Reality check - Windows 8 was not made for you

[PGHammer 1,504]

Okay. Maybe "doing things the way we want" is not the correct combination of words. A better way to put it would be "doing things the way we're used to" vs "doing things the modern way".

My point remains the same though.

That is why I said that the reaction is very much anti-change, however much those clamoring want to deny it.

I, for example, didn't say (in fact, have never said) that the change was NOT jarring - in fact, I have stipulated it.

Yet my own computing history is among the longest of all of Neowin.

How is it that I can get past all that mitigates against my getting used to the Modern UI and that a large number of my fellow Neowinians cannot?

That is something I would truly like to know.

We complain - rightfully so, in my opinion - about things being *meh* - then, when a change comes along that deliberately shakes things up, we backtrack and practically insist on *meh*.

I honestly and truly do NOT get it.

[nekkidtruth 467]

*snip*

I agree, there's no need to initiate another start menu debate. I agree with most of what you said though. But the sudden jump to touch is only a piece of the puzzle. Just as whether the start screen is useful/useless is up for debate, so are many of the other changes such as keyboard shortcuts etc. The whole thing was just put together so poorly.

The desktop is still there, yes. It's still functional just as it was before. There's no denying that and there's no point in anyone arguing over that as well. Windows 8 is a stepping stone. I personally understand that entirely. It just isn't a very good stepping stone, in my opinion.

[cropcircles 51]

I think you have this backwards somewhat. The general population won't get past the desktop until they accidently find the auto hide dashboard on on the right side of the screen. This OS is geared towards the portable gadget generation. Once you get past the opening curtain the system is still there for power users and day to day surfers alike.

[+warwagon 13,211]

Mark my words.. The average user after 1 months, using Windows 8 will NOT know the start button is hidden in the bottom left corner.

[Ice_Blue 983]

Consider them marked. On your way.

(Couldn't resist. From Pirates of the Caribbean) :)

[Shane Nokes 739]

Except it's not opinion. Metro/Modern/Whatever it's called this week, was specifically designed for touch-based devices (aka. Phones and tablets). So it's not opinion, it's reality. The only reason it's on the desktop right now is because they HAVE to start somewhere to get to where they're headed (a unified approach across multiple devices). I'd say no one is disputing that, but I can't speak for others. The fact remains, it's not currently not optimized for a desktop therefore it's impossible for it to "shine". That's fact, not opinion.

Ok so I'm either delusional or a liar? I ask because I think it is absolutely marvelous on my desktop...

I state it that way, because if you what you state is a fact, then what I state is either a delusion or a lie, since your statement is not an opinion, but objective fact.

Also just to clarify, I ask this not out of anger, but in order to clarify why this is not an opinion in the mind of the poster.

Mark my words.. The average user after 1 months, using Windows 8 will NOT know the start button is hidden in the bottom left corner.

Considering that Start has always defaulted to the bottom left...I would say I'll take your bet. ;)

[+trag3dy 4,114]

That is why I said that the reaction is very much anti-change, however much those clamoring want to deny it.

I, for example, didn't say (in fact, have never said) that the change was NOT jarring - in fact, I have stipulated it.

Yet my own computing history is among the longest of all of Neowin.

How is it that I can get past all that mitigates against my getting used to the Modern UI and that a large number of my fellow Neowinians cannot?

That is something I would truly like to know.

We complain - rightfully so, in my opinion - about things being *meh* - then, when a change comes along that deliberately shakes things up, we backtrack and practically insist on *meh*.

I honestly and truly do NOT get it.

To be perfectly blunt no one cares if you get it or not. We don't need you to verify our opinions, likewise with yours.

That being said I've never once argued for reverting the start screen completely or removing metro, or anything along those lines. I've always argued for giving us all the options we've had back. Let people choose what to use the start variant they want. If it's not the start screen then as I've said before, it's clearly not the future of computing MS is hoping it to be and they can try something else with Windows 9.

Since we're naming things we don't understand... I don't understand why people don't want more options, or would actively argue against having them. "Getting rid of legacy code" is a stupid excuse.

[Shane Nokes 739]

Since we're naming things we don't understand... I don't understand why people don't want more options, or would actively argue against having them. "Getting rid of legacy code" is a stupid excuse.

Yet everyone always complains about code bloat all the time around here...

There are options out there for people who want to use something similar to the old start menu.

That's one of the great things about Windows.

Something doesn't work the way you want?

There's an app for that. ;)

/YesIJustSaidThat

[nekkidtruth 467]

Ok so I'm either delusional or a liar? I ask because I think it is absolutely marvelous on my desktop...

I state it that way, because if you what you state is a fact, then what I state is either a delusion or a lie, since your statement is not an opinion, but objective fact.

Also just to clarify, I ask this not out of anger, but in order to clarify why this is not an opinion in the mind of the poster.

In order for your opinion to actually hold some merit, we'd have to be discussing Metro/Modern as if it was designed with the desktop in mind. However, it was not. Granted, I'll give you that it may "shine" for you, but that would indicate you have very low standards with regards to what it could/should be on the desktop. Which I suppose opens up a whole new can of "opinions".

Fact: It is not designed for a desktop PC. Is that changing? Of course. In it's current state however, it is not ready and nowhere near "shines" as you put it. I suppose you might have a different definition of "shine". *shrug*

[Shane Nokes 739]

In order for your opinion to actually hold some merit, we'd have to be discussing Metro/Modern as if it was designed with the desktop in mind. However, it was not. Granted, I'll give you that it may "shine" for you, but that would indicate you have very low standards with regards to what it could/should be on the desktop. Which I suppose opens up a whole new can of "opinions".

Fact: It is not designed for a desktop PC. Is that changing? Of course. In it's current state however, it is not ready and nowhere near "shines" as you put it. I suppose you might have a different definition of "shine". *shrug*

So when I post my feelings about the interface it's an opinion & indication of low standards, but when you post your feelings about the interface it's an objective fact above reproach?

Good to know. ;)

I do believe that will be my last post as regards this portion of this thread.

[nekkidtruth 467]

So when I post my feelings about the interface it's an opinion & indication of low standards, but when you post your feelings about the interface it's an objective fact above reproach?

Good to know. ;)

I do believe that will be my last post as regards this portion of this thread.

If you'd like to twist this into something it isn't, you're welcome to. You're deliberately ignoring the fact that it is NOT designed for a desktop and taking everything I've said as a direct insult. I'll admit I suppose I could word some of what I've said differently, but it doesn't change the facts.

[Shane Nokes 739]

If you'd like to twist this into something it isn't, you're welcome to. You're deliberately ignoring the fact that it is NOT designed for a desktop and taking everything I've said as a direct insult. I'll admit I suppose I could word some of what I've said differently, but it doesn't change the facts.

So I said my last post would be the last, but I feel the need to address this.

I'm not twisting anything. How you feel about the design & how well it is suited to its task is an opinion. How I feel about it is also an opinion. Neither is objective fact, but based on how we use our systems.

I'm very familiar with Metro/Modern/Whatever UI and used to how it works and the design logic behind it. So even on a desktop system I find the combination of both interfaces to work well and efficiently for all the tasks I perform. This includes several 'power user' scenarios as well as just normal every day usage.

My point wasn't that I was taking it as an insult (I'm not, as I find it humorous), but that to claim how you feel about something that is subjective based upon user experience is disingenuous at best.

I feel that the new start screen is just as well suited to a desktop as the old start menu was (in some ways I prefer it). Sure there are some kinks in the new interface, but that happens every time a new interface is launched for Windows, or OS X, or Linux, etc. There are always bugs to be worked out at a later date.

Just because we have opposing viewpoints doesn't mean that one of us is the arbiter of fact, and one is just sharing an opinion. Both are opinions, and equally valid since we both believe what we say to be the way it is, to us.

[nekkidtruth 467]

So I said my last post would be the last, but I feel the need to address this.

I'm not twisting anything. How you feel about the design & how well it is suited to its task is an opinion. How I feel about it is also an opinion. Neither is objective fact, but based on how we use our systems.

I'm very familiar with Metro/Modern/Whatever UI and used to how it works and the design logic behind it. So even on a desktop system I find the combination of both interfaces to work well and efficiently for all the tasks I perform. This includes several 'power user' scenarios as well as just normal every day usage.

My point wasn't that I was taking it as an insult (I'm not, as I find it humorous), but that to claim how you feel about something that is subjective based upon user experience is disingenuous at best.

I feel that the new start screen is just as well suited to a desktop as the old start menu was (in some ways I prefer it). Sure there are some kinks in the new interface, but that happens every time a new interface is launched for Windows, or OS X, or Linux, etc. There are always bugs to be worked out at a later date.

Just because we have opposing viewpoints doesn't mean that one of us is the arbiter of fact, and one is just sharing an opinion. Both are opinions, and equally valid since we both believe what we say to be the way it is, to us.

I'm relieved to hear you aren't taking personal insult to anything I've said because I wasn't trying to personally insult you. That being said, you're still ignoring the fact. It isn't my opinion that Metro/Modern wasn't designed for the desktop. It's fact. It was designed for the Windows Phone and the tablet they were working on. What Microsoft is doing at the moment is taking what was designed for those touch devices and attempting to implant it into a desktop PC, and that's where Windows 8 comes in. This is the stepping stone to a unified OS over multiple devices. The only part that is opinion with regards to the above, is that I think it's horribly horribly done and not a very good start to the process.

[Shane Nokes 739]

I'm relieved to hear you aren't taking personal insult to anything I've said because I wasn't trying to personally insult you. That being said, you're still ignoring the fact. It isn't my opinion that Metro/Modern wasn't designed for the desktop. It's fact. It was designed for the Windows Phone and the tablet they were working on. What Microsoft is doing at the moment is taking what was designed for those touch devices and attempting to implant it into a desktop PC, and that's where Windows 8 comes in. This is the stepping stone to a unified OS over multiple devices. The only part that is opinion with regards to the above, is that I think it's horribly horribly done and not a very good start to the process.

Actually the original concept that became known as Metro was originally used for Windows Media Center. Later on the Zune & Zune Software started to incorporate the design aesthetic and that's when it started to become known as Metro.

These were originally designed for Mouse, Keyboard, & Remote interactions. The idea that these interfaces would be well suited to touch came later with Windows Mobile 6.5 & the Zune HD.

In testing they found that the newer design could be used almost equally well in both traditional & touch based environments.

When Microsoft decided to start over after canceling Photon (codename for Windows Mobile 7) they decided to apply much more of the 'Metro' design approach and start to tie things in with existing products. The Xbox received an updated in November 2010 that enabled the 'tile' interface that is now becoming common across all of their major products. Windows Phone launched with a similar interface just before that (or just after if you're in North America) that was helping to unify the vision they had.

One of these is a touch based device (Windows Phone) and the other is a combination of Controller, Remote, and Gesture based interfaces (Xbox).

The interface was designed to scale well with all of these scenarios depending on what was being used.

That's why I say it's disingenuous to claim that keyboard & mouse are not considered first-class citizens in the new design. Are there instances where touch is going to be better? Sure.

There are also going to be places where gesture navigation (Kinect) and mouse/keyboard work better too.

Right now you're basing everything off a paltry few apps for an OS that is not yet even generally available to consumers.

Am I saying that in the end you will be wrong? Not at all.

I'm just saying that as it stands the interface was designed to work very well with multiple types of input. Give it time. ;)

[nekkidtruth 467]

I'm just saying that as it stands the interface was designed to work very well with multiple types of input. Give it time. ;)

Don't you worry, I do plan to give it time. Which is why I'm skipping Windows 8 and waiting for 9. They should have most of the oddities worked out by then. Unless by some miracle they decide to fix some of the issues using a service pack (one can dream haha).

As for everything else you said, I'm aware of how and where Metro/Modern came to be. But it didn't really "shine" (for lack of a better term) until it went mobile. Here's a question for you to think about....

Why is it that when these UI changes were integrated with the likes of WMC and Xbox, they were able to so with very little difficulty? Why has it been so much of an issue on the desktop?

[thomastmc 608]

So you're saying the Modern Ui experience on a desktop is pointless (or unhelpful)? That's what we've been discussing :p

Problem is, there's no getting around some things, once you link your Microsoft ID with Windows 8, your contacts, messenger and everything is forced into the ModernUi apps. You can ignore them, sure.. but I'm still logged into 2 or 3 places at once on the same workstation! :p

The Modern UI apps are great on the desktop (at least for me) for most tasks that I would normally do on the web, email, calendar, podcasts, twitter, facebook, news, etc. However, you are "immersed" in the Modern UI, and can't integrated to a desktop app as well.

Modern UI does have a place. The desktop covers everything else, as it always has.

Also, you don't have to be logged in at multiple locations, simply uninstall the app.

[Dot Matrix 7,438]

If you guys want to talk about scaling, let's put it this way. I'm planning on using a semi-old PC as a Home Theater PC connected to my TV. I have a nice 30 inch that when used with Windows 7, needs the DPI raised to 200%. With Windows 8's Start, I can bypass the desktop all together, and go straight to where I need to from there, no scaling required. :)

I'm not sure why people think Metro is bad for big screens, because this PC disagrees.

[Shane Nokes 739]

Don't you worry, I do plan to give it time. Which is why I'm skipping Windows 8 and waiting for 9. They should have most of the oddities worked out by then. Unless by some miracle they decide to fix some of the issues using a service pack (one can dream haha).

As for everything else you said, I'm aware of how and where Metro/Modern came to be. But it didn't really "shine" (for lack of a better term) until it went mobile. Here's a question for you to think about....

Why is it that when these UI changes were integrated with the likes of WMC and Xbox, they were able to so with very little difficulty? Why has it been so much of an issue on the desktop?

With WMC I would say because it's a purpose driven application, but even then it wasn't entirely without difficulty.

Same with Xbox. People have been complaining ever since the change over from the original dash, which happened back in 2008. Not everyone mind you, but some.

I would say part of the issue with PC's is that it's a fundamental change in look & feel. Yes there's a big change in function, but not necessarily functionality. By that I mean a lot of things look & feel different, but behave very similarly if you look at it.

The start button feature? Sure the button is gone, but still clicking bottom left brings up the menu. Pressing the start key on the keyboard will do the same.

Search from start? Still there, but not as noticeable since there's not a big empty white space with a blinking cursor.

Ability to view everything from the old start menu? Still there with 2-clicks. Sure that's one more click than before, but not a huge difference.

Power User tools access? Faster than before just by right-clicking in the bottom right hand of the screen.

In fact some of these changes they've made work best with a mouse & keyboard oddly enough.

Now if you're going to say that Microsoft wanted to create this interface to help bolster the tablet market with a nice easy touch interface, then I'm definitely in agreement. I wouldn't go so far as to say that it's designed as entirely touch-first.

If that were the case then I would be getting pretty ticked off left and right at a loss of functionality since I'm on my PC quite and bit and need to be able to do things quickly. That way I can get in, get out, and do something else. :)

If you guys want to talk about scaling, let's put it this way. I'm planning on using a semi-old PC as a Home Theater PC connected to my TV. I have a nice 30 inch that when used with Windows 7, needs the DPI raised to 200%. With Windows 8's Start, I can bypass the desktop all together, and go straight to where I need to from there, no scaling required. :)

I'm not sure why people think Metro is bad for big screens, because this PC disagrees.

That confuses me too since (as I pointed out) the original UI that later started to be called Metro was designed for Media Center, which was designed to be used on large screens.

[WinMetro 0]

Look at the reality, Windows 8 will ship on many PC's. People will get used to it. The Desktop is still there for you. Don't panic, Windows 8 is here. Windows is back in track. Power users are screaming for Windows to go back to its 15+ year UI. Same people who hated Windows 95 because of that new UI. You know what? You got used to it, I did and everyone here in this forum running Windows 95 to Windows 7 has gotten used to it. Why say the same thing when YOU will get used to it because I can see the future.

Argument #1 - I don't like Metro* style apps and I don't want any Metro* style app near my PC.

Hello? Windows 8 Start Screen lets you pin anything so if you just want your Desktop apps pinned then pin them OK.

Argument #2 - Windows 8 all apps view sucks I can't see the app I'm looking for.

Well use Start Search it's there for you Windows UI Protesters. Works exactly like Windows 7 but full screen, hit WinKey and start typing. You can even filter your view by Apps, Settings and Files. The File's view is way better than Windows 7, more details.

Argument #3 - I just can't get used to Metro* and I'm going back to Windows 7.

Don't go back to Windows 7 get ViStart, Classic Shell or Start8.

Or if you just chickened out of the new Windows 8 stay with your Windows 7, thank you it's not like MS is going to change Windows 8 for you.

That's it for next time, come back to Windows UI Mythbusters next time.

*Metro word will be used, if you prefer to call it Modern UI please do so.

[nekrosoft13 724]

Reality check - Power users are Windows users too and have just as much right to an opinion as you do. Regardless whether you agree with them or not. Just as some **** and moan that power users have some false sense of entitlement, so do those who like Windows 8. It's a giant hypocrisy to be frank. Stick to your opinion, and stop trying to force it down everyone else's throat. I think we have enough of these "If you don't like Windows 8, you're an idiot! And here's why..." threads. Just as we have way too many "If you like Windows 8, you're an idiot! And here's why..." threads.

Waste of Internet space.

first intellegent person in the threat

[nekrosoft13 724]

I'm relieved to hear you aren't taking personal insult to anything I've said because I wasn't trying to personally insult you. That being said, you're still ignoring the fact. It isn't my opinion that Metro/Modern wasn't designed for the desktop. It's fact. It was designed for the Windows Phone and the tablet they were working on. What Microsoft is doing at the moment is taking what was designed for those touch devices and attempting to implant it into a desktop PC, and that's where Windows 8 comes in. This is the stepping stone to a unified OS over multiple devices. The only part that is opinion with regards to the above, is that I think it's horribly horribly done and not a very good start to the process.

very true, And i will add to that, that this is MS attempt to speed up sales of phone OS that only 5-8% of market use and its barelly gaining in the ground. their hope is that if they force this GUI on general population more people might be bying their phones

[Shane Nokes 739]

very true, And i will add to that, that this is MS attempt to speed up sales of phone OS that only 5-8% of market use and its barelly gaining in the ground. their hope is that if they force this GUI on general population more people might be bying their phones

Windows & Windows Phone are actually in 2 separate divisions at Microsoft. They have entirely different ledgers & are generally not dependent upon each other. Every group at MS has to 'sing for its supper'.

To clarify, Windows is part of the Windows Division (naturally) and Windows Phone is part of the Entertainment and Devices Division, unless they've changed things in the 3 months I've been on vacation. :p

Also if you think they would risk alienating their cash cow for the sake of their mobile OS...well I can't think of a polite way to describe that theory.

[nekkidtruth 467]

Windows & Windows Phone are actually in 2 separate divisions at Microsoft. They have entirely different ledgers & are generally not dependent upon each other. Every group at MS has to 'sing for its supper'.

To clarify, Windows is part of the Windows Division (naturally) and Windows Phone is part of the Entertainment and Devices Division, unless they've changed things in the 3 months I've been on vacation. :p

Also if you think they would risk alienating their cash cow for the sake of their mobile OS...well I can't think of a polite way to describe that theory.

Except that what he says rings very true. They may be different divisions, but it's obvious they're looking to bridge those divisions. So his theory is more realistic than you're obviously willing to admit.

[Shane Nokes 739]

Except that what he says rings very true. They may be different divisions, but it's obvious they're looking to bridge those divisions. So his theory is more realistic than you're obviously willing to admit.

It rings true if you don't know how things work at Microsoft. Are they attempting to make their interfaces more cohesive which leads to a more unified experience? Yes.

Are they changing things to support Windows Phone with the risk of alienating their Windows userbase? That would be beyond ridiculous to even consider, especially since the divisions have separate ledgers as I've already stated.

This is a direction that they've been headed towards for quite some time. It's not something new and being done only to bolster their mobile effort.

[Subhadip 36]

It's not just interfaces, both Windows 8 and Windows Phone 8 now run on the Windows NT 6.2 kernel. I don't know the technical details, but WinRT seems very closely related to the Windows Phone API now - in the WP8 keynote they mentioned that it is extremely simply to port apps between WP8 and W8, and most apps can readily interact between them (e.g. between W8 tablet / WP8 phone). They may be different divisions but it is very obvious that they are co-operating much more closely than ever before. Another prime example is Surface.