• Sign in to Neowin Faster!

    Create an account on Neowin to contribute and support the site.

Sign in to follow this  

Reality check - Windows 8 was not made for you

Recommended Posts

Alladaskill17    181

I like how you just throw 'no errors' in your OP, that's the only thing I can really rag on...Its an OS... built by people, used by people, error messages are included in the OS for reason... :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Shane Nokes    739

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.

That's nothing new either. Previous version of Windows Phone & Windows Mobile ran on WinCE. The Xbox runs on a customized version of Windows, as do many of the other products Microsoft puts out.

This doesn't place them into the same division as one another. It just means that there is collaboration.

That still doesn't mean they would jeopardize their cash cow OS to bolster another product line. That's the point I was making. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
nekkidtruth    467

That still doesn't mean they would jeopardize their cash cow OS to bolster another product line. That's the point I was making. ;)

Except that they ARE jeopardizing their "cash cow". Just because it's a stepping stone to something better, doesn't mean it isn't a risk. They ARE taking a risk. That's evident by the blatant ignoring of feedback during beta's, previews, whatever else. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Shane Nokes    739

Using only the first half of a statement to fit your view of things doesn't work. You blatantly ignore that it's a single sentence that ends with, "...to bolster another product line".

I never said they don't take risks, but that they are not about to take a risk with their biggest OS just to prop up another product. I love Windows Phone, but I don't see Microsoft making this move just to make more money for it.

That was the point the other poster was making and the point that I'm refuting.

I mean come on, you know better...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
nekkidtruth    467

Using only the first half of a statement to fit your view of things doesn't work. You blatantly ignore that it's a single sentence that ends with, "...to bolster another product line".

I never said they don't take risks, but that they are not about to take a risk with their biggest OS just to prop up another product. I love Windows Phone, but I don't see Microsoft making this move just to make more money for it.

That was the point the other poster was making and the point that I'm refuting.

I mean come on, you know better...

Except businesses do that all the time. Why wouldn't they? It's absolutely feasible. Even more so BECAUSE of how big of a cash cow Windows is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Shane Nokes    739

Except businesses do that all the time. Why wouldn't they? It's absolutely feasible. Even more so BECAUSE of how big of a cash cow Windows is.

*Sighs*

I already explained this earlier...and this is a subject where I have more than a little first hand knowledge...

I do believe this is now a very good point for a complete exit from the thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
nekkidtruth    467

*Sighs*

I already explained this earlier...and this is a subject where I have more than a little first hand knowledge...

I do believe this is now a very good point for a complete exit from the thread.

You explained that they are different divisions. And? You speak like it would be the first time ever different divisions within a corporation crossed paths and in some cases, have merged because of said collaborations.

No one said "OMG THIS IS WHAT HAS HAPPENED YOU CAN'T DENY IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!" Someone simply brought it up as a theory. Why are you being so ridiculously dismissive?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
nekrosoft13    722

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.

and that is excactly what they are doing. they want their pathetic phone to gain market share what is the best way to do it? force the UI that almost noone likes on general population, if they are forced to use it, maybe they will get used to it, and stop buying iphones and droids and more windows phones will sell.

what they can't realize is that you can't merge desktop UI with mobile UI. it simply doesn't work. especially business enviroment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PGHammer    1,492

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. ;)

Also, most of these SAME apps are ports from other devices - bringing their biases, and flaws, with them.

The WinRT/XBLW games are *all* ports from the XB360 - contrariwise, they had the easiest trip over.

Most of the apps, however, are ports from Windows Phone/Windows Mobile - not so easy (as the resolution constraints of a phone are inapplicable to notebooks, let alone desktops - and it's showing in app behavior).

Also, it's not as if Win32 applications/applets are going away - Amazon still distributes (gives away) their Win32 Kindle e-reader (which I still prefer to the Modern UI/WinRT version, despite its own flaws).

I've seen this before, in fact - most early Win32 applications were brought over - unchanged - from Windows NT. (WinZip is, in fact, one of them - it was *originally* written as a pure Win32, as in NT, application - the Win16 version came along later, as did the hooks into Windows Explorer.)

I have no beef with ModernUI itself, and I can understand the grief some folks have with ModernUI apps compared to their Win32 counterparts.

However, that is exactly the beauty of Windows 8 (compared to either WindowsRT or Windows 7) - it is the only place where the two cross over and compete (and surprisingly, to the benefit of both).

It is very much Windows 95 all over again - and then some.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.