those "skeletons" the goverment agencies have,

First of all they aren't hiding anything from the US goverment, OEM's, MVP's, etc. The goverment, OEM's, MVP's, etc know what MS is doing but keep it secret for fear of retaliation (all of them have too much to risk if MS decides to retaliate against them), second The distro I have installed is one of those "Richard Stallman-approved" ones (Richard Stallman IS CONSPIRANOIC, hence if there's anyone that will triple check and triple audit ANY CODE THAT COMES FROM MS is him) which means that any malicious MS code was removed from the kernel before the kernel image got approved for packaging and uploading. Also remember that the code MS sent was "COMMITED" (as in received) but not all of it was "APPROVED" (that means that both Linus torvalds and Richard Stallman have personally reviewed it and accepted it for inclusion in the kernel codebase).

Yes, I agree on that part, but if you look at pretty much all the surveys about win8. There's quite a lot of people who hate the Metro UI and apps.

And when you want to back things up you end up hunting registry keys holding your settings and hunting down settings buried in libraries and binaries. In Linux just zip your user folder and all your personal settings go with you (all you need to do is use the same username and extract the archive in the new user folder). Also the "Install wizard" you prefer can hide unwanted add-ons.

Well. Try to fit a +3TB HDD in a non-UEFI box and tell me if you can use ALL of the disk capacity without changing from mbr to gpt.

If you consider that only big name comercial apps are worthy then keep your Windows. Because Not many comercial application manufacturers will make products for Linux (they would incurr in and wrath).

BTW: There's no need to invent conspiracy theories about MS. Their monopolistic nature and malice and hostility towards Linux were proven in the US and EU courts (remember the Halloween Documents, the internal memo where one of the MS CEO's asked one of his employees to find surrepticiuos ways to propietarize the ACPI standard with the pupose of locking Linux out, or the "get the facts" campaign where the astroturfing and sockpuppetry was blatant, or the foxconn ACPI scandal where it was proven that MS forced foxconn to put an acpi dsdt table that was meticulously designed to throughly crash the Linux kernel. And the table was there only for Linux. There was another more generic table for "unsupported OS's", or Steve Ballmer yelling at the top of his lungs that "Linux was a cancer" and that he was going to use all of his (illegal) tricks to throughly erradicate it, or the initial draft of the TCPA standard which was mostly MS designed, and "casually" locked Linux out, or the initial version of BitLocker/BCD that came in an early version of Longhorn (even before it got called "Vista") that "just casually" rendered any Linux partition inoperable even if there were two partitions between the Windows and the Linux partition, or what about the relativelly recent SCO scandal where MS underhandedly passed money to SCO to help SCO crush Linux, or all the patent FUD (I mean, if they have those patents WHY THEY DOESN'T SHOW THEM), and those fraudulent deals with Linux distributors that were clearly meant to bring dissent within the Linux community, and the DE sabotage, and let's not forget the Best-Buy "training" material for salesmen that had blatant FUD against Linux all over the material). MS is clearly against Linux and have shown it many times.

BTW 2: The fact that you have a M$-Linux partition gathering lint doesn't make you less of a MS FANBOY and Steve Ballmer MOUTHPIECE.

sorry, there's something wrong with the quote tags in my reply, so I've pasted it to

[Josh the Nerd]

I don't see why people keep bringing "business" into this Windows 8 discussion. The only way Windows 8 will work it's way into business will be on devices like tablets or hybrids like the Surface. The fact is, and some people seem to overlook this time and again, business wasn't going to upgrade to Windows 8 regardless of metro, the start screen or having a start menu option etc. Any business that has already upgraded to Windows 7 or will upgrade to Windows 7 later this year and into 2013 will/was going to skip Windows 8 regardless.

I would think any business upgrading in 2013 would upgrade to Windows 8 then. It gives them longer before having to upgrade again, and Windows to Go seems like it can be very useful for business.

[George P Global Moderator]

I would think any business upgrading in 2013 would upgrade to Windows 8 then. It gives them longer before having to upgrade again, and Windows to Go seems like it can be very useful for business.

Business upgrades slow, the 2013 upgrades were probably planned for this year but just won't happen till then. Business just tends to skip a version or go to it a year later with SP1. So, Windows 8 SP1 probably won't show up till fall of 2013 in which case business won't upgrade to that till 2014 or w/e. They're always behind, which is why the 2-3 year release cycle for Windows is what MS has went with but I don't think they'll sit on Windows 8 for that long. I expect Windows 8 will see the return of Feature Packs, or just bigger service packs.

[~Johnny]

that's because Windows 8 has only 3 supported DPI scales. If your monitor is not using them, you get standard 96 DPI problems i.e. same messy **** that Windows 7 and lower have/had.

Oh and only WinRT apps bring proper DPI scaling support by default.

read: http://blogs.msdn.co...nt-screens.aspx

3 supported DPI scales? What? You can choos whatever DPI scaling you want, and Windows 8 (and even Windows 7 for that matter), will adjust accordingly. And the vast majority of Windows applications already feature proper DPI scaling support by default, and its something that formed the core platform of WPF & XAML that many .NET applications use.

[Daveski]

I am still wondering why MS has combined this desktop/tablet OS & not just released separate systems. I also would argue with the idea that the desktop is dead & laptops are going the way of Jurassic Park. From what I have heard MS have lost business with some hardware manufacturers & I think that this new OS is a way of pushing their own hardware.

Will I upgrade to Win 8? ... No.

When I buy a new computer I will have to give it some thought. I may go Mac or Ubuntu.

[Josh the Nerd]

I am still wondering why MS has combined this desktop/tablet OS & not just released separate systems.

The Surface is a perfect example of why they're the same OS. Microsoft doesn't want you to have to choose between a desktop/laptop and a tablet. You can have them both in one.

[Daveski]

The Surface is a perfect example of why they're the same OS. Microsoft doesn't want you to have to choose between a desktop/laptop and a tablet. You can have them both in one.

That's just my point though. From what I have seen of Win 8 it is an unhappy blend of two systems & primarily seems biased against desktop users. It is more likely a marketing move to shift loads of Surface units to the punter than any great feat of homogenised innovation. I doubt whether I will ever purchase a Surface tablet. I really don't know what I'll do when it comes to buying a new laptop. I don't want Win 8, I may be able to roll-back to Win 7 if MS allow that. I have a feeling that if I can't do that I may dual-boot with Ubuntu & just keep Win 8 for when or if I really have to use Windows. Macbooks are looking better all the time.

[ambiance]

I tried the release preview yesterday and really wanted to like it, but couldn't. Metro looks clean, but it's cumbersome and the fact that I use Google's ecosystem doesn't help much either. Also, I prefer to access all my information in my browser and don't like having all these apps I'm not using eating up memory. It's not like I don't have the resources, but I'm OCD and have been like that since my DOS TSR days. After using it for several hours I kept finding myself not needing to use the start screen and going into desktop mode. While the UI tweaks are nice, everything else has been basterdized. Like many have said it's tablet first with desktop as an afterthought. It needs to be all or nothing.

I was planning on taking advantage of the upgrade offer and now I plan on saving the money. I'm kind of sad about it as this will be the first time ever that I'll not be upgrading. I voted hate even though I'm more disappointed/ambivalent about it and don't see any reason to upgrade from 7.

[PGHammer]

That's just my point though. From what I have seen of Win 8 it is an unhappy blend of two systems & primarily seems biased against desktop users. It is more likely a marketing move to shift loads of Surface units to the punter than any great feat of homogenised innovation. I doubt whether I will ever purchase a Surface tablet. I really don't know what I'll do when it comes to buying a new laptop. I don't want Win 8, I may be able to roll-back to Win 7 if MS allow that. I have a feeling that if I can't do that I may dual-boot with Ubuntu & just keep Win 8 for when or if I really have to use Windows. Macbooks are looking better all the time.

The only reason why the folks that criticize it complain about bias is because the Start menu is missing.

I'm not saying this to be saying it - out of the detractors' own mouths, the one major criticism of Windows 8 is that the Start menu is gone.

Never mind that alternatives from third parties (such as Start8 and Classic Shell) abound.

Never mind that compatibility with *desktop applications* with Windows 8 is not only not broken, but is actually better than that of the benchmark it is compared against - Windows 7 + SP1.

Never mind that the QuickTask power-user's menu is *only* discoverable by mouse-users (there's no shortcut key combo or touch gesture that can launch it).

Because it supports touch *at all* , it's criticized.

I don't have a touch-screen display on this desktop, and I feel far from shortchanged by Windows 8.

I run productivity applications, games, etc. (In fact, I play the same games I did on Windows 7.)

[PGHammer]

LOL. I still have some of my 70+ year old business owners asking me where the "start button" is. I'm not even going to attempt to explain the invisible charms menu hot spot. There's plenty of logic that defeats what Microsoft is doing with Windows 8, and comparing it to politics doesn't make it any more or less logical (considering politics themselves are completely illogical).

Which is exactly why I made that comparison - politics is proving as logical as religion, and just as emotionally driven.

[Noir Angel]

I voted "Doesn't bother" because I don't use Windoze. I use OSX86, Linux or BSD these days.

People still work under the delusion that saying "Windoze" is somehow cute or funny? *sigh*

that's because Windows 8 has only 3 supported DPI scales. If your monitor is not using them, you get standard 96 DPI problems i.e. same messy **** that Windows 7 and lower have/had.

Oh and only WinRT apps bring proper DPI scaling support by default.

read: http://blogs.msdn.co...nt-screens.aspx

I wasn't talking about the visual quality of the applications, I was referring to the fact that most of them don't display anything like enough information to look good on a high resolution screen.

[LEXX911]

No, we're technically the old users who are used to the way things were/are done, and dislike the idea of changing our workflow to something that will make us less productive (I'm referring to Metro's screen hogging, not the search ability which I agree has improved over the years).

I'm a heavy multitask Windows power user and I don't see how it's affecting my work flow. Even though I hardly ever go into Start Metro mode but as an Artist I like the way it look. I'm getting the best of both world. I don't miss that ugly Start Orb and I hardly ever go in Start Orb. Right click where the START ORB use to be and I get all the most use Programs/Applications much more faster than before. They put all the main Applications right in there that I use pretty often so they did their homework. I'm pretty sure when it RTM is release you probably will be able to add in that launch area what APPS you most want to be in there. And are people that stupid or lazy to create short cuts also?

SInce it's obviously not very intuitive for multitasking but it's made for entertaining purpose my main complain would be there's no volume control inside the music or video APP which is really stupid. My other complain would be is that the START area can become a total mess with the installation of other applications. But that hopefully will be fixable and hope you can replace it with different Metro Icon and also be able to group them to keep it clean.

[LEXX911]

The only reason why the folks that criticize it complain about bias is because the Start menu is missing.

I'm not saying this to be saying it - out of the detractors' own mouths, the one major criticism of Windows 8 is that the Start menu is gone.

Never mind that alternatives from third parties (such as Start8 and Classic Shell) abound.

Never mind that compatibility with *desktop applications* with Windows 8 is not only not broken, but is actually better than that of the benchmark it is compared against - Windows 7 + SP1.

Never mind that the QuickTask power-user's menu is *only* discoverable by mouse-users (there's no shortcut key combo or touch gesture that can launch it).

Because it supports touch *at all* , it's criticized.

I don't have a touch-screen display on this desktop, and I feel far from shortchanged by Windows 8.

I run productivity applications, games, etc. (In fact, I play the same games I did on Windows 7.)

The problem with people who complain about the missing START ORB didn't know that you can right click in that same area and you get most of the main applications that you once did with the START ORB but better because they replace it with the most applications that power users uses.

[Daveski]

The only reason why the folks that criticize it complain about bias is because the Start menu is missing.

It's not the only reason that people criticise Win 8.

I'm not saying this to be saying it - out of the detractors' own mouths, the one major criticism of Windows 8 is that the Start menu is gone.

People like the Start Menu. To me, it seems that this 'radical' overhaul is more to do with a marketing strategy than anything else.

Never mind that alternatives from third parties (such as Start8 and Classic Shell) abound.

Alternatives that MS is trying to stop being employed, according to some sources.

Never mind that compatibility with *desktop applications* with Windows 8 is not only not broken, but is actually better than that of the benchmark it is compared against - Windows 7 + SP1.

Broken or not is not the issue though is it?

Never mind that the QuickTask power-user's menu is *only* discoverable by mouse-users (there's no shortcut key combo or touch gesture that can launch it).

Because it supports touch *at all* , it's criticized.

I don't think that this reason either is why people dislike it.

I don't have a touch-screen display on this desktop, and I feel far from shortchanged by Windows 8.

I run productivity applications, games, etc. (In fact, I play the same games I did on Windows 7.)

According to this poll, almost an equal amount of people hate it compared to those that think it is wonderful. It's just slightly more that 'hate' it.

I don't 'hate' Win 8/Metro, I just don't like it. When Vista reached my country it was highly praised & the bugs in it that plagued American users were gone. In many ways I like Win 7 better, but they are both good for me. I liked XP when it first came out. I don't like Win 8. Eventually, if I buy a computer running it I may learn to accept it. I doubt whether I will ever learn to like it, touchscreen or no. I have a feeling I that will make a dual-boot with Ubuntu & use that as my default OS. I will probably use Win 8 then only when it is necessary.

[JaLooNz]

It is over optimised for touch till the point that mouse movements are excessive for some simple tasks. The other issue is that I can foresee poor desktop consistency, having to constantly switch between metro and the existing apps.

[Dot Matrix]

People still work under the delusion that saying "Windoze" is somehow cute or funny? *sigh*

+1

[jake1eye]

This is the only version of Windows I will not buy or install.

Hate the Metro Start, it looks like it was design buy a person

who did to much Acid in the Seventies and never came down.

[PGHammer]

The problem with people who complain about the missing START ORB didn't know that you can right click in that same area and you get most of the main applications that you once did with the START ORB but better because they replace it with the most applications that power users uses.

And that is whose fault?

That power user's menu (I've called it QuickTask) - which launched in the Consumer Preview - was, in fact, pointed out as a new feature in the Consumer Preview thread; I personally, in fact, listed it as one of several reasons I showed Windows 7 the door.

jake1eye - you've proven my point about the subjectivity behind the dislike of Windows 8 (and the UI). It's not about logic; it's not even about *broken workflow*.

[Daveski]

It is over optimised for touch till the point that mouse movements are excessive for some simple tasks. The other issue is that I can foresee poor desktop consistency, having to constantly switch between metro and the existing apps.

Yes, & then there's that. Which again makes me wonder why MS didn't just create two separate operating systems, one for desktops & one for tablets. Unless they have a hidden agenda.

[Eric Veteran]

[Threads merged]