Recommended Posts

Not to bash anybody, but MS can't win. If they do the same as Android or iOS, they can't innovate and are just copying. If they decide to do something differently then people are upset because it's different and they want the same as all the others. Very strange if you ask me.

I can't thank you enough for this.

I know that. The point of a status bat is its visible. Esp on a desktop where there is more than enough space. I'm perfectly fine with how it is now on an Arm tablet, with no desktop. But with desktop apps that have useful information in the status bar, it makes no sense to hide it.

no, its better hidden. I've had iPhone and and android and both UIs are not to my liking. I prefer my WP where the status bar is hidden and can be shown if i want it.

I disagree. Most of the criticisms I see are mindless and inane and I can't say that I've seen many haters praising the OS for anything.

I'll tell you why I think Windows 8 and Metro are an improvement over previous versions. Large numbers of Windows users (including the majority of casual users) don't use their PCs for more than just internet browsing. For them Metro is a simple interface that allows them to make the most out of their PCs and also simplifies the transition to a tablet. For people who use their PCs for productivity the desktop works exactly the same way as it always has and the Start menu is improved to eliminate the problems caused by trying to squeeze too much onto a tiny menu.

I agree with you there are a huge number of people who just hate Windows for no reason at all, but let's not include them. There also many many experienced users with reasonable objections.

The problem with the 2 interfaces is the interaction - everyone will have to switch between Desktop and Metro, and this is not intuitive at all. It's a very unfriendly OS for new users and the included 'tutorial' is frankly a joke. 'Mkaing transition to a tablet' is not a valid argument, an OS can behave differently on devices, forcing the same touch gestures on a normal pc is stupid, esp when they are so hard to use.

I agree with you there are a huge number of people who just hate Windows for no reason at all, but let's not include them. There also many many experienced users with reasonable objections.

The problem with the 2 interfaces is the interaction - everyone will have to switch between Desktop and Metro, and this is not intuitive at all. It's a very unfriendly OS for new users and the included 'tutorial' is frankly a joke. 'Mkaing transition to a tablet' is not a valid argument, an OS can behave differently on devices, forcing the same touch gestures on a normal pc is stupid, esp when they are so hard to use.

I don't see why desktop users will have to use Metro-based apps if they don't want to. If you are referring to the Start Screen then I don't think it's unintuitive at all - I think it's a vast improvement over the Start Menu. Easing the transition to a tablet certainly is a vaid argument for those people who are interested in a tablet. I'm much more interested knowing that I can have the same interface on all my computing devices rather than the iOS and Android alternatives that force me to waste time learning different interfaces for no good reason. Windows 8's Metro interface works well with a mouse and keyboard and I expect it will work equally well on a tablet (all the reviews I've seen support this). You're not forced to use touch gestures on a "normal PC" because there are mouse/keyboard alternatives to all the touch gestures.

If you are primarily a Desktop program user, then Windows 8 gives you a new app launcher to replace the Start Menu.

If you are a casual Windows user, then you can live going in and out of Metro apps, and the desktop is like an emulator space for older apps.

I am assuming there are more Casual than Power users, so Windows 8 is a simpler, cleaner, brighter, and easier experience to use. Power users, if they are any good at what they do will adapt, even if they are unwilling at first.

  • Like 3

I agree with you there are a huge number of people who just hate Windows for no reason at all, but let's not include them. There also many many experienced users with reasonable objections.

The problem with the 2 interfaces is the interaction - everyone will have to switch between Desktop and Metro, and this is not intuitive at all. It's a very unfriendly OS for new users and the included 'tutorial' is frankly a joke. 'Mkaing transition to a tablet' is not a valid argument, an OS can behave differently on devices, forcing the same touch gestures on a normal pc is stupid, esp when they are so hard to use.

I installed RP on my wife's laptop and she as "normal user" as you get. All she uses is browsing, Office, music/video playback. There is not a single metro app she has used and the start screen is hardly anything getting in her way. She has everything pinned to taskbar and I haven't seen her use the start screen for anything more than launching "apps". Start screen(or lack of start button/menu) is not an issue for "normal people" and only people who don't like it forever reason think that "normal people" will have trouble using it. (sorry guys, IE10 + neowin = no enter key)

On a fresh install, music, pictures and video are all going to open with Metro apps, and once you are in Metro its nearly impossible for a user to figure out how to get back. I've seen people look for a close, back, or Esc, and that doesn't work. There's no taskbar. No one is going to discover the hot corners (even after the tutorial). And only power users know Alt-F4, Alt-Tab etc.

I really don't get what was so hard about adding chrome to Metro apps on a non touch device. It would be trivial to show a X in the upper corner as expected, show a taskbar in the bottom etc. Not doing these things doesn't make the UI any better. It preserves the Metro experience. It's only because of obstinately refusing to acknowledge that people will use Win 8 on a normal pc.

No one is doing that. Everyone agrees its a fast OS with a lot of nice improvements. Almost all the criticism is the behavior on non-touch devices and MS or the defenders hasn't given a single reason why Metro on desktop is better.

There's plenty of reasons it's better. For one, it's taking advantage of emerging desktop technologies. Kinect for PC, remotes, Xbox Controllers, and yes, even TOUCH. :o It's Microsoft future-proofing Windows.

Which is why I said 'more limited version'. In practice, if you see the number next to an app on iOS you know it has new content. The only thing live tiles add is showing a snippet preview, you still need to open the app. 'Tiles let you easily see' only for tiles you actually notice. Its not a substitute for a true Notification center.

Why do people have to defend every single thing about Win 8 as if its the best design ever.

Live tiles support badges that not only display numbers but other glyphs such as updates, etc.

No one is going to discover the hot corners (even after the tutorial).

Why not? having the whole screen dedicated to a picture and the words "put your mouse in the corner" sounds like a pretty good tutorial to me O.O

I really don't get what was so hard about adding chrome to Metro apps on a non touch device. It would be trivial to show a X in the upper corner as expected, show a taskbar in the bottom etc.

Because that goes against Metro and would be an (IMO) horrible design choice. Metro is about being minimal and focusing on the content over the chrome. It would be trivial to use the XP-style start button, taskbar, and visual styles in Windows 7 but Microsoft didn't do it. Go figure O:

Not doing these things doesn't make the UI any better. It preserves the Metro experience. It's only because of obstinately refusing to acknowledge that people will use Win 8 on a normal pc.

Not doing these things enhances Metro, and Metro is what Windows 8 is designed for. IMO, I would rather have Microsoft design an OS around a mediocre design and have it consistently use that design then mix a mediocre design with elements from less-than and greater-than designs.

It's only because of obstinately refusing to acknowledge that average users don't actually need these things (have you ever heard a user say OMG? WHERE'S THE CLOSE BUTTON? for an Android or iOS app? have consumers complained about there being no taskbar in iOS or an app-based taskbar in Android? didn't think so.) that you posted your comment.

Have you ever used iOS or Android on a non-touch device? They are mobile OS's, WIndows is NOT. There is a huge difference, what you said applies to WP7/WP8, and not at all to a desktop/enterprise OS. Have you ever used Win 8 on a normal pc? Or seen a normal user try to? It's a usability nightmare.

Good design is unobtrusive, and functional. Good design is what makes the user more productive, not just what looks pretty.

'Win 8 is designed for Metro' is exactly the problem because MS's implementation of Metro on non-touch is terrible. And guess what, a mediocre design which is consistent is still crap. e.g. if an OS required you to click 5 times to close a window, and used that consistently everywhere, that doesn't make it good.

Have you ever used iOS or Android on a non-touch device? They are mobile OS's, WIndows is NOT. There is a huge difference, what you said applies to WP7/WP8, and not at all to a desktop/enterprise OS.

but now the question is whether normal users want a desktop PC when they can do the same thing with a Surface-type hybrid. Sure - it's probably not going to be too good for enterprises and powerusers, but I wasn't talking about them, I was talking about normal users.

Have you ever used Win 8 on a normal pc? Or seen a normal user try to?

It's a usability nightmare.

I dual boot Windows 8 and openSuse on my laptop right now, and I've also installed the Windows 8 RP on two of my families computers. sure, at first they wanted to know how to close an app, but after about 3 minutes of showing them how to bring up the charms menu and drag down from the top, they're using Windows 8 just as well as they were using Windows 7, Vista, and XP. And the RTM has a tutorial in it, so please don't say "but what about users who don't have someone to tell them how to use it?"

Good design is unobtrusive, and functional. Good design is what makes the user more productive, not just what looks pretty.

a taskbar where one is not necessary is obtrusive, and so is essentially forcing all apps to have a visible chrome where one isn't necessary. hiding the chrome and focusing on the content, aka "Metro," IMO, makes the user more productive.

'Win 8 is designed for Metro' is exactly the problem because MS's implementation of Metro on non-touch is terrible. And guess what, a mediocre design which is consistent is still crap. e.g. if an OS required you to click 5 times to close a window, and used that consistently everywhere, that doesn't make it good.

but what if the OS had windows which had a close button on each side (with only one of those actually working), and then having to press the close button sometimes 1 times, sometimes 5, and sometimes 10?

once the user gets used to the global functions (like dragging down to close, opening the charms bar, and opening the appbar), Metro is more effective for the average user since it takes away unnecessary design elements and allows them to use the same keystrokes/gestures to do common things in all metro apps.

Take the Metro IE for an example - with the Desktop IE, you have to top window chrome, the taskbar, and the scrollbar using space that's supposed to be used to display the website. But in the Metro IE, 100% of the screen space is dedicated to the website. reading neowin forums in Metro IE the whole page is dark (I'm using the dark theme :D), but when reading it in the desktop it feels like Neowin is 'framed' - I have purple tabs at the top, and blue bars at the very top and bottom.

Metro IE still enables the normal user to do what they want (to type in a web address and manage tabs) but it is able to do that while giving the website the space it deserves.

Have you ever used Win 8 on a normal pc? Or seen a normal user try to? It's a usability nightmare.

Good design is unobtrusive, and functional. Good design is what makes the user more productive, not just what looks pretty.

Yes. I've been running both the CP and RP on my laptop and desktop machines. Guess what? The CP got me through a semester of school, and the RP has been running on my desktop (my laptop has been mostly inactive since school has been out for the summer) almost flawlessly (save for a complete re-install after a drive malfunction). It's no different than Windows 7 if you stick to the desktop. Usability nightmare? No, just different. It's a break from the old Windows workflow.

but now the question is whether normal users want a desktop PC when they can do the same thing with a Surface-type hybrid. Sure - it's probably not going to be too good for enterprises and powerusers, but I wasn't talking about them, I was talking about normal users.

I dual boot Windows 8 and openSuse on my laptop right now, and I've also installed the Windows 8 RP on two of my families computers. sure, at first they wanted to know how to close an app, but after about 3 minutes of showing them how to bring up the charms menu and drag down from the top, they're using Windows 8 just as well as they were using Windows 7, Vista, and XP. And the RTM has a tutorial in it, so please don't say "but what about users who don't have someone to tell them how to use it?"

a taskbar where one is not necessary is obtrusive, and so is essentially forcing all apps to have a visible chrome where one isn't necessary. hiding the chrome and focusing on the content, aka "Metro," IMO, makes the user more productive.

but what if the OS had windows which had a close button on each side (with only one of those actually working), and then having to press the close button sometimes 1 times, sometimes 5, and sometimes 10?

once the user gets used to the global functions (like dragging down to close, opening the charms bar, and opening the appbar), Metro is more effective for the average user since it takes away unnecessary design elements and allows them to use the same keystrokes/gestures to do common things in all metro apps.

Take the Metro IE for an example - with the Desktop IE, you have to top window chrome, the taskbar, and the scrollbar using space that's supposed to be used to display the website. But in the Metro IE, 100% of the screen space is dedicated to the website. reading neowin forums in Metro IE the whole page is dark (I'm using the dark theme :D), but when reading it in the desktop it feels like Neowin is 'framed' - I have purple tabs at the top, and blue bars at the very top and bottom.

Metro IE still enables the normal user to do what they want (to type in a web address and manage tabs) but it is able to do that while giving the website the space it deserves.

I find your reasoning very disingenious. If we follow this line of thought, you're saying that all UI's should have no chrome, no UI at all besides content. Do you think no one thought of this in the history of computer science? The reason we have UI's we do today is because they are the most EFFICIENT for people to use, and have been refined for decades.

Touch based UI like Metro is nice. Similarly, voice controlled UI's are great. But there is no evidence they are better suited, more functional or more productive in the state they are today. And most defnitely not on a non touch desktop pc.

Metro simply doesn't belong on a non touch device in its current form - its not designed for it and is a series of compromises. Win 8 Desktop is just another Metro app. You can even drag the Desktop from the top corner - tell me how that makes any kind of sense at all.

Microsoft has made this mistake before, when they tried to force the desktop UI, complete with Start menu and tiny controls, on tiny Windows Mobile devices. Not everything is a pc. But they learnt nothing. Now they are trying to pretend that everything is a tablet. In no other industry do people pretend that all devices and form factors should have the same UI. Imagine how terrible it'd be web sites suddenly decided to show the mobile version on your pc. That's what Metro and Win 8 is like, hiding all advanced functions and forcing a tablet metaphor on everyone.

Have you ever used iOS or Android on a non-touch device? They are mobile OS's, WIndows is NOT. There is a huge difference, what you said applies to WP7/WP8, and not at all to a desktop/enterprise OS. Have you ever used Win 8 on a normal pc? Or seen a normal user try to? It's a usability nightmare.

I have been doing this nearly all day every day for years, and so have countless others, with no sign of a "usability nightmare" anywhere (including countless usability studies). This is a common tactic from the vocal minority to try and invent non-existent problems extrapolated to the majority in order to make a case. It's important not to confuse this with reality.

Good design is unobtrusive, and functional. Good design is what makes the user more productive, not just what looks pretty.

Exactly. This is precisely the goal in getting rid of "chrome" and making that functionality globally and consistently available only when needed/useful/called-for.

'Win 8 is designed for Metro' is exactly the problem because MS's implementation of Metro on non-touch is terrible. And guess what, a mediocre design which is consistent is still crap. e.g. if an OS required you to click 5 times to close a window, and used that consistently everywhere, that doesn't make it good.

This is a straw man. Nobody makes you click 5 times to close a window, and "closing a window" isn't even a scenario, it's a way in which particular scenarios have been implemented in the past.

Microsoft has made this mistake before, when they tried to force the desktop UI, complete with Start menu and tiny controls, on tiny Windows Mobile devices. Not everything is a pc. But they learnt nothing. Now they are trying to pretend that everything is a tablet.

I don't follow. First you're saying that Microsoft made a mistake in the past by trying to "force" a desktop UI onto a phone/PDA. This alone I would actually argue against, as someone who owned many Windows Mobile devices - and thus knows that they didn't follow a desktop metaphor at all (i.e. there were no overlapping windows, no taskbar, no desktop, etc.). Yes it had an always available "Start" button, but it was only superficially related in any way to the desktop Start button, and showed a full-screen (or nearly so) menu.

Second, Windows 8 does exactly the opposite of what you accuse Windows Mobile of having done. Instead of taking a "desktop UI" as you call it and "forcing" it (as you say) onto a new kind of device, we very clearly decided not to do that, which is exactly what many folks here are objecting to! Instead we created something brand new, designed to bridge the gap between desktop and mobile. The two objections are mutually exclusive :-)

In no other industry do people pretend that all devices and form factors should have the same UI.

So cars, trucks, and motorcycles are all steered in completely different ways?

Imagine how terrible it'd be web sites suddenly decided to show the mobile version on your pc.

This is a poor analogy. This would make a lot of sense on a small screen PC, but obviously would not on a large screen, by definition. What you're calling a "mobile version" is really just a website designed exclusively for tiny screens, usually to make up for the fact that they're "normal" site was not designed to scale down that far. Of course, some websites are designed to have a single version which accommodates all screen sizes (the "mobile" and "normal" versions are the same).

That's what Metro and Win 8 is like, hiding all advanced functions and forcing a tablet metaphor on everyone.

You're making an assumption that Windows 8 would not look and work the same even if tablets did not exist. There's no such thing as a "tablet metaphor" by the way. There's a desktop metaphor, many aspects of which are clearly outdated (but will take time to evolve and replace). But things like full-screen apps, and system UI that fades into the background but is always globally accessible... These aren't really metaphors at all.

I find your reasoning very disingenious. If we follow this line of thought, you're saying that all UI's should have no chrome, no UI at all besides content. Do you think no one thought of this in the history of computer science? The reason we have UI's we do today is because they are the most EFFICIENT for people to use, and have been refined for decades.

Nothing's perfect :) And I would actually like to see the chrome be taken to a minimum in all UIs, but that's just a personal preference.

Touch based UI like Metro is nice. Similarly, voice controlled UI's are great. But there is no evidence they are better suited, more functional or more productive in the state they are today. And most defnitely not on a non touch desktop pc.

fair enough that there's no evidence, but has a study ever been done comparing the productivity of someone using a Windows 8-based surface-type device compared with a windows 7 desktop?

Metro simply doesn't belong on a non touch device in its current form - its not designed for it and is a series of compromises. Win 8 Desktop is just another Metro app. You can even drag the Desktop from the top corner - tell me how that makes any kind of sense at all.

You answered that in the sentence right before the question - it's just another Metro app. Now the Desktop is really just the place to run high-end apps and apps that haven't been upgraded to Metro. Why does XP Mode in Windows 7 have a close box? how does that make any kind of sense at all?

Microsoft has made this mistake before, when they tried to force the desktop UI, complete with Start menu and tiny controls, on tiny Windows Mobile devices. Not everything is a pc. But they learnt nothing. Now they are trying to pretend that everything is a tablet. In no other industry do people pretend that all devices and form factors should have the same UI. Imagine how terrible it'd be web sites suddenly decided to show the mobile version on your pc.

The problem with Windows Mobile was they just essentially stuck Windows onto a phone, added some apps, and called it quits. Windows 8 was rebuilt from, essentially, the ground up to work on everything from desktops to hybrids to tablets - they might have designed it with tablets first in their mind, but normal users don't care about what it was designed mostly for - all they care about is if they can get it to open up Facebook or play Solitaire. Which, btw, Windows 8 does very nicely.

That's what Metro and Win 8 is like, hiding all advanced functions and forcing a tablet metaphor on everyone.

hiding advanced functions, yes, it is - and that's not a bad thing. Microsoft's simply making Windows 8 work better for the majority of it's users, who almost never use the advanced features. Why do you need all those advanced features being obtrusive and getting in your way when you're trying to find a simple feature? It makes a lot of sense to me to take the highly-used features and bring them to the front, and then put the least-used features in the background.

You're making an assumption that Windows 8 would not look and work the same even if tablets did not exist.

Are you saying it would? For example, wouldn't you simply implement a contextual menu here (I realize there's an infinite edge, but it would still be faster to have an option right beneath the mouse cursor, wouldn't it?):

post-5569-0-08433800-1344277321.png

Are you saying it would? For example, wouldn't you simply implement a contextual menu here (I realize there's an infinite edge, but it would still be faster to have an option right beneath the mouse cursor):

Well, first off, I meant in a broader sense (i.e. full-screen apps and Start menu, for example). For specific details, I cannot speak for design decisions I wasn't involved in. Personally, I've never used that button. I never unpin anything I expect to actually use, so my Start screen always has everything I'll ever need. If I do need anything else I invoke it using search (and searching for nothing shows the same All Apps view).

Well, first off, I meant in a broader sense (i.e. full-screen apps and Start menu, for example). For specific details, I cannot speak for design decisions I wasn't involved in. Personally, I've never used that button. I never unpin anything I expect to actually use, so my Start screen always has everything I'll ever need. If I do need anything else I invoke it using search (and searching for nothing shows the same All Apps view).

Fair enough. It's not just the Start screen though. In fact, if I am seeing this correctly, it's only the start screen where there's at least an infinite edge. In other (Microsoft supplied) apps you have to target the exact location of the button. In some apps the toolbar vanishes if you click somewhere below the button, in others, simply nothing will happen. It works quite inconsistently actually. You can't move between buttons while holding down the mouse button either.

One of my issues is MS has always been a company which introduced change for a reason. When they added the Ribbon, it was met with widespread hatred. But they did extensive user studies with the Ribbon to decide which was a more productive UI, and shared those studies so the results were there for everyone to see.

With Win 8 I am not aware of any usability studies that measure the productivity on a non touch device vs Win 7. The magic word in Win 8 development has been 'telemetry' - they look at what features were least used, and remove them. This is of course a terrible way to do things. Using MS's own example, Word has a million features most of which are hardly ever used. When the Word team was asked why these rare features were present, the reply was that any given feature might be used by very few people, but all those people used different features, so everything was important.

Metro being more usable or better is not proven, we simply have to take MS's word for it since we have no option. This is in stark contrast to other decisions such as the new Explorer changes, where they did publish usability data on why it's better.

Win 8 removes power user features, customization, user control - all because the majority didn't use them (of course!). These advanced features don't need to interrupt a normal user. e.g. they took away the ability to customize Window colors, which is a huge deal to a certain segment. Everyone else is free to ignore that option if they want.

I guess I have a fundamental problem with architecting an entire OS around the concept of touch, relegating desktop to a 2nd class citizen, and adding workarounds (I'll be kind and not call them hacks) to make it work on a non-touch device. I have an even bigger problem when WinRT, the next gen Windows API, is flawed and limited to only Metro apps, as if no one would ever want to write a desktop app again.

Well, first off, I meant in a broader sense (i.e. full-screen apps and Start menu, for example). For specific details, I cannot speak for design decisions I wasn't involved in. Personally, I've never used that button. I never unpin anything I expect to actually use, so my Start screen always has everything I'll ever need. If I do need anything else I invoke it using search (and searching for nothing shows the same All Apps view).

I believe the question is why can't the context menu be shown as a regular context menu on a non-touch device. We know Metro can display context menu's just fine, e.g. if you right click on a network connection name you get a Metro context menu. The decision to show this as a bar is just because every Metro app behaves as if it was running on a tablet, thus it sacrifices usability.

All of these arguments come down to one simple thing... preference. That's it in a nutshell. There are those who prefer Windows 8 and those who don't. Those who don't prefer it, claim that it affects their productivity and is the worst thing ever. Those who do prefer it, claim that it hasn't affected their productivity and is the best thing ever.

These threads go back and forth, one side trying to convince the other or prove the other wrong. And, out of all theses threads and hundreds of pages and thousands of responses, replies, remarks, comments, statements, questions, retorts, and attacks... no one has swayed anyone. Or, at least very few anyway.

Most of the claims, to date, are subjective and not factual. Claiming that it does or does not affect your productivity is subjective even though it may be true for you. But, I get it. Nerds love debate, especially on the internet. But, the fact is... it's done. MS has shipped the OS to OEMs and it will be here in a short time. It cannot be changed now and most likely will not be changed in the future. That is to say, they're not going backwards. Say goodbye to the old desktop and the way we've been computing for the last 20+ years.

We can argue until we're blue in the face about the perceived benefits and detriments of Windows 8. But, this is the future of computing. Maybe not the only one, but the computer as you knew it is dead. It just isn't gone yet.

Alas, 20th century computer. I knew him well, Horatio.

All of these arguments come down to one simple thing... preference. That's it in a nutshell. There are those who prefer Windows 8 and those who don't. Those who don't prefer it, claim that it affects their productivity and is the worst thing ever. Those who do prefer it, claim that it hasn't affected their productivity and is the best thing ever.

These threads go back and forth, one side trying to convince the other or prove the other wrong. And, out of all theses threads and hundreds of pages and thousands of responses, replies, remarks, comments, statements, questions, retorts, and attacks... no one has swayed anyone. Or, at least very few anyway.

Most of the claims, to date, are subjective and not factual. Claiming that it does or does not affect your productivity is subjective even though it may be true for you. But, I get it. Nerds love debate, especially on the internet. But, the fact is... it's done. MS has shipped the OS to OEMs and it will be here in a short time. It cannot be changed now and most likely will not be changed in the future. That is to say, they're not going backwards. Say goodbye to the old desktop and the way we've been computing for the last 20+ years.

We can argue until we're blue in the face about the perceived benefits and detriments of Windows 8. But, this is the future of computing. Maybe not the only one, but the computer as you knew it is dead. It just isn't gone yet.

Alas, 20th century computer. I knew him well, Horatio.

:D agreed, it's pretty much pointless, but it's nice to be able to argue about it

It's a break from the old Windows workflow.

I didn't think it effected anyone's workflow. ;)

There you go again with the 'PC as you know it is dead' flamebait.

I never unpin anything I expect to actually use, so my Start screen always has everything I'll ever need. If I do need anything else I invoke it using search (and searching for nothing shows the same All Apps view).

That's pretty ****ed up.

With Win 8 I am not aware of any usability studies that measure the productivity on a non touch device vs Win 7. The magic word in Win 8 development has been 'telemetry' - they look at what features were least used, and remove them. This is of course a terrible way to do things. Using MS's own example, Word has a million features most of which are hardly ever used. When the Word team was asked why these rare features were present, the reply was that any given feature might be used by very few people, but all those people used different features, so everything was important.

Metro being more usable or better is not proven, we simply have to take MS's word for it since we have no option. This is in stark contrast to other decisions such as the new Explorer changes, where they did publish usability data on why it's better. Win 8 removes power user features, customization, user control - all because the majority didn't use them (of course!). These advanced features don't need to interrupt a normal user. e.g. they took away the ability to customize Window colors, which is a huge deal to a certain segment. Everyone else is free to ignore that option if they want.

This is exactly how I feel and sums it up very nicely. Everyone uses their computers differently, and it looks like some users are in for a rude awakening while others are much luckier.

Personally speaking, I redesigned my "Windows experience" around the time Vista came out. I still used a quick launch, but I had many things pinned to my Start Menu. I didn't like all of the "clutter" on my desktop; there were apps I preferred to keep hidden, but were always two clicks away from being used. When Windows 7 came out, this behavior of mine increased. I have 5 items pinned to my Superbar and everything else is tucked away nicely on my Start Menu. I have them in alphabetical order, they have their own lists and I can still keep my desktop clean. Occasionally, there will be an application I don't have pinned and for that, I would use the Start Menu search.

I started this new form of behavior in the Fall of 2006. I'm approaching six years of this way of utilizing my desktop and it has been taken away. Am I a minority? Absolutely, but the fact is, this quote is the exact reason why people are upset. Windows 8 is going to significantly alter my desktop approach and I honestly don't know if the changes are going to be worth it.

Also, why should I relearn my behaviors when at work I use and will continue to use Windows 7 (and OS X)? I certainly don't want to have to learn something that won't even translate to where I spend most of my computer work. There are many inconistencies that I haven't even addressed, but others already have. Brandon, as much as I respect you, your work for Microsoft and your willingness to help this community for years, you are sadly seeing it from the "other" side. You have a vested interest in this product and are going to try your hardest to make people see your opinions, but you are talking to people who know how to use computers.

If I want to always be dictated on how I can use my computer, I would be 100% Apple. I don't want Microsoft going to these because they are scared of how the market has been moving lately.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • On the topic of being locked out of a service. Recently two different friends of mine got locked out of their Google accounts. Both were hack attempts and one of them is waiting 30 days before he can get back in. He had backup codes and MFA but not a passkey. It was a browser token hack. Anyhow he has to wait 30 days for the dispute or whatever to end. The other person only had a password and is screwed losing all of the email, docs and years of photos. Google won’t help her at all. Her fault because she had no backup/recovery setup. Enable passkeys if possible. Also do NOT use browser based password managers. If using a cloud service make sure it is one you can fully sync to one of your devices so you can back it up. Like a PC or Mac with some backup drive plugged into it. Google is the worst to use IMHO. You can’t sync your photos at all. You have to use the “Take Out” service which is manual and takes days. That service strips the meta data from your photos. Also Google Docs synced to a device are useless without a Google accounts. MS Office/Libre Office is not going to open a link to a Google doc to a dead account.
    • Why you need to take back control of your synced passwords and how to go about doing that by Paul Hill Credit: Pixabay Last month, when Google decided to introduce daily and weekly caps for Gemini, it reignited an anxiety of mine, that you can’t really depend on service providers to maintain features forever, and it got me looking into free software (as in freedom) in other areas too. One app I quickly came across was KeePassXC on desktop and KeePassDX on Android as an alternative to password manager lock-in within the Chrome or Firefox ecosystems. I personally like to switch around with browsers, and using either password manager is inconvenient, so something like KeePassXC was interesting to me. The main issue with it now is syncing; I was not sure how to do that. After a bit of research, I came across Syncthing, a tool I was vaguely familiar with but had never used because it seemed complicated. However, I was completely wrong, and honestly, I think everyone should use it if they use multiple devices. It essentially lets you share folders peer to peer across all of your devices, no cloud services that you don’t control necessary! And it was fairly simple to set up, if not a bit clunky. Since setting it up, I’ve also started using Syncthing to back up other apps too, so don’t think it’s limited to just saving password databases. You can use it for pretty much anything you use Dropbox or Google Drive for. Before continuing to talk about those apps a bit more, let’s walk back a bit and talk about browser sync. Ever since the late 2000s and early 2010s, really, since we have been using smartphones, browser sync has been a necessity of life. I don’t know about you, but I have hundreds of passwords saved. For the most part, they’re all unique, so I don’t remember them and rely on software to manage them for me. Until recently, I’ve relied on password managers in Chrome and Firefox, but what I always found annoying was that it can be hard to transfer them between browsers. Sure, on Windows it is simple enough, but on Linux, exporting bookmarks has been temperamental. It works OK nowadays, but not too long ago, Chrome required you to enable exporting passwords in chrome://flags. The situation is even worse on mobile; there is no exporting or importing of passwords of any kind. You literally have to do it on a desktop, which is incredibly annoying in our mobile-first world. Sync also lets us take out bookmarks, history, tabs, and autofill data easily. To enable sync, it’s just a matter of signing into the browser once, and it handles the rest. It’s nice and easy. Obviously, all this has some issues, including those I’ve outlined above about it being hard to transfer data between browsers, but also things such as account suspension, lost account passwords, and other lock-in mechanisms, such as passkeys, being tied to a specific browser. On a sidenote, I have just removed all of my passkeys because they can make it harder to move browsers. I think the biggest threat to your synced passwords, especially if doing this with Google, is having your account suspended. I don’t ever expect mine to be suspended, but you do hear horror stories on Reddit where people lose access to their Google accounts. Imagine if you have hundreds of passwords, then suddenly lose access to them because Google froze your account, what would you do? So yes, it can be nice to use these syncing services for their convenience, but they also have risks. You may have seen me going on about free software quite a bit in my editorials. It’s essentially a concept championed by the Free Software Foundation. It’s software under particular licenses that grant you four freedoms: run the program for any purpose (0), study and change the source code (1), redistribute copies to others (2), and the freedom to distribute modified copies to others (3). For example, if there is an app I use and one day it gets abandoned by the developer, I can keep running it or even clone the software and continue developing it. Look at the myriad of cool services Google has run over the years before killing them. You can’t take the source code for those because they are proprietary, for the most part. Both KeePassXC and Syncthing are free software, so I get the freedoms listed above. In my use case where I’m syncing a database full of my passwords, I also get proper ownership over my data, there is no losing access to the database due to a frozen account, I can access the code of the tools I’m using, and I can get support from real people online if I run into issues, rather than having to consult a vague help page from an opaque company. With the KeePassXC password manager, you create a .kdbx file, which is what will be synced between devices. KeePassXC has cross-platform apps and also has browser extensions so that the browser can fetch passwords from the database once it is unlocked. Meanwhile, Syncthing is a peer-to-peer file sync tool where you can select folders to sync between your devices. Just pop files in the folders you choose, and then they will be available across your other devices whenever they come online. Syncthing is resilient as it works over both LAN and the internet and only ever sends content between your devices, never to a third-party server somewhere else. By combining these two pieces of software, you can essentially replicate the browser sync functionality. I have had a weird, conflicting issue where a new file is appearing, but it doesn’t seem to be impacting my main password database, which is updating between devices just fine. If you want to get a setup similar to what I have, you will need to go here to download KeePassXC for your computer. Once you have that, you will need to download your passwords from your web browser to a CSV file. In Chrome, you can type chrome://password-manager/settings into the URL bar, and you should see an option to download your passwords under Export Passwords. This will give you the CSV file you need for importing into KeePassXC. If you use a different browser, just use a search engine and type “browser-name export passwords” and muddle along. In KeePassXC, you’ll want to press Import File from the home screen, select the CSV file, and create a new database from it. On one of the screens of the wizard, there will be a Title field with a drop-down selected to none. Change this to Title and continue. You’ll select a name for the database, the encryption level (the defaults are fine), and then you will pick a password. I would choose four unrelated words that are easy for you to remember, as you’ll be typing them fairly often to access your passwords. When you have all your passwords in your new database, you will want to set up the browser extension so that your browser can fetch passwords from KeePassXC. Rather than explain how to do that here, refer to KeePassXC’s guide on how to set it up properly. Once you’ve got that set up, you want to install KeePassDX on Android. You can grab it on the F-Droid store and the Google Play Store. For iPhone users, there are other .kdbx-supporting apps, but I haven’t tried any of them, so have a look around and use what suits you. Once you have that done, you will want to install Syncthing on your computer and find a third-party app for your mobile device. On Android, I use an app called BasicSync; there are also options for iOS, but again, I’ve not tried these. Once you’ve got SyncThing, you’ll want to set it up and connect all of your devices together and share a folder between your gadgets. PCWorld has a good tutorial on setting up a synchronized file between your devices using SyncThing. Once you’ve set it up, congrats, you’ll never have to touch that stuff again except for adding or removing devices. I’ll be honest, I didn’t particularly like setting up Syncthing. It didn’t take me a massive amount of time, but I think I had to check online because I found it a bit confusing. That said, I’ve had it running for several weeks now and never need to touch the Syncthing settings, so that’s very nice. I also mentioned a conflicting file. I’m not sure why this is appearing, but the main .kdbx file seems to be updating and syncing just fine. What’s nice is that both KeePassXC and Syncthing are free software, so they won’t just vanish one day; you can take the code and fork the project or use a range of alternative implementations that others have made. It’s also nice that it works over LAN, so even if your ISP is having problems, your passwords will still sync. One area where you will want to be a bit more careful with this setup is if you only have one device. I am OK because I have a computer and two phones, all synced up. If you just have one device, you will probably want to store a backup of your .kdbx file somewhere else. Obviously, you’ll also want to remember your password really well, too. If you get locked out, it's game over. Overall, if you want to take back control of your computing from big tech, taking control of your passwords is an important part of this. You don’t need to immediately clear out your browser’s password manager; try running KeePassXC and the password manager concurrently for a while to see if you run into any problems. If you do try this out, let us know some other creative ways to use Syncthing. I haven’t really come up with a solution about what to do with my bookmarks, for example.
    • If the price was a dollar, someone would complain "Why isn't it free?" If it was free, someone would complain they weren't being paid to play it.
    • That lens of history will burn if you hold it at the right angle... Warn users too late: Shame, Microsoft! That extremely minor update to an obscure Control Panel widget required 2 years of warning. Warn users too early: Shame, Microsoft! We've got better things to do. Pipeline and process be damned, we'll just always be disappointed, eh?
    • Microsoft Paint used to be my favorite Windows app as a kid, and it's still pretty good by Usama Jawad I have been using Windows since the early 2000s, when I was around 10 years old or so. I vaguely remember playing around with Windows 98 and Windows 2000, but that may have been on school PCs which had old operating systems installed. My main OS on the home PC, and the one I recall spending most time with, was Windows XP. At that time, I used the home PC to create Word and PowerPoint documents for school, but a lot of the time, I simply used it to play games. My dad would bring game discs which we would try and install on the PC, sometimes unsuccessfully, and sometimes, we would rely on flash games in the browser, like Bubble Trouble on Miniclip. However, the problem with the latter approach was the internet speed. On a good day, our dial-up internet would offer us speeds of 56 kbps, but on most days, it was closer to 33 kbps. This did not facilitate online gaming as I would often have to wait minutes for a game to load or "draw" on the screen, and trying to download pirated games wasn't simple either. I remember getting tired of waiting for online games to load and just downloading simulator games from the Big Fish Games website instead, only to be disappointed after finding out that I was just being given access to trial versions of the title, and I needed to fork out money to pay for the full version. All of this is to say that it wasn't very easy to find entertainment options on the home PC when I was a kid, due to a number of reasons, mostly outside of my control. This situation pushed me towards a rather unconventional ally: Microsoft Paint. Whenever the internet wasn't working as good as I expected, I would simply spin up Paint and draw complete rubbish on the canvas. Of course, that wasn't always the intention, but it usually happened when I messed up drawing a straight line or something, and then I would give up on that particular piece and simply draw a random collection of objects. Microsoft Paint was extremely accessible and easy to use. Even if you weren't an artist, you could quickly understand the tools at your disposal and how to leverage them on a canvas. The absolute breadth on offer ensured that each painting was truly unique, as you could utilize various combinations of tools like the pencil, paint, spray paint, and more to truly personalize your creation. Since I wasn't particularly good at drawing both on digital screen or a physical screen, I remember that my main style of art would be to insert a bunch of randomly intersecting lines and then fill them with random colors through the paint can. I have trying to replicate that art style in the latest version of Paint below, and as you can see, it's truly Pablo Picasso-esque. The human imagination truly knows no bounds Microsoft Paint kept me occupied for hours and was my best friend when video games on the home PC were inaccessible for one reason or the other. There was no academic or professional reason for which I would need to use Paint, but I still loved using it in my personal time, even if what I created wasn't worth being shown to anyone. It was simply fun. Fast-forward to today, and the situation is mostly the same. Now that I am almost 29 years old, and I still have no reason to use Microsoft Paint in a professional capacity. In fact, I don't even use it in a personal capacity, except to dabble with it from time to time, just to see if core functionalities are still intact. And I'm happy to say that I think Microsoft Paint still offers the same accessibility and inviting experience that it did to me a couple of decades ago, even though its UX has been refreshed and it's been integrated with Copilot features. Interestingly, things could have been a lot different, had Microsoft had its way. Microsoft Paint was marked for deprecation with the Windows 10 Fall Creators Update in 2017, and even began displaying a product retirement alert, urging customers to shift to Paint 3D instead. Fortunately, after consumer backlash, Microsoft reversed course on this decision, and Paint continues to be a native app inside Windows installations that can also be updated quite frequently through the Microsoft Store. Instead, Paint 3D ended up on the chopping block, which is for the better, I think. I have intermittently played around with Microsoft's refreshed Paint experience in the past few years, and I do think it has received worthwhile upgrades. the UI and the UX has been modernized while retaining core functionality, and the app is still fairly easy to use. It doesn't meet any of my use-cases, but I've never really had any use-cases ever, as described previously. Of course, the elephant in the room is the Copilot integration. Personally, I believe that this is one place where Copilot does make sense, environmental concerns aside. I know that a lot of creatives use AI to generate images, and while some may be using professional alternatives, Paint still offers a decent casual experience, with the power of Copilot. Of course, you do need to have a valid Microsoft 365 Copilot license and available credits to use it, but even if you don't, you still get the big Copilot button in the toolbar, unfortunately. All in all, I am glad that Microsoft Paint continues to be a native feature in Windows 11, and a piece of software that has evolved to meet modern needs without cutting off its own roots. It's just an iconic piece of Windows history that was an essential part of my childhood, and while I don't use it anymore, I'm just glad it is still there.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Week One Done
      Supreme Spray LV earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      Genuinetonerink- Dubai earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Genuinetonerink- Dubai earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Year In
      hhgygy earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Week One Done
      AMV earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      513
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      163
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      88
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      74
    5. 5
      Michael Scrip
      73
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!