Windows 8 - Unintuitivity at its best

[Ottawa Gamerz]

You did absolutely nothing in Metro we haven't been able to do for years on the desktop. It's not even easier or more convenient. Really it's not. Overall Metro simply stands for less functionality. Why? When you have to get any serious word done you still end up using the desktop, something you just admitted to yourself. Windows 8 actually makes things less convenient when you continuously end up switching between two completely different interface paradigms.

serious word dont u mean work ya ya another person that talks because he can

word lol u just pulled a homer simpson

[.Neo]

serious word dont u mean work ya ya another person that talks because he can

Thanks. You try using some capitals and punctuation here and there.

[Dot Matrix]

You did absolutely nothing in Metro we haven't been able to do for years on the desktop. It's not even easier or more convenient. Really it's not. Overall Metro simply stands for less functionality. Why? When you have to get any serious work done you still end up using the desktop, something you just admitted doing yourself. Windows 8 actually makes things less convenient when you continuously end up switching between two completely different interface paradigms.

And that's the point. Which is beneficial because Metro works across a wide range of PCs, when the desktop simply doesn't. Plus, Metro has the advantage of being designed after Microsoft's Trustworthy Computing mantra, they're more secure than Win32 ever will be because each app is sandboxed. Another advantage is that they are more easily maintainable than Win32 and won't trash systems with garbage file dumps or registry entries.

These are going to be huge benefits that will start to push Win32 out of the spotlight.

[VivM]

Plus, Metro has the advantage of being designed after Microsoft's Trustworthy Computing mantra, they're more secure than Win32 ever will be because each app is sandboxed. Another advantage is that they are more easily maintainable than Win32 and won't trash systems with garbage file dumps or registry entries.

These are going to be huge benefits that will start to push Win32 out of the spotlight.

And that's missing the point, yet again. The problem with Metro isn't the under-the-hood anything; the problem with Metro is that it's a full-screen, touch-oriented paradigm that's ill-suited to what traditional PCs are used for (i.e. creating things). The best 'creating' application you can think of that exists for Metro are glorified notepad apps like Evernote and OneNote.

Why, if you are so right, is MS incapable (or unwilling) of demoing any productivity application more serious than that for Metro? Where is Metro WordPad/Paint? Their idea of a 'Metro' productivity application is sticking some ALL CAPS and weird fonts in Office and continuing to run it in their 'deprecated' Win32 desktop.

That's what we're upset about: people who, for 15-20 years, if not longer, have seen PCs as a way to create things are suddenly being force fed an interface paradigm that pretends no one needs to create things. We're supposed to consume Bing and News and Weather and music stores. That's what Microsoft tells us the future is for the most successful productivity computing platform in history. All because they got caught with their pants down by Apple selling lots of tablets...

[.Neo]

And that's the point. Which is beneficial because Metro works across a wide range of PCs, when the desktop simply doesn't. Plus, Metro has the advantage of being designed after Microsoft's Trustworthy Computing mantra, they're more secure than Win32 ever will be because each app is sandboxed. Another advantage is that they are more easily maintainable than Win32 and won't trash systems with garbage file dumps or registry entries.

These are going to be huge benefits that will start to push Win32 out of the spotlight.

If anything those are shortcoming of Win32, not the desktop in itself. Ever noticed how OS X doesn't suffer from registry entry issues and how App Store apps are sandboxed?

[VivM]

And why is that? Are you afraid of change?

If you're that bitter, set up the OS the way you want it. Program Defaults is your friend. But let me tell you something, this is a screenshot of my current Start screen on the PC I am currently on. Where's the desktop? I'm working with nothing but Metro. I have survived two weeks of school on nothing but, save for Office use. And this is still the CP. This isn't RTM where there are more apps waiting in the marketplace that I don't have access to yet. SO what exactly is making you bitter here? Afraid of change? Afraid of loosing your skillset? What?

I'm bitter because for 17 years, I trusted Microsoft. They said to use Luna, I used Luna. They said the start menu should have two columns, I used two columns. (I know many people who instinctively used the 'classic' start menu until Win7 took that option away) If Microsoft said something was the way to go, I used it as they intended.

So I WANT to use Windows 8 as intended. And what I find myself looking at is a touch-screen oriented interface that is absolutely ill-suited for the hardware I've paid good money for (see below). That's why I'm bitter. I don't want to spend an hour or two screwing with the default associations, installing third-party start menu replacements, etc... i.e. spending my time to undo Steven Sinofsky's deliberate design decisions to make an OS designed to consume content on a 10" tablet. This is Windows, FFS, it's supposed to be a serious, keyboard/mouse-driven productivity platform...

The other thing to mention is the hardware. For many years, MS rewarded people who bought good hardware and planned ahead. Take Vista. I had no problem running Aero on my machines because, well, I had discrete GPUs, decent quantities of RAM, etc. The people who got screwed were the suckers buying $400 i865/i915 systems without doing their research. Win8 flips that on its head - the people with the 1920x1200 or higher monitors, the quad-core CPUs, the fancy GPUs, etc. are clearly not the priority. They get a worse experience (why the modal autorun dialog? why the metrified wifi network picker? etc.) because MS thinks the focus is 10-11" tablets that no one owns.

My problem with Win8, fundamentally, is psychological. Steven Sinofsky is telling me, and my thousands of dollars of hardware, to became a pawn in his plan to catch up in the tablet market that his boss Ballmer couldn't compete in. The crazy bit is, he could offer a 'Win8 Curmudgeon Edition' with Metro put in its place (i.e. buried like Windows Media Center) for $75/license more, and laugh all the way to the bank. But instead he's selling a compromised product that insults his most loyal customers for dirt cheap...

[Dot Matrix]

And that's missing the point, yet again. The problem with Metro isn't the under-the-hood anything; the problem with Metro is that it's a full-screen, touch-oriented paradigm that's ill-suited to what traditional PCs are used for (i.e. creating things). The best 'creating' application you can think of that exists for Metro are glorified notepad apps like Evernote and OneNote.

Why, if you are so right, is MS incapable (or unwilling) of demoing any productivity application more serious than that for Metro? Where is Metro WordPad/Paint? Their idea of a 'Metro' productivity application is sticking some ALL CAPS and weird fonts in Office and continuing to run it in their 'deprecated' Win32 desktop.

That's what we're upset about: people who, for 15-20 years, if not longer, have seen PCs as a way to create things are suddenly being force fed an interface paradigm that pretends no one needs to create things. We're supposed to consume Bing and News and Weather and music stores. That's what Microsoft tells us the future is for the most successful productivity computing platform in history. All because they got caught with their pants down by Apple selling lots of tablets...

It's full screen, but hardly touch oriented. I can still use a mouse and keyboard in Metro apps just as I can on the desktop. Paint for Metro exists as Fresh Paint, and if you're so concerned about a NotePad app, why not create one? I can't until I install RTM in October. Also Office 2013 hasn't reached "Gold" status yet, who knows what else is coming with that release. Go out and develop, that's what Microsoft wants you to do. You complain a lot, but want others to do the work for you. Just because default Metro apps might be somewhat featureless, doesn't mean Metro as a whole has to be featureless.

If anything those are shortcoming of Win32, not the desktop in itself. Ever noticed how OS X doesn't suffer from registry entry issues and how App Store apps are sandboxed?

If Win32 goes, so does the current desktop as we know it. Something else would be developed that would run the new WinRT apps.

So I WANT to use Windows 8 as intended. And what I find myself looking at is a touch-screen oriented interface that is absolutely ill-suited for the hardware I've paid good money for (see below). That's why I'm bitter. I don't want to spend an hour or two screwing with the default associations, installing third-party start menu replacements, etc... i.e. spending my time to undo Steven Sinofsky's deliberate design decisions to make an OS designed to consume content on a 10" tablet. This is Windows, FFS, it's supposed to be a serious, keyboard/mouse-driven productivity platform...

And I have also been using Windows 8 as intended. I use both Metro and the Desktop on my desktop PC, and have stuck to using nothing but Metro on my HTPC where the desktop makes no sense. And I have tested to see how much I can get away with in using nothing but Metro on my notebook as well, and it works better than expected. I had to make little changes to my desktop system, but those where mostly power options. I installed Zune, and was prompted if I wanted to make it default, which I did. I installed Windows Essentials, and made Photo Gallery my default photo viewer.

[Calum Veteran]

You did absolutely nothing in Metro we haven't been able to do for years on the desktop. It's not even easier or more convenient. Really it's not. Overall Metro simply stands for less functionality. Why? When you have to get any serious work done you still end up using the desktop, something you just admitted doing yourself. Windows 8 actually makes things less convenient when you continuously end up switching between two completely different interface paradigms.

Developing functional apps takes time. He has to switch to Desktop in order to use Microsoft Office because there isn't currently a "Metro" version of Microsoft Office. I'm pretty confident one of the reasons for that is because they haven't had time to create a "Metro" version of Microsoft Office that is either just as functional as the Desktop version or nearly as functional as it, and I can think of a few reasons as to why they would have decided against releasing a much-less-functional version.

I don't think you can reasonably slam the new experience for being "less functional," in terms of what developers are capable of producing, until developers have had time to develop versions of their apps that are just as functional as the current Desktop versions. It's possible that Photoshop could be created for the new experience, but many people are assuming that is impossible. I say, wait and see exactly how powerful the new platform could be for developers to develop functional and useful productivity apps. I may be wrong, but I feel it's wrong to assume when none of us know for sure.

[code65536]

The problem is that you are insisting that they have to remain separated. The question begs - why?

I have no qualms with including the WinRT API in desktop Windows. I have no problem with Metro existing on desktop Windows. What I do take issue with is shoving Metro in our faces on the desktop. Keep the desktop in the background as the forgotten red-headed stepchild if you're on a tablet, letting people see it only if they want to. I'm okay with that. Just as long as Metro gets the same treatment on non-tablets: Get Metro out of my way, but allow me the option to use it if I want.

Worse, you are also apparently insisting that Google is capable of doing something that neither Microsoft OR Apple are capable of - creating a multiple-input UX. Android is multi-input - it supports touch AND keyboards AND mice.

There's a difference between "supports" and "supports well". It's not so much about keyboard/mouse as it is about the larger computing model. Tell me again how well multitasking, task switching, and sharing data between apps work on Android? Because I have this shiny Nexus 7 tablet with the latest and greatest Android and it doesn't seem to do a very good job with this whole multitasking thing that Xerox invented way back when.

You are basically insisting that Windows' multiple-API approach - the same approach that it has used over the past two decades - is no longer workable.

Again, you've misunderstood (or misconstrued) my arguments. Never did I ever say "Kill all Metro!" in my rants. My rants are often along the lines of, "Why the bloody hell am I being forced to interact with Metro on the desktop?"

User compatibility is not the same as application/hardware/software compatibility - no less than Windows 7 is the biggest example of that. It had a far smaller UI/UX change than Windows 8 - yet it had far greater application breakage compared to Vista or XP, let alone Windows 8.

Again, you are misunderstanding my post. That part of my post was a response to Dot Matrix's flippant Win32-is-a-useless-dinosaur-that-must-die nonsense. Windows 8 does not kill Win32 in any way shape or form (which is why I do use it day-to-day--I'm good with Win8, just not Metro), but I do take issue with this "let's throw out Win32" line that some people take (and that Microsoft's disturbing attitude towards the desktop suggest that they might take in a future version of Windows).

Yet once they have, they have been able to create solid applications - and games - that use it.

Yea, mostly little minor things with the coding quality of someone fresh out of a programming class. Not to say that there aren't big serious projects in .NET, but things like Paint.NET are the (rare) exception, not the rule.

Even more surprising, .NET is cross-platform - .NET is no obstacle to cross-platform development (despite the naysaying of game developers at first).

Source-code level cross-platform (if by cross-platform, you mean between different Windows platforms, because, practically .NET really does not work outside of Windows, even if it may be possible in theory) compatibility existed long before .NET came to town. Remember the days when, from the same source base, NT ran on Alpha and PowerPC? And how, with that same code base, NT now also runs in IA64, x86-64, and ARM? As for binary compatibility, hey, if your source is well-written, it's not hard to press that compile button a second time.

(It leads to the following question - how many of the various "Start menu add-ins" are written in .NET, or leverage it?)

Good question. I should go download a few and poke and them to see what makes them tick. But I'm all but certain that they're native code. Seeing as how stuff like COM are designed for native use (and .NET's interaction with it is hackish at best) and any in-process code with a native host practically has to be native, native not only would be the easiest solution, but may be the only solution. But I'll get back to you on that at a later point. :p

[phailyoor]

It's full screen, but hardly touch oriented. I can still use a mouse and keyboard in Metro apps just as I can on the desktop.

Except that the experience is like crap. Does anyone use a mouse on the iPad? NO. The UX is designed ONLY for touch, and the fact that the mouse "works" does not mean that it works well in any way.

[VivM]

Developing functional apps takes time. He has to switch to Desktop in order to use Microsoft Office because there isn't currently a "Metro" version of Microsoft Office. I'm pretty confident one of the reasons for that is because they haven't had time to create a "Metro" version of Microsoft Office that is either just as functional as the Desktop version or nearly as functional as it, and I can think of a few reasons as to why they would have decided against releasing a much-less-functional version.

I don't think you can reasonably slam the new experience for being "less functional," in terms of what developers are capable of producing, until developers have had time to develop versions of their apps that are just as functional as the current Desktop versions. It's possible that Photoshop could be created for the new experience, but many people are assuming that is impossible. I say, wait and see exactly how powerful the new platform could be for developers to develop functional and useful productivity apps. I may be wrong, but I feel it's wrong to assume when none of us know for sure.

So, wait a second. Maybe, in theory, after many years, developers could make Office/Photoshop/AutoCAD/etc for Metro that is as functional as today's desktop version. (MS knew that Metro was coming at least two years ago, they have a large work force and plenty of cash, and they don't have a Metro Office that they can even demo at a conference, let along release as a public beta. One must wonder why.)

But... here comes the key question. Why? Everybody knows to use the existing versions. The code is mature and has long been debugged. Why should Quark or Autodesk or Adobe spend millions and millions of dollars (and years, since you're acknowledging that MS can't seem to redo Office in two years) reinventing the wheel for Metro?

Assuming there are benefits to Metro outside the new interface paradigm, i.e. sandboxing, app store, etc, why not implement those for desktop apps?

Again, what problem is the move to touch-friendly, full-screen apps fixing, other than MS' poor market share in tablets and the sense that 'OMG a huge chunk of Windows users are going to defect to iPads'?

[code65536]

I don't think you can reasonably slam the new experience for being "less functional," in terms of what developers are capable of producing, until developers have had time to develop versions of their apps that are just as functional as the current Desktop versions. It's possible that Photoshop could be created for the new experience, but many people are assuming that is impossible.

Those assumptions are not entirely out of line. There are some fundamental UI paradigms in Metro (*cough* ****-poor multitasking *cough*) and technical restrictions in Metro (severe restrictions of functionality that prevent things like Webkit of Gecko from working in Metro and that forces Google and Mozilla to use IE's backend and rendering engine with only superficial frontend changes if they ever want to dabble in Metro browsing) that make it quite impossible for certain "serious" (wait, web browsing is now considered "serious"?) applications to exist in Metroland.

[VivM]

Except that the experience is like crap. Does anyone use a mouse on the iPad? NO. The UX is designed ONLY for touch, and the fact that the mouse "works" does not mean that it works well in any way.

Exactly. To the person saying Android supports mouse, keyboard, and touch, are there any mouse/keyboard Android devices widely available? I'd think Android would suck used by a mouse.

[code65536]

The crazy bit is, he could offer a 'Win8 Curmudgeon Edition' with Metro put in its place (i.e. buried like Windows Media Center) for $75/license more, and laugh all the way to the bank.

I approve!

[phailyoor]

Exactly. To the person saying Android supports mouse, keyboard, and touch, are there any mouse/keyboard Android devices widely available? I'd think Android would suck used by a mouse.

Well, convertible android tabs use kb + trackpad. The trackpad is pretty much useless though, as the touchscreen is right there.

[Kyang]

Except that the experience is like crap. Does anyone use a mouse on the iPad? NO. The UX is designed ONLY for touch, and the fact that the mouse "works" does not mean that it works well in any way.

That's iOS, not Metro. Though, now that you mention it, I do wonder what, if anything, in Metro makes it any more usable by a mouse than iOS.

[phailyoor]

That's iOS, not Metro. Though, now that you mention it, I do wonder what, if anything, in Metro makes it any more usable by a mouse than iOS.

After using the iOS emulator to use an iPad with kb + mouse, I actually think iOS does a better job than metro.

MT is more useable-double tap home instead of hot corner, then move mouse down

no lame hidden app-bars-controls are usually onscreen all the time, for easy clicking

Scrolling works vertically on most apps

[Dot Matrix]

Assuming there are benefits to Metro outside the new interface paradigm, i.e. sandboxing, app store, etc, why not implement those for desktop apps?

Again, what problem is the move to touch-friendly, full-screen apps fixing, other than MS' poor market share in tablets and the sense that 'OMG a huge chunk of Windows users are going to defect to iPads'?

Assuming? Why would I assume, when I know for sure there are benefits?

You complain about the need to rewrite code, yet ask why not do that for desktop apps? Because Win32 would need to be rewritten, apps would need to be rewritten. Everything would need to be rewritten. Which is exactly what is being done in Windows 8. It's the start of a completely rewritten and revamped UX that not only benefits touch users, but also plays nice with non-desktop, desktops.

Developing functional apps takes time. He has to switch to Desktop in order to use Microsoft Office because there isn't currently a "Metro" version of Microsoft Office. I'm pretty confident one of the reasons for that is because they haven't had time to create a "Metro" version of Microsoft Office that is either just as functional as the Desktop version or nearly as functional as it, and I can think of a few reasons as to why they would have decided against releasing a much-less-functional version.

I don't think you can reasonably slam the new experience for being "less functional," in terms of what developers are capable of producing, until developers have had time to develop versions of their apps that are just as functional as the current Desktop versions. It's possible that Photoshop could be created for the new experience, but many people are assuming that is impossible. I say, wait and see exactly how powerful the new platform could be for developers to develop functional and useful productivity apps. I may be wrong, but I feel it's wrong to assume when none of us know for sure.

Remember, there is the OneNote MX preview app. If you ask me, it's a sign of things to come for the rest of the Office Suite.

[phailyoor]

Assuming? Why would I assume, when I know for sure there are benefits?

You complain about the need to rewrite code, yet ask why not do that for desktop apps? Because Win32 would need to be rewritten, apps would need to be rewritten. Everything would need to be rewritten.

If a new runtime was provided for the desktop, then the benefits might acutally outweight the WTF factor, and make rewriting worth it. As it is now, there are a lot of reasons to NOT rewrite code, and only a few that promote it.

Remember, there is the OneNote MX preview app. If you ask me, it's a sign of things to come for the rest of the Office Suite.

Like the one in android and iOS? I don't see full MS office on those, and onenote has been around for a long time.

[nub]

Metro Photoshop! Metro Word! Metro Visual Studio!

[code65536]

If anything those are shortcoming of Win32, not the desktop in itself. Ever noticed how OS X doesn't suffer from registry entry issues and how App Store apps are sandboxed?

Nah, they're not even shortcomings of Win32.

If Microsoft wanted, they could create a "Trusted Application" initiative. Developers who want to participate must comply with certain guidelines regarding interface consistency, proper good-neighbor interaction with other applications on the system (including restrictions on what registry changes a program can make outside of its own little private space in the registry), stuff like that. Programs that pass get a special digital signature from Microsoft, much like WHQL, and can optionally participate in a Microsoft-run store and even in Windows Update.

And then Microsoft can plaster big scary warnings to users encouraging them not to install untrusted programs or even go as far as requiring a user to change a default setting in order to allow untrusted programs to run. And if Microsoft kept the price of this low, I think a lot of developers would participate, and you can get a perfectly clean, manicured ecosystem that's friendly to newbies (and still acceptable to us power users as long as we retain the right to disable any restrictions).

Eh, basically, have Microsoft do with userland what they already do with in the kernelspace with WHQL. No need for Metro to enter into any of this, and you can attain the same degree of orderliness.

So why isn't Microsoft doing this? Metro bootstrap, baby.

And all this talk about porting to Metro. Sure, that's fine if you got a little toy app (which, really, is what most of the crap in Android/Apple/MSFT App Stores are), but if you have a serious program like, oh, an IDE with tens of millions of lines of code and that was slowly developed and evolved over decades, that is not something that you can just port (with any acceptable degree of quality and feature preservation) in a year. Or two. Or three.

And OneNote MX does not count. Its features are pretty bare compared to OneNote, and, hello? Porting a program that emulates a pad of paper to a tablet interface is not exactly a huge leap. OneNote was designed from its very beginning to be touch-friendly. It's like saying that the Pope was able to convert an Anglican to Catholicism. I'll be more impressed if he can do the same to Dawkins.

[phailyoor]

Nah, they're not even shortcomings of Win32.

If Microsoft wanted, they could create a "Trusted Application" initiative. Developers who want to participate must comply with certain guidelines regarding interface consistency, proper good-neighbor interaction with other applications on the system (including restrictions on what registry changes a program can make outside of its own little private space in the registry), stuff like that. Programs that pass get a special digital signature from Microsoft, much like WHQL, and can optionally participate in a Microsoft-run store and even in Windows Update.

And then Microsoft can plaster big scary warnings to users encouraging them not to install untrusted programs or even go as far as requiring a user to change a default setting in order to allow untrusted programs to run. And if Microsoft kept the price of this low, I think a lot of developers would participate, and you can get a perfectly clean, manicured ecosystem that's friendly to newbies (and still acceptable to us power users as long as we retain the right to disable any restrictions).

Sounds just like what apple did, and they did it quite successfully. It's one of the few apple things I approve of. Letting devs do whatever they want, but giving a little incentive to do things right.

[Ottawa Gamerz]

if u are a programer go back to 7 or mac

now im ottawa_gamerz as u can see my spelling sucks my grammer blows i dont know where all the dumb ...''';;; go but

MY POINT THIS u can read it and what i say is in english so for the love of god STOP POINTING it out because u wounder why people

goes to his school and shoots up the place u got nutting nice to say just fuk off if the sides where turned i dont care what and how it looks like as long as i can read it. ALL BULLIES IN SCHOOLS ONLINE need to be shot or asses kicked because no one ever listens to the one thats getting bullied they just turn a blind eye and while u do that the kid get stressed pizzed off and ur surprized that here he comes with a gun and u die! so just stop it

[Dot Matrix]

If a new runtime was provided for the desktop, then the benefits might acutally outweight the WTF factor, and make rewriting worth it. As it is now, there are a lot of reasons to NOT rewrite code, and only a few that promote it.

Like the one in android and iOS? I don't see full MS office on those, and onenote has been around for a long time.

So, just because WinRT bypasses the desktop, it's bad? The Start Menu was killed off and re-written because Metro apps had no way of interacting with Metro Apps.

I have seen no difference in OneNote MX from the way I used the desktop OneNote.

Nah, they're not even shortcomings of Win32.

If Microsoft wanted, they could create a "Trusted Application" initiative. Developers who want to participate must comply with certain guidelines regarding interface consistency, proper good-neighbor interaction with other applications on the system (including restrictions on what registry changes a program can make outside of its own little private space in the registry), stuff like that. Programs that pass get a special digital signature from Microsoft, much like WHQL, and can optionally participate in a Microsoft-run store and even in Windows Update.

And then Microsoft can plaster big scary warnings to users encouraging them not to install untrusted programs or even go as far as requiring a user to change a default setting in order to allow untrusted programs to run. And if Microsoft kept the price of this low, I think a lot of developers would participate, and you can get a perfectly clean, manicured ecosystem that's friendly to newbies (and still acceptable to us power users as long as we retain the right to disable any restrictions).

Eh, basically, have Microsoft do with userland what they already do with in the kernelspace with WHQL. No need for Metro to enter into any of this, and you can attain the same degree of orderliness.

So why isn't Microsoft doing this? Metro bootstrap, baby.

Sounds good... But where are the Win32 developers? Last I checked, they jumped to mobile platforms. When's the last time Win32 got a killer app that used up to date APIs, and took advantage of new Windows features?

if u are a programer go back to 7 or mac

now im ottawa_gamerz as u can see my spelling sucks my grammer blows i dont know where all the dumb ...''';;; go but

MY POINT THIS u can read it and what i say is in english so for the love of god STOP POINTING it out because u wounder why people

goes to his school and shoots up the place u got nutting nice to say just fuk off if the sides where turned i dont care what and how it looks like as long as i can read it. ALL BULLIES IN SCXHOOLS ONLINE need to be shot or asses kicked because no one ever listens to the one thats getting bullied they just turn a blind eye and while u do that the kid get stressed pizzed and ur surprized that here he comes with a gun and u die! so just stop it

What. The. Hell.

[Ottawa Gamerz]

So, just because WinRT bypasses the desktop, it's bad? The Start Menu was killed off and re-written because Metro apps had no way of interacting with Metro Apps.

I have seen no difference in OneNote MX from the way I used the desktop OneNote.

Sounds good... But where are the Win32 developers? Last I checked, they jumped to mobile platforms. When's the last time Win32 got a killer app that used up to date APIs, and took advantage of new Windows features?

What. The. Hell.

if u woundering y i did that people keep pointing it out to me on here so maybe some one will learn to just read and up shut