What do you expect (not hope) to see in Windows 9?

[Vice]

actually MS is listening to feedback

recent leak

no hack needed for those of you

via winsupersite

I thought it turned out that was just a Stardock product and not a Microsoft thing? Has that status been updated yet?

[Noir Angel]

actually MS is listening to feedback

recent leak

no hack needed for those of you

via winsupersite

As has been pointed out multiple times, that dialogue is from Stardock's Start8, not Windows.

[Dot Matrix]

An OS that works itself to fit the user gives the user choice. Where is the needs fit for those of us that work better without the start screen?

Windows 7 is still available...

[Noir Angel]

Windows 7 is still available...

And what happens if Microsoft don't put the old start menu back before support is dropped for 7? Then we're getting shafted.

[Dot Matrix]

Vista itself didn't need to be backpedaled from. It has some great features. It did look very familiar to Windows XP. It had the start menu and such. The main backlash from consumers was that it didn't run their software or hardware. That took time to mature.

There was never a problem with Vista itself only the ecosystem that had been built up around Windows XP for what, 6-7 years? Software and Hardware makers had become too engrained in XP and that is what made Vista falter.

Also the fact that it didn't run well on all systems due to the Intel IGP debacle etc

Anyway I can give a good example of failed Microsofts products. Zune, Microsoft Bob etc - Not everything they've done has been a home run and when things aren't liked by Consumers they get axed.

A lot of you may not know about Microsoft Bob but it was back in the 90's when Microsoft tried to humanize the Windows desktop environment and make it "simple" basically they dumbed it down like they are doing with Metro and it failed miserably. They never attempted something like that again. Until now. But this time it's because they want to go after the iPad so they've blown up a phone UI like Apple did and are hoping that'll be successful. The difference is, Apple didn't take their desktop OS and make it run iOS apps, they don't need to leverage their desktop monopoly to be successful like Microsoft are doing.

All you have to do is look at Microsoft's recent demonstrations and releases to see why they won't be backpedaling with Windows 9. The Metro UI opens up more hardware and computing options.

And what happens if Microsoft don't put the old start menu back before support is dropped for 7? Then we're getting shafted.

And why does it need to come back? Nothing there worth saving, except app pinning, and you get that with the Start Screen.

[Vice]

All you have to do is look at Microsoft's recent demonstrations and releases to see why they won't be backpedaling with Windows 9. The Metro UI opens up more hardware and computing options.

I agree with you that the Metro UI opens up more form factors. Phones, Tablets. Things with touch screens it works great. But a lot of us don't have touch screens and the normal desktop environment is just more powerful for a finite pointing device like a physical mouse and keyboard. It's a good thing we still have the desktop in Windows 8 because that'll be where everyone spends all their time.

Are you using Windows 8 right now to reply to me? If so, are you using a browser inside Metro or on the desktop? How many apps do you actually use in Metro? Do you only use it to launch apps or do you spend more than an hour in Metro actually using apps?

[Noir Angel]

Because, for the 10 bazillionth time I don't need a full screen start menu that forces itself into my face every time I boot my computer and looks like ass. There's no such thing as being "more dynamic" they're just appeasing the tinker toy crowd to the detriment of their main user group.

[Dot Matrix]

I agree with you that the Metro UI opens up more form factors. Phones, Tablets. Things with touch screens it works great. But a lot of us don't have touch screens and the normal desktop environment is just more powerful for a finite pointing device like a physical mouse and keyboard. It's a good thing we still have the desktop in Windows 8 because that'll be where everyone spends all their time.

Yes, the desktop is still there, and has been greatly enhanced. That's not going away for some time yet.

Are you using Windows 8 right now to reply to me? If so, are you using a browser inside Metro or on the desktop? How many apps do you actually use in Metro? Do you only use it to launch apps or do you spend more than an hour in Metro actually using apps?

This is my screens right now:

I also have the Weather, OneNote MX, and Mail apps open in the background.

[Ci7]

I thought it turned out that was just a Stardock product and not a Microsoft thing? Has that status been updated yet?

As has been pointed out multiple times, that dialogue is from Stardock's Start8, not Windows.

got screwed with that SS mixed with other Windows 8 bits

my mistake :(

Vista itself didn't need to be backpedaled from. It has some great features. It did look very familiar to Windows XP. It had the start menu and such. The main backlash from consumers was that it didn't run their software or hardware. That took time to mature.

There was never a problem with Vista itself only the ecosystem that had been built up around Windows XP for what, 6-7 years? Software and Hardware makers had become too engrained in XP and that is what made Vista falter.

Also the fact that it didn't run well on all systems due to the Intel IGP debacle etc

Anyway I can give a good example of failed Microsofts products. Zune, Microsoft Bob etc - Not everything they've done has been a home run and when things aren't liked by Consumers they get axed.

A lot of you may not know about Microsoft Bob but it was back in the 90's when Microsoft tried to humanize the Windows desktop environment and make it "simple" basically they dumbed it down like they are doing with Metro and it failed miserably. They never attempted something like that again. Until now. But this time it's because they want to go after the iPad so they've blown up a phone UI like Apple did and are hoping that'll be successful. The difference is, Apple didn't take their desktop OS and make it run iOS apps, they don't need to leverage their desktop monopoly to be successful like Microsoft are doing.

regarding Vista

personally i like , made the jump in day 1

Vista > XP anyday

as for Win8

that remain to be seen by mass market

at worst case they would changed direction , but not the 'U' turn kind of things

---

i hardly use the startscreen through

[Noir Angel]

Enhanced? I'd say that's debatable given the horrible things they're doing with the UI, like cramming it full of whitespace.

And with Vista, most of people's complaints were about it's reliability and performance not it's features. Microsoft didn't backtrack on features because the features in Vista were pretty Good, they just improved 7.

[jagowar]

I expect win9 to have every "major" app ported to metro and you will never have to go back to the desktop.... the radial menu will be commonplace for complex apps and once that happens I think most of the bitching will subside when most people have touchscreen devices (desktop, laptop and tablet).

You will have a few people stuck in the past who will go to Linux but the rest will realize that metro is actually a superior system.... by then I also expect apple to have basically copied the touch desktop model and made osx the same as ios.

[Vice]

got screwed with that SS mixed with other Windows 8 bits

my mistake

regarding Vista

personally i like , made the jump in day 1

as for Win8

that remain to be seen by mass market

at worst case they would changed direction , but not the 'U' turn kind of things

I liked Vista and Windows 7 too. I upgraded to both of those once they hit RTM before they were on sale. I'm not a Windows hater. I use Windows 7 every day and I enjoy using it I think it's the best OS Microsoft has ever produced. But I just hate Windows 8's Metrification with every fiber of my being. To me it feels like an OS made for babies, I'm not a baby.

It sort of reminds me of that quote by Robert A Heinlein. "Censorship is telling a man he can't have a steak just because a baby can't chew it." I feel like Windows 8 is babyfiying an OS for the masses because they can't handle a serious product and now Microsoft is telling me I can't have the OS I want because these babies need a simpler OS. And yes I know they aren't forcing anyone to upgrade and I know that the desktop is still there. But I'd like to upgrade to an improved version of Windows 7 not a Babification version, I want more advanced features not simplification of features we already have. I mean what brand new features does Windows 8 actually have? Because all I see that they've done is tweaked existing apps that already came with Windows 7 and switched out the Start Menu for the Start Screen, a more basic and larger (visually) version of the Start Menu.

I'll probably be on Windows 7 until like 2014 at this rate. I have no viable upgrade path. There are technologies I want to use in the future like SCSI connected USB3 and things that haven't even been invented yet and these will surely not make their way to Windows 7. So my choices in the future will be upgrade to Windows 8 or some other over-simplified OS for babies or go without the more advanced hardware I want to use.

It only took NVIDIA 1 year to drop support for Tri and Quad SLI under Windows XP after Windows Vista came out. And at that time XP still had way more market share. What if the same situation unfolds after Windows 8 and then I feel like I'm forced to upgrade to use the hardware or applications I want? I just feel like Microsoft is not giving us choice like they used to. Even in Windows 7 you can turn the superbar off and instead of having App Icons you can have Window Names show instead. Where is the Metro off switch and the Start Menu on switch?

[Noir Angel]

I liked Vista and Windows 7 too. I upgraded to both of those once they hit RTM before they were on sale. I'm not a Windows hater. I use Windows 7 every day and I enjoy using it I think it's the best OS Microsoft has ever produced. But I just hate Windows 8's Metrification with every fiber of my being. To me it feels like an OS made for babies, I'm not a baby.

Yep, that's precisely my feeling too. And there's just no need to make a UI so ugly, you can still make touch UI's look good.

[Dot Matrix]

I expect win9 to have every "major" app ported to metro and you will never have to go back to the desktop.... the radial menu will be commonplace for complex apps and once that happens I think most of the bitching will subside when most people have touchscreen devices (desktop, laptop and tablet).

You will have a few people stuck in the past who will go to Linux but the rest will realize that metro is actually a superior system.... by then I also expect apple to have basically copied the touch desktop model and made osx the same as ios.

I really wanna see a full Office MX, and Explorer metro apps by Windows 9 release. But for Metro to overtake the desktop, I need to be able to have multiple apps open at a time on both my monitors.

[Vice]

I expect win9 to have every "major" app ported to metro and you will never have to go back to the desktop.... the radial menu will be commonplace for complex apps and once that happens I think most of the bitching will subside when most people have touchscreen devices (desktop, laptop and tablet).

Do you actually think people will use a touch screen on a desktop? Sitting at their chair with their hand held out in the air touching at a screen? Because that just won't happen. HP tried this and no one else cared, no competition from other manufacturers because that idea is very poor.

The ergonomic way to use a computer is to sit with the screen at eye level with a separate mouse and keyboard on the desk which you manipulate with your hands, a rested position where the desk takes the weight of your arms.

At best I'd expect a touch panel like the Apple Magic Trackpad for desktops.

[Motoko.]

Microsoft is appealing to the masses with Metro, if they're successful with Windows 8 and their line of tablets. You can be sure they will never look at our feedback from the amount of money they will be making.

[Dot Matrix]

Do you actually think people will use a touch screen on a desktop? Sitting at their chair with their hand held out in the air touching at a screen? Because that just won't happen. HP tried this and no one else cared, no competition from other manufacturers because that idea is very poor.

The ergonomic way to use a computer is to sit with the screen at eye level with a separate mouse and keyboard on the desk which you manipulate with your hands, a rested position where the desk takes the weight of your arms.

At best I'd expect a touch panel like the Apple Magic Trackpad for desktops.

Yes. They have ergonomic touchscreens that can fold down into more comfortable positions, almost like a panel on Start Trek that you can use to touch or draw on.

[Vice]

Yes. They have ergonomic touchscreens that can fold down into more comfortable positions, almost like a panel on Start Trek that you can use to touch or draw on.

I'm sure those are super popular. Of course I'm being sarcastic. Almost no one owns anything like that, nor will they. Tablets will superseed products like those entirely. And that is only if Notebooks don't kill Desktops first which they look to do the way the market is going.

[Matthew_Thepc]

There's one thing I really don't understand (and hope someone could tell me) - why don't you just use Start8 or Classic Shell if you dislike Metro? then you can get all the Windows 8 Desktop benefits without having to 'put up' with the Metro Start Screen. Do you dislike the login page, Metro improvements in the Explorer, and the Metro in Office 2013 also? (sorry if this comes across as an attack or anything; I'd actually like to know)

[Vice]

There's one thing I really don't understand (and hope someone could tell me) - why don't you just use Start8 or Classic Shell if you dislike Metro? then you can get all the Windows 8 Desktop benefits without having to 'put up' with the Metro Start Screen. Do you dislike the login page, Metro improvements in the Explorer, and the Metro in Office 2013 also? (sorry if this comes across as an attack or anything; I'd actually like to know)

I don't think any of those improvements are worth purchasing in my opinion. But my aversion is not just to this version of Windows but that if this becomes successful you can expect Windows 9 to take Metro even further and perhaps even do away with the desktop completely. I don't want to sacrifice the future of computing for an improved explorer in the present.

I was all for Windows 8 when its features were first being announced. File Deduplication, Better file transfer display windows in explorer, improved task manager. I loved all that stuff, then Metro showed up. I felt that Windows 8 was getting off to a great start and I was hoping they would add some new Apps to the mix to round out its base before release. I didn't expect Metro.

[theyarecomingforyou]

I don't have a problem with Metro apps per se, nor with the new start screen. What I do have a problem with is their integration / interaction with the desktop. The taskbar should be visible at all times - even when running Metro apps and the start screen - and that would mean task switching would be much easier (then you wouldn't need the hot-corners). More importantly, there needs to be better consistency. In Windows 8 there are some features only available via the Metro-style PC Settings, while others require you to use the Control Panel - the Network controls are Metro-style yet the sound controls are Aero-style. And mouse gestures that work on the desktop don't work in Metro and vice versa. I'd like to see Microsoft really unify the operating system. I imagine we'll see Windows 9 move to eliminate or reduce window chrome and bring the style of Metro over to the desktop environment.

Really, it's the limitations of WinRT apps that annoy me. With a desktop browser I can snap two windows side-by-side and browse multiple websites, yet with Metro I can't. With a 30" monitor (2560x1600) that leaves a lot of blank space, which is annoying and wasteful. And the same is true of the majority of Metro apps - they waste a lot of space and have very low information density. I'm sure I'll end up using a few Metro apps with compelling / unique functionality - particularly as the ecosystem develops - but most of the apps I've tried so far are terrible.

[Vice]

I don't have a problem with Metro apps per se, nor with the new start screen. What I do have a problem with is their integration / interaction with the desktop. The taskbar should be visible at all times - even when running Metro apps and the start screen - and that would mean task switching would be much easier (then you wouldn't need the hot-corners). More importantly, there needs to be better consistency. In Windows 8 there are some features only available via the Metro-style PC Settings, while others require you to use the Control Panel - the Network controls are Metro-style yet the sound controls are Aero-style. And mouse gestures that work on the desktop don't work in Metro and vice versa. I'd like to see Microsoft really unify the operating system. I imagine we'll see Windows 9 move to eliminate or reduce window chrome and bring the style of Metro over to the desktop environment.

Really, it's the limitations of WinRT apps that annoy me. With a desktop browser I can snap two windows side-by-side and browse multiple websites, yet with Metro I can't. With a 30" monitor (2560x1600) that leaves a lot of blank space, which is annoying and wasteful. And the same is true of the majority of Metro apps - they waste a lot of space and have very low information density. I'm sure I'll end up using a few Metro apps with compelling / unique functionality - particularly as the ecosystem develops - but most of the apps I've tried so far are terrible.

I pretty much agree with this and I also use the same monitor with the same resolution. If Metro was integrated better with the taskbar always visible I'd be less hateful against it.

[xWhiplash]

There's one thing I really don't understand (and hope someone could tell me) - why don't you just use Start8 or Classic Shell if you dislike Metro? then you can get all the Windows 8 Desktop benefits without having to 'put up' with the Metro Start Screen. Do you dislike the login page, Metro improvements in the Explorer, and the Metro in Office 2013 also? (sorry if this comes across as an attack or anything; I'd actually like to know)

Soo, we have to use 3rd party tools in order to use Windows 8 the way we want to?

Can somebody please, for once, explain why everyone is so afraid of a damn choice? Just a simple check box in the computer settings to automatically boot into the desktop mode.

What does that say about Windows 8 if the fans of the operating system say "If there is a choice, nobody will use it". If the new interface is indeed better as most of you say, it will not matter if there is a hidden checkbox deep in the system settings. If it is indeed better, that will be the only thing that matters.

And can somebody please explain why my high performance studio computer with 30" monitors needs to act like a tablet and share the same interface? Just to be "consistent"? Please. I do not use my studio computer the same way as I use my iPad. Why would I need it to share the same interface as a tablet? I usually have 8 Windows Explorer windows open, Photoshop, After Effects, Visual Studio, and other applications open at the same time. Having free floating windows is a necessity for me.

[Raa]

I expect my desktop computer to operate as a desktop computer, not a touch-based computer. Happy to have Metro, but don't shove it down my throat when I don't need it.

[Dot Matrix]

Soo, we have to use 3rd party tools in order to use Windows 8 the way we want to?

Can somebody please, for once, explain why everyone is so afraid of a damn choice? Just a simple check box in the computer settings to automatically boot into the desktop mode.

What does that say about Windows 8 if the fans of the operating system say "If there is a choice, nobody will use it". If the new interface is indeed better as most of you say, it will not matter if there is a hidden checkbox deep in the system settings. If it is indeed better, that will be the only thing that matters.

And can somebody please explain why my high performance studio computer with 30" monitors needs to act like a tablet and share the same interface? Just to be "consistent"? Please. I do not use my studio computer the same way as I use my iPad. Why would I need it to share the same interface as a tablet? I usually have 8 Windows Explorer windows open, Photoshop, After Effects, Visual Studio, and other applications open at the same time. Having free floating windows is a necessity for me.

You're looking at Windows 8 like it's still Windows XP or 7, and you can't do that. It's a new design paradigm that is making a clean break from the old one. I've been sitting here using Metro on my desktop all night. I quite like it, but it's too limiting yet. I still want to be able to use Metro apps across all monitors at a time if I want to.

If you're still attached to the desktop, the desktop is still there, but it's without a doubt legacy code at this point. We might see a new design by Windows 9 that incorporates better touch features and more Metro integration. But there's no doubt that the mouse centric, 9x paradigm is dead, Jim. We're in an era of computing where computers need to device neutral.