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

[trag3dy]

There is a crap ton of legacy code still in Windows 7 that shouldn't be there. Why are you laughing at that?

Because I couldn't care less about that as long as I can use my computer the way I want to. The saying "if it ain't broke don't fix it" applies here.

[Dot Matrix]

Because I couldn't care less about that as long as I can use my computer the way I want to. The saying "if it ain't broke don't fix it" applies here.

How do you define "If it ain't broke..."? Because there are many arguments against the current cesspool of legacy code in Windows. Security, reliability, viability, etc.

[trag3dy]

How do you define "If it ain't broke..."? Because there are many arguments against the current cesspool of legacy code in Windows. Security, reliability, viability, etc.

Yeah I hear every day about how the start menu is the source of unending security vulnerabilities. Or the desktop with it's also unending reliability issues. Damn that legacy code right to hell.

[Rickkins]

I fully expect ms to proclaim that the return of a full desktop option is a natural progression of win8 and how it was driven by the success of win8.

[Rickkins]

How do you define "If it ain't broke..."? ~snipped nonsense~

Win7's desktop.

paradigm

Please stop using that word. It is annoying as hell, and does not, I'm sorry to say, impress anyone.

[Dot Matrix]

Yeah I hear every day about how the start menu is the source of unending security vulnerabilities. Or the desktop with it's also unending reliability issues. Damn that legacy code right to hell.

Read through the monthly security bulletins Microsoft releases, and you'll see they're patching holes in Explorer. Windows 8 Metro does away with all those legacy woes. Especially, if they purge all remaining 9x code in Windows 9, and develop a better, more secure and virtualized "desktop" environment. That's what I'm hoping for.

Judging by your previous comment, the only thing happening here is fear of change. You don't want Microsoft to fix itself up, because that means a change in your habits. Which I don't understand. For how good Windows 7 is, it's still a building that has been patched up, but still left to rot. You should care because if that goes unfixed for long, you're at risk, Joe User is at risk, etc. You can't blame Microsoft for completely renovating Windows.

[trag3dy]

Read through the monthly security bulletins Microsoft releases, and you'll see they're patching holes in Explorer. Windows 8 Metro does away with all those legacy woes. Especially, if they purge all remaining 9x code in Windows 9, and develop a better, more secure and virtualized "desktop" environment. That's what I'm hoping for.

Judging by your previous comment, the only thing happening here is fear of change. You don't want Microsoft to fix itself up, because that means a change in your habits. Which I don't understand. For how good Windows 7 is, it's still a building that has been patched up, but still left to rot. You should care because if that goes unfixed for long, you're at risk, Joe User is at risk, etc. You can't blame Microsoft for completely renovating Windows.

I understand that. But they don't need to strip out features to make way for new features. We can have both and you can use whichever you prefer. You know that right? If all Microsoft heard as feedback was that everyone wants more OPTIONS* then they would be compelled to add those options and in the process make everyone happy. And please. You are trying to make out like there won't be security vulnerabilities in Windows 8.

You draw some funny conclusions. I'm all for change if I think the change is better. My opinion is that the direction MS is taking Windows 8 with the metro garbage is not change for the better though. If I'm afraid of change then you're afraid of having options, which I find really odd.

*Capitalized, bold, italicized, and underlined to emphasize the importance of the word.

[xWhiplash]

Read through the monthly security bulletins Microsoft releases, and you'll see they're patching holes in Explorer. Windows 8 Metro does away with all those legacy woes. Especially, if they purge all remaining 9x code in Windows 9, and develop a better, more secure and virtualized "desktop" environment. That's what I'm hoping for.

Judging by your previous comment, the only thing happening here is fear of change. You don't want Microsoft to fix itself up, because that means a change in your habits. Which I don't understand. For how good Windows 7 is, it's still a building that has been patched up, but still left to rot. You should care because if that goes unfixed for long, you're at risk, Joe User is at risk, etc. You can't blame Microsoft for completely renovating Windows.

Why couldnt they renovate the start menu? Why does the start screen have to be thrown in my computer that was thousands of dollars?

If you can give one valid argument why my studio and work computer needs to act like a tablet other than "things need to change". But so far all the arguments FOR metro and the new start screen have not been very convincing. It is always "OMG you hate change!!!" or "Fine stick with the old way of doing things". Um I am sorry, I am usually one of the first to upgrade to all the newest stuff. I upgraded a computer to Vista that probably should not be running it because I wanted all of those new features. Vista and 7 brought changes for the better, not worse like Windows 8 is doing.

I do not have time to completely change my work flow "just because". I get on my computer, and immediately go to work. I know where everything is in the start menu, I know how to get to all the administrative tools very quickly from ONE menu. If it makes things better, I will change it, but Windows 8 does not make my job any easier. Windows 7 was a change for the better. The superbar was an incredible enhancement. It even included the option to use the taskbar like you could in previous OSes.

[xWhiplash]

I understand that. But they don't need to strip out features to make way for new features. We can have both and you can use whichever you prefer. You know that right? If all Microsoft heard as feedback was that everyone wants more OPTIONS* then they would be compelled to add those options and in the process make everyone happy. And please. You are trying to make out like there won't be security vulnerabilities in Windows 8.

You draw some funny conclusions. I'm all for change if I think the change is better. My opinion is that the direction MS is taking Windows 8 with the metro garbage is not change for the better though. If I'm afraid of change then you're afraid of having options, which I find really odd.

*Capitalized, bold, italicized, and underlined to emphasize the importance of the word.

Agreed. New code is just as vulnerable, if not worse in some cases. The old code has been beaten, poked, exploited, patched, patched, and patched over the years.

[abysal]

For Windows 9; I'd like to have choice to run or disable Metro. I'd also like a more consistent UI. I'd like to see a start menu, although the button can go, however hot corner stuff doesn't work well with multiple monitors.

The charms bar needs to go or be redesigned. Network connections should behave as they did in 7; UI wise, although they can be the new way if running Metro.

UI transparencies and shadows need to come back. Being able to run multiple UI themes would also be nice with native support.

To summarize; use choice is what I would like to see

[Stoffel]

Why is it always the same 5-7 people who have to start complaining about Win 8 and metro, and derail every thread?

We get it you don't like Metro. But don't you get tiered of saying the same thing over and over???

[xWhiplash]

Why is it always the same 5-7 people who have to start complaining about Win 8 and metro, and derail every thread?

We get it you don't like Metro. But don't you get tiered of saying the same thing over and over???

Maybe because we are fed up with Microsoft's attitude with Windows 8? We are consumers who buy a product. We do not have to deal with it like everybody keeps saying. We will deal with it by sticking with Windows 7 and then be done with Microsoft. I have still not read one good argument why my 3.33Ghz i7, 18GB of ram studio/work computer needs an interface like metro. It breaks my productivity, and I do not have months to change my habits just because.

[Dot Matrix]

I understand that. But they don't need to strip out features to make way for new features. We can have both and you can use whichever you prefer. You know that right? If all Microsoft heard as feedback was that everyone wants more OPTIONS* then they would be compelled to add those options and in the process make everyone happy. And please. You are trying to make out like there won't be security vulnerabilities in Windows 8.

You draw some funny conclusions. I'm all for change if I think the change is better. My opinion is that the direction MS is taking Windows 8 with the metro garbage is not change for the better though. If I'm afraid of change then you're afraid of having options, which I find really odd.

*Capitalized, bold, italicized, and underlined to emphasize the importance of the word.

I'm not afraid of options, however, Windows is moving in a new direction, away from what we've known. It's a new product meant to be used in new ways, and chances are had they been kept around, they would have been removed in Windows 9 anyways, and we would be right back here with these threads.

Windows 8 is about pushing new technologies, not clinging to old tech. It'll take a few years, but once Windows 8 is on the market, by Windows 9 we'll have some pretty cool toys to play with, both on the desktop and on tablet devices.

Why couldnt they renovate the start menu? Why does the start screen have to be thrown in my computer that was thousands of dollars?

If you can give one valid argument why my studio and work computer needs to act like a tablet other than "things need to change". But so far all the arguments FOR metro and the new start screen have not been very convincing. It is always "OMG you hate change!!!" or "Fine stick with the old way of doing things". Um I am sorry, I am usually one of the first to upgrade to all the newest stuff. I upgraded a computer to Vista that probably should not be running it because I wanted all of those new features. Vista and 7 brought changes for the better, not worse like Windows 8 is doing.

I do not have time to completely change my work flow "just because". I get on my computer, and immediately go to work. I know where everything is in the start menu, I know how to get to all the administrative tools very quickly from ONE menu. If it makes things better, I will change it, but Windows 8 does not make my job any easier. Windows 7 was a change for the better. The superbar was an incredible enhancement. It even included the option to use the taskbar like you could in previous OSes.

Because it's what Microsoft wanted, plus a redesigned Start Menu would not give the benefit of live tiles, and is by no means touch friendly. 32x32 and 16x16 icons just don't cut it in that world. Increasing icon size would have meant the sacrifice of more space and people would be complaining anyway that it covers more of their screen.

And there's nothing new with the Start Screen that's asking you to change. It still works the way the old one did, the only difference being Search. The desktop is still there, and Metro apps are optional. Pin the desktop tile to the first spot, and upon login, press "Enter" and go to town.

[patseguin Global Moderator]

I love the core idea of WIndows 8 and will install it as main OS as soon as RTM is on Technet. However, I just can't get over why they have to make the desktop UI so ugly. Why wouldn't they just keep the Windows 7 UI and add the start screen and other changes? And asking for the start menu back is getting old. I've never seen such attention to such a minor UI feature. I'm on 7 and I avoid the start menu at all costs. I have my important day to day stuff on the taskbar.

[abysal]

Why is it always the same 5-7 people who have to start complaining about Win 8 and metro, and derail every thread?

We get it you don't like Metro. But don't you get tiered of saying the same thing over and over???

The same can be said for the supporters of the Metro initiative, why not just sit back and be quiet? Why not? Because It's about voicing your opinion, whether you like Windows 8 or not. So please do not try to belittle and dismiss the opposition as if your opinion is all that matters.

[Stoffel]

The same can be said for the supporters of the Metro initiative, why not just sit back and be quiet? Why not? Because It's about voicing your opinion, whether you like Windows 8 or not. So please do not try to belittle and dismiss the opposition as if your opinion is all that matters.

It's just sad to see that it's always the same few people derailing every single tread about Win 8

We get it you don't like it, show that with your money and don't buy Win8.

And yes my opinion is still that this is all a storm in a glass of water. You are all supposed to be smart people.

Is it really that hard to get used to a full screen start menu? It works just like before. It's just a bit bigger.

I understand that people don't like Metro apps, just don't use them, simple as that.

Why don't you just pin everything you would normally pin to your start menu to your start screen, including links to folders, control panel, ...

Then you use Win 8 just like you did before, you just have quicker access to more apps/settings in one go

All i'm saying is that it seems like a lot of complaining about a, in my eyes, small change

[jagowar]

I love the core idea of WIndows 8 and will install it as main OS as soon as RTM is on Technet. However, I just can't get over why they have to make the desktop UI so ugly. Why wouldn't they just keep the Windows 7 UI and add the start screen and other changes? And asking for the start menu back is getting old. I've never seen such attention to such a minor UI feature. I'm on 7 and I avoid the start menu at all costs. I have my important day to day stuff on the taskbar.

The reason they are doing it was all the initial feedback was the metro to desktop was too jarring (and it was). It really felt like two completely separate os's. The problem on the other hand is why spend significant resources to make the old desktop fully metrofied (because it's not the focus in windows anymore like the dos prompt was in 95/98/vista/7) and what we have gotten is a ****** child trying to live between both which does not work.

[Arceles]

I think that engineering programs... and all the serious stuff is gonna move, and then me with it, I'm pretty sure that in one future one precise linux distribution, or even another OS created by a consortium of companies will arise, and that will be the end of the dependency of windows, because for entertainment Steam is already moving to ubuntu... if this goes on perhaps Microsoft is actually letting the competition work... and with that it will be their long term fall, because they are to focused into shoving their "new paradigm" into all users.

[BajiRav]

Because I couldn't care less about that as long as I can use my computer the way I want to. The saying "if it ain't broke don't fix it" applies here.

Newsflash: You never used your computer (running Windows) the way you wanted. You always used it the way Microsoft told you to.

First they told you to type commands(DOS) then they told you to click icons on screen (Win 3.x) then they told you to use the start menu (Win 4-7) and now they are saying use start screen.

Maybe because we are fed up with Microsoft's attitude with Windows 8? We are consumers who buy a product. We do not have to deal with it like everybody keeps saying. We will deal with it by sticking with Windows 7 and then be done with Microsoft. I have still not read one good argument why my 3.33Ghz i7, 18GB of ram studio/work computer needs an interface like metro. It breaks my productivity, and I do not have months to change my habits just because.

Can you post a picture of the gun Microsoft is holding to your head to force you to use metro? I haven't heard a single convincing reason from you as to why your productivity is affected by ignoring metro and continuing to follow your routine workflow as described in a previous post in this thread.

You are not the only person in the world with a powerful PC used for work (I have a Dell T5500 + 12GB RAM for example). If I had Windows 8 on this beast, I'd still be able to use it just the way I use it today at work.

[Dot Matrix]

I think that engineering programs... and all the serious stuff is gonna move, and then me with it, I'm pretty sure that in one future one precise linux distribution, or even another OS created by a consortium of companies will arise, and that will be the end of the dependency of windows, because for entertainment Steam is already moving to ubuntu... if this goes on perhaps Microsoft is actually letting the competition work... and with that it will be their long term fall, because they are to focused into shoving their "new paradigm" into all users.

Why do they have to move? Can you imagine what touch would do to some of these programs? How much easier it would be with AutoCAD and the like using an inclined multi-touch screen and a stylus to manipulate objects rather than a mouse? How about having a nice 30 inch screen embedded into a desk to work with and draw on like I do a piece of paper? There's nothing, nothing, saying engineering programs can't work with touch.

[abysal]

It's just sad to see that it's always the same few people derailing every single tread about Win 8

We get it you don't like it, show that with your money and don't buy Win8.

And yes my opinion is still that this is all a storm in a glass of water. You are all supposed to be smart people.

Is it really that hard to get used to a full screen start menu? It works just like before. It's just a bit bigger.

I understand that people don't like Metro apps, just don't use them, simple as that.

Why don't you just pin everything you would normally pin to your start menu to your start screen, including links to folders, control panel, ...

Then you use Win 8 just like you did before, you just have quicker access to more apps/settings in one go

All i'm saying is that it seems like a lot of complaining about a, in my eyes, small change

I understand what you're saying, and in part I agree (if I don't like it, I won't use it / buy it). However try to look at it from the other prespective. A lot of people want change and the OS to work the way they want it to, that means having options to customize defferent elements of the UI and OS to their liking (both look and function). I'm not tring to convince you that which way is better, I'm just voicing my opinion on what doesn't work for me. So to put it rudely; get over it.

[BajiRav]

Why do they have to move? Can you imagine what touch would do to some of these programs? How much easier it would be with AutoCAD and the like using an inclined multi-touch screen and a stylus to manipulate objects rather than a mouse? How about having a nice 30 inch screen embedded into a desk to work with and draw on like I do a piece of paper? There's nothing, nothing, saying engineering programs can't work with touch.

Dude, I am all for metro and Windows 8 but what you are saying about drawing on a screen like you do on paper is just crazy. Do you even know how far engineering drawing has advanced specially something like parametric drawing? Multi-touch view manipulation is one thing but drawing objects using a stylus will reduce productivity regardless of the familiarity with that method.

[abysal]

Newsflash: You never used your computer (running Windows) the way you wanted. You always used it the way Microsoft told you to.

First they told you to type commands(DOS) then they told you to click icons on screen (Win 3.x) then they told you to use the start menu (Win 4-7) and now they are saying use start screen.

Can you post a picture of the gun Microsoft is holding to your head to force you to use metro? I haven't heard a single convincing reason from you as to why your productivity is affected by ignoring metro and continuing to follow your routine workflow as described in a previous post in this thread.

You are not the only person in the world with a powerful PC used for work (I have a Dell T5500 + 12GB RAM for example). If I had Windows 8 on this beast, I'd still be able to use it just the way I use it today at work.

So now you're being told again; this is how to use the computer by Microsoft. That doesn't make it an absolute.

To your 2nd point, productivity is affected by the distracting full screen switching of the Metro Start screen, and the charm bar. That's not to say it's the end of the world, but it is an issue to me and many others.

[BajiRav]

So now you're being told again; this is how to use the computer by Microsoft. That doesn't make it an absolute.

To your 2nd point, productivity is affected by the distracting full screen switching of the Metro Start screen, and the charm bar. That's not to say it's the end of the world, but it is an issue to me and many others.

It is absolute as long as you choose to use Windows 8 (or later). It's their OS and you can't do anything about it. I don't like the permanent menu bar in OS X but does that mean I should complain about it in every OS X thread? No, because that's how Apple designed it and if I want to use OS X - that is how I will need to use it.

I have complained about accidental Charms triggering myself (ironically when using maximized/full screen desktop apps :) ) but I don't believe start screen is a problem once you get to desktop where everything you use is pinned to the task bar.

[Dot Matrix]

To your 2nd point, productivity is affected by the distracting full screen switching of the Metro Start screen, and the charm bar. That's not to say it's the end of the world, but it is an issue to me and many others.

The Charms Bar doesn't take up any more space on the desktop than the Start Menu did.

Dude, I am all for metro and Windows 8 but what you are saying about drawing on a screen like you do on paper is just crazy. Do you even know how far engineering drawing has advanced specially something like parametric drawing? Multi-touch view manipulation is one thing but drawing objects using a stylus will reduce productivity regardless of the familiarity with that method.

Sure, I understand that some functions can be quite complex, but there is always room for improvement. After all, the mouse isn't going to be around forever, but these types of apps will. One way or another, they'll adapt to new technologies on the market.