Recommended Posts

Windows RT is NOT a phone OS. It is much more capable than WP8.

I never said it was. Why are you so touchy about what is and isn't a phone OS? I don't understand why WP can't join the club, especially considering your penchant for ARM. Four inches to forty, shouldn't that be the motto? For such a fan, why do you hate RT and WP so?

What makes RT not a phone OS and Win8Pro not a tablet one? Isn't that the trade for this do-over? Isn't that our advantage? Each format gives up a little, lets say bias in PGHammer lingo, to have the same 'stuff' across all.

I know some of you guys love Windows 8 but dang, some people just don't like Windows 8 no matter what. You guys need to accept that.

I understand that, but I was replying to Order_66.

He was talking about the abundant amount of people coming into his store complaining about Win8.

MS missed to ball completely by only adding that little into (move your cursor into any corner) at the initial setup.

They should have done a much more extensive demo, or give little hints like they did in earlier versions of Windows, that alone would have helped a lot.

He was not talking about your average IT pro, but about normal people. I still believe they just follow blindly what the tech press or their IT pro friends tell them to like.

So with a little training of your staff and a positive attitude you can sell Windows 8 easily to the average person.

That was the only point I was making

...

I'd say a week before I really got the hang of it and now, I don't miss the Start Menu at all.

Here are a couple tips I did at home and work to improve my productivity:

  • Learned to love Start Menu search more than I did in Vista and 7! There are 3 ways to access it, WinKey+F, mouse to the top right for Charms Bar, or tap WinKey to get to the Start Screen and just start typing.
  • Install Adobe Reader or your desktop PDF reader of choice and set it as default (avoids Modern app)
  • Set Windows Photo Viewer as default picture viewer (avoids Modern app)
  • Brought my trusty custom JumpList from Win7 to Win8, it's simple and very effective (IMO) http://en.www.ali.dj/jumplist-launcher/

I can spend most of my time in desktop mode uninterrupted until I choose to go to the Start Screen.

I know some of you guys love Windows 8 but dang, some people just don't like Windows 8 no matter what. You guys need to accept that.

Accepting it isn't the problem, Growled - it's when your reasons are pretty much the same ones that had hobbled previous OS failures (some of which were competition for NT, like Solaris and OS/2) that has me shaking my head in utter disbelief.

None of you are stupid - you can't be in IT and even survive. Most of you are also quite familiar with the competition that NT has had over the years (including Solaris and OS/2) - and most certainly are more familiar with both than I am - and the internal politics within Sun and IBM respectively that led to their failure to launch (especially since both, in fact, predate NT). Yet you are insisting that Microsoft make the same mistakes -knowing perfectly well what would happen to Microsoft (and Windows) if they did. I'm not even asking that you even LIKE the direction that Microsoft is heading.

I'm not exactly sanguine over the direction Microsoft is going myself - however, I do, at least get WHY they are going in that direction. I can no more live on the Royal Barge on the Egyptian River and make demands on the Royal Oarspersons than can Microsoft - or any person that makes a living, career, or even simply enjoys IT. You aren't Canute with his broom, attempting to sweep back the sea - and all it got HIM was wet. You get over the change in direction, accept it - and move on, already.

A phone OS is a poor tablet OS. I already have a Lumia running WP8, so why limit myself to such a crappy UX. when I can do better with Windows 8? Operating systems should never be upscaled. Go upscale a photograph and see just what that does to the quality of the photo. It's the same principal when upscaling operating systems.

Ok so you say upscaling an OS is bad, which is something I actually agree with.

So by that logic, why in the hell is MS trying to upscale a tablet UI onto a desktop PC? Same analogy as your photograph one. It performs great on a tablet, but on a full size desktop PC with mouse and keyboard it is a horribly clunky experience, not even remotely smooth or intuitive. However it DOES make sense for touch.

I never said it was. Why are you so touchy about what is and isn't a phone OS? I don't understand why WP can't join the club, especially considering your penchant for ARM. Four inches to forty, shouldn't that be the motto? For such a fan, why do you hate RT and WP so?

What makes RT not a phone OS and Win8Pro not a tablet one? Isn't that the trade for this do-over? Isn't that our advantage? Each format gives up a little, lets say bias in PGHammer lingo, to have the same 'stuff' across all.

Windows 8 Pro is a *superset OS* - it supports more than just tablets.

Nobody - not Dot, or myself, or anyone that has posted in favor of ModernUI - has attempted to pigeonhole ModernUI, let alone Windows 8 itself. That has been done entirely by the critics of ModernUI.

Do you realize, that by deliberately doing such pigeonholing, is that you are ALSO pigeonholing the rest of the Windows UI - the carryover from 7, in other words - as desktop-only?

Most of you know that Windows has deliberately resisted such pigeonholing - Windows NT, in fact, has thrown up the greatest such resistance.

Also, here's something that you may want to take a look at - every operating system that has STUCK to such pigeonholing - regardless of from which direction the pressure to pigeonhole becomes - has failed or become niche-bound.

Windows - and especially NT - has gotten to its position because it has resisted being pigeonholed. iOS has advanced beyond music players. Android has advanced beyond phones. In other words, Google and Apple are following the trend of - surprisingly - Windows in general, and NT in particular by NOT staying niche-bound. (You may be able to survive in a niche - however, you certainly don't thrive in one. In fact, look at OS X - unlike iOS, Apple has deliberately kept it inside the closed-OS niche - and it is costing OS X. OS X is surviving - however, thriving it is not.)

Further, x86 tablets exist - and they began before Windows 8 did. (Yes - Windows 8 created a drive for more such tablets - however, they predate it.) Then there are convertibles (such as Lenovo's Yoga series, ASUS' Transformer series, and Samsung's ATIV). They have features of both tablets and "conventional" portables - not exactly fitting into a traditional niche, do they? As hardware has adapted and changed, Windows in general, and NT in particular, has followed along with and embraced those changes - that is utterly beyond what any of us (including me) would have even dared consider.

I don't own a tablet - in fact, I have little interest in purchasing one. However, I have family and friends that have - and who is the "resident geek" that gets called upon when their tablet (regardless of what OS it is running) is having issues? Yes - me. That - in and of itself - means that sticking fingers in ears and trying to whistle up more oarspersons for the Royal Barge is not even close to being an option. That ALSO means that, regardless of what my personal feelings may be, I'd better be prepared to deal with the tablet onslaught. Being in IT means adapting to changes - even if the changes are not necessarily the ones we have hoped for. It means rolling with the flow and getting over it, and moving on.

I'm not asking that you necessarily LIKE the changes involved - some of the changes that ModernUI creates leave ME a little queasy, to be honest. (And such changes have not a thing to do with the Start menu, or the excision thereof.) However, being in denial is no more an option for you than it is for me - and if you CAN'T deal, for whatever reason, get out of IT and find yourself a new line of work. While change is not always how we'd like it, change is a constant.

Places like control panel were stupid to get too, also searching for apps never really worked for me also (It wouldn't show or would show the wrong app)

control panel - type control pael and wulla metro control panel, u want it in desktop win+x and wulla a whole list of power commands

Ok so you say upscaling an OS is bad, which is something I actually agree with.

So by that logic, why in the hell is MS trying to upscale a tablet UI onto a desktop PC? Same analogy as your photograph one. It performs great on a tablet, but on a full size desktop PC with mouse and keyboard it is a horribly clunky experience, not even remotely smooth or intuitive. However it DOES make sense for touch.

ModernUI is a part of Windows 8 Pro for those neither fish OR fowl devices called "convertibles" - that actually started with Windows 7; the very fact that it also is usable with mice and keyboards (and therefore on desktops) is gravy. It seems *clunky* on desktops because it is *foreign* to our experiences. Chris123NT, you should know as well as any of us how a change in desktop experience can roil a user base - how easy was the adjustment from NT 3.x to NT4, or from NT4 to Windows 2000?

Convertibles (both ARM and x86) support multiple methods of interaction - touch, keyboards, and mice. That means that support for all those multiple methods MUST be part of the operating system. Touch support in Windows 7 was, to put it bluntly, horrible - application support for touch was even worse. (That is, in fact, why touch support on desktops never really took off pre-8.) Android and iOS supported all three (in Android's case, 3.x had better support for interaction OTHER than touch than 2.x - which was why Google demanded 3.x on tablets to get its official blessing) while 7, despite a higher licensing fee, did not (it failed miserably at touch).

Segue to today. Tablets are selling - iOS, Android, and (in a surprise to doubtless all the doubters) Windows-based tablets (both RT and 8-based). Included with those tablets and slates are convertibles (Android-based, RT-based, and 8-based). Convertibles are to traditional hardware what Android, iOS, and Windows (especially NT) are to traditional operating systems - they laugh at convention. If anything, Windows NT is the least-conventional operating system in not merely Microsoft's history, but in the history of all operating systems. Windows NT didn't follow the trend - it set, and to a large part IS the goldarned trend. Therefore, ModernUI (or something like it) was predictable when the first convertibles happened.

Here's something else that needs to seriously be thought on - are desktops not selling due to something that is missing outside the OS? Where are the desktops that support touch? How well do those that exist sell? Touch-supporting desktops aren't cheap - they still have a price premium compared to conventional desktops. Could the non-sales of Windows 8-powered desktops be due to not necessarily something missing in Windows 8, but due to touch support being missing in the hardware available, or the price for it being too high? The economy is only now recovering - and said recovery is slow and shaky. Tablets, slates, and convertibles are cheaper than traditional desktops - better yet, they all (or mostly) support multiple methods of interaction - favoring none. If you aren''t used to touch interaction, a tablet is cheaper to learn it than a touch-enabled desktop. Even if you have to add a keyboard and mouse, it often remains cheaper than a desktop - in some cases, cheaper than even a traditional notebook - and, other than screen size, may well be more usable (due to longer battery life and the aforementioned touch support, which is often not included in traditional notebooks). How are traditional notebooks (regardless of OS) selling? (Apple's own latest sales numbers may be a different sort of tell - no MacBook supports touch. Are iPad sales eating into MacBook sales? Are consumers giving a different sort of message - if the OS supports touch, than the hardware had better support touch? Do we have a Vista or Windows 2000 Professional situation - where the OS is outstripping the hardware it is running on?)

I tried Windows 8 for 4 months and I never came to like it.

Sure I tried installing software which brings the Start Menu back, but I couldn't avoid the Metro interface entirely. What annoyed me the most is that Windows 8 has 2 interfaces, Metro and Desktop, if it only had one of then (even only the Metro) I might like it or at least get used to it.

I've recently switched OS to Ubuntu Gnome which I really like, but maybe I will try Windows 8 again when 8.1 is released, if they change anything significantly.

i came from Mac, with VM on win7 for some stupid client's excel with macros... Anyway, after reading so many bad reviews, i did want to give it a try and yes, i started with a very pessimistic feeling on how stupid would that be. nevertheless, i went ahead, installed it, and while in VM was a pain (active corners, not really as they border out to the mac), when i did bootcamp, took me a day to get used to the new start page, metro, etc. While i may still stick to outlook (for business reasons) and a few old-desktop styles apps, definitely i loved win8 and it's now my only OS with Mac.

  • Like 2

I know some of you guys love Windows 8 but dang, some people just don't like Windows 8 no matter what. You guys need to accept that.

I guess personally I am fine with people not liking it - what I don't like is when posters here start extrapolating their opinion to "normal consumer" stuff. A good example here is Order_66 who has probably typed the words "hostile" and "UI" more than they were printed in all the dictionaries combined.

I like Windows 8 for all improvements it brings and I hate to seeing a really fine OS crucified because some people don't like it. This is a very deja vu of what happened to Vista. The overall decline of PC market is only adding fuel to the fire (not to mention that PC sales have plummeted under 7 too but people conveniently ignore that).

Ok so you say upscaling an OS is bad, which is something I actually agree with.

So by that logic, why in the hell is MS trying to upscale a tablet UI onto a desktop PC? Same analogy as your photograph one. It performs great on a tablet, but on a full size desktop PC with mouse and keyboard it is a horribly clunky experience, not even remotely smooth or intuitive. However it DOES make sense for touch.

The Start Screen isn't a tablet only UI. I don't understand how having a dashboard on my PC suddenly makes it a tablet? The desktop is still there.

Hmm I dunno, move to top right or bottom left, Settings>Control Panel.

Or you just WIn Key + Type Control Panel Item and just choose "Settings" as the search filter.

I wouldn't say it's "difficult" it's not harder then it was before, it's just that you and others are not used to change, and rather then adapt, people choose to abandon and go back to their old ways they are comfortable with

nope.

http://www.zdnet.com/from-windows-8-to-windows-7-why-i-downgraded-7000006922/

Interesting, and I quote:

Lastly, the reason I disliked Windows 8 as much as I did was the lack of familiarity.

and...

I get Windows 8. It's not difficult to use; it's just unenjoyable to use, for me.

He makes this point repeatedly, that it is not unusable, just that it is unfamiliar and he doesn't like it. Kind of goes against what a lot of Windows 8 haters on this forum seem to be saying.

  • Like 2

I did a fresh install of Windows 7, it feels to good to go back to a comfortable enjoyable OS

humanz, comfortable and enjoyable isn't the issue (the enjoyment usually is DUE to the comfort factor when it comes to operating systems). What IS the issue is when you start extrapolating your specific (and possibly unique) issues to everybody.

  • Like 1

You get over the change in direction, accept it - and move on, already.

Almost every customer I work with is using XP, with a few now just moving to Windows 7. I doubt I ever have to worry about supporting 8. With only a 3.x% market share after months on the market it'll be a while before I have to worry it anyway.

Almost every customer I work with is using XP, with a few now just moving to Windows 7. I doubt I ever have to worry about supporting 8. With only a 3.x% market share after months on the market it'll be a while before I have to worry it anyway.

So you don't plan to support Windows 8.1 or above? The changes made here aren't going away any time soon.

So you don't plan to support Windows 8.1 or above? The changes made here aren't going away any time soon.

Dot, he was referring to the folks he is supporting - lots of XP, and some 7. If they are enterprise customers, they are going to be largely unwilling to upgrade (whether they are under a SoftwareAssurance or other enterprise contract or not) due to training costs - I can't exactly fault enterprises for being unwilling to spend on training for a new OS when there are other priorities. Then there IS the issue that there are a ton of XP users - how much of the HARDWARE is just plain deprecated, and couldn't even run Windows 7, let alone 8? If the hardware can't run 7, it can't run 8 (especially since the reverse is also likely true) - that means that just in replacing XP with 7, there are hardware costs that WILL be incurred. If you want to avoid training costs, going to 7 (not 8) is a safe bet - and one thing enterprises like to do, especially in a shaky economy, is play it safe. I get that much.

My issue with the critics is the smoke-blowing and outright dishonesty over the reasons for their criticism of either Windows 8 in general, or ModernUI in particular. If you are uncomfortable with the UI change, say so - there's no harm in that, and I won't hate you for it; just don't blow smoke up my posterior and try to pigeonhole the UI as "touch-only" or "touch-first" - that is no more true of ModernUI than it is of Android of today.

  • 5 weeks later...

Right from the start I thought that the tiles concept was a bad idea for the pc. Removing the start button? Even worse. Now with Windows 8.1 the start button is back. In windows 8.2 they'll probably get rid of the tiles. By the time they'll get to Windows 9 they'll relaunch Windows 7 and everyone will be happy.

Right from the start I thought that the tiles concept was a bad idea for the pc. Removing the start button? Even worse. Now with Windows 8.1 the start button is back. In windows 8.2 they'll probably get rid of the tiles. By the time they'll get to Windows 9 they'll relaunch Windows 7 and everyone will be happy.

I really doubt that they would go back. If anything Microsoft is going to evolve on the Start Screen. As with OS X right now how much more feature complete can you make the desktop environment? They can add minor tweaks, skins, and improvements, but thats about it. The way I see it, Microsoft can either keep Windows going on this hybrid approach OR separate things out. They could have gone the route of Windows Phone OS for phones and small tablets, Windows RT (no desktop) for larger tablets and Windows 8 for desktops. However again with that approach where does that leave the desktop OS, how much more could it really be improved

I have been happy with WIN8 since Beta and love it now and can't wait for the official 8.1 release.

I was skyping today and had the METRO UI Skype on the left hand side 1/4 view and the Desktop on 3/4 view snapped together and what a treat :) Now with more control coming it will be even greater.

Embrace what is already familiar and add in a few new UI touches and it isn't all that complicated to understand or get used to. The Desktop is still the Desktop so I don't understand the in and out of Metro. The Metro to me is a larger Start Menu customized to how I like it. I love reading news from it. On the Surface Pro its a real treat. I have shown people that mostly used their iPads for reading news and the way the Metro UI lays out the News Feed is very nice. Can't wait for the 2560x1440 screens hit. The 1080p is nice but more is better I believe :)

I've been using it for a week now and I still feel pretty much lost.

I miss the start menu! All I did there is used the search and click My Computer but I keep going to the corner of the screen searching for it.

Metro is ..idk, not for me. Why the apps takes a few seconds to load? Sure, every application we use takes a few seconds to load but with metro the stupid splash screen stops me from doing any thing else. It's like metro takes me to a completely other place in windows with its full screen etc' and i don't like it. Makes me feel disconnected.

How much time it took you to adjust to windows 8?

I am having trouble understanding why Microsoft would make a tablet-designed OS global for PCs. It just doesn't make sense. I mean, of course you can click each tile and scroll and whatnot, but these tiles would be the equivalent to Apple releasing an official OS primarily based on the iOS home screen.

So, I had come to the conclusion that I didn't like the new start screen so I disabled it entirely and added the classic start button. You can customize every last bit of it, and disable the start screen with this program. http://www.classicshell.net/ Good luck!

I am having trouble understanding why Microsoft would make a tablet-designed OS global for PCs. It just doesn't make sense. I mean, of course you can click each tile and scroll and whatnot, but these tiles would be the equivalent to Apple releasing an official OS primarily based on the iOS home screen.

Not to disagree (and I am not a Windows 8 fan at all) but I don't see the start menu as being primarily tablet designed. The fans of the start menu say they can maneuver in it faster than they can with the old menu. I can't but I'm a old fuddy duddy it seems.

So, I had come to the conclusion that I didn't like the new start screen so I disabled it entirely and added the classic start button. You can customize every last bit of it, and disable the start screen with this program. http://www.classicshell.net/ Good luck!

I love me some Classic Shell. :)

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Posts

    • The quantum search for Time's origin had an equally mind-boggling conclusion by Sayan Sen Image by Steve Johnson via Pexels A theoretical study from researchers at the University of Surrey suggested that the direction of time may not be fundamentally fixed in certain quantum systems. The work, published in Scientific Reports, examined how the “arrow of time” could emerge from microscopic physics and found that time-reversal symmetry can remain intact even in models used to describe processes such as energy loss and thermalisation. The arrow of time refers to the observed one-way direction from past to future in everyday life. In macroscopic processes, this is easy to see. Spilled milk spreads across a table and does not gather back into a glass, and heat flows from hotter objects to colder ones. These processes shape the common sense idea that time moves in a single direction. However, at the level of fundamental physics, many equations do not prefer a direction of time. Time-reversal symmetry means that the same physical laws can describe a system whether time moves forward or backward. This has made it difficult to explain why irreversible behaviour appears in the large-scale world even when the underlying rules do not require it. Dr Andrea Rocco, Associate Professor in Physics and Mathematical Biology at the University of Surrey, described this contrast: "One way to explain this is when you look at a process like spilt milk spreading across a table, it's clear that time is moving forward. But if you were to play that in reverse, like a movie, you'd immediately know something was wrong – it would be hard to believe milk could just gather back into a glass. However, there are processes, such as the motion of a pendulum, that look just as believable in reverse. The puzzle is that, at the most fundamental level, the laws of physics resemble the pendulum; they do not account for irreversible processes. Our findings suggest that while our common experience tells us that time only moves one way, we are just unaware that the opposite direction would have been equally possible." The study focused on open quantum systems, which are quantum systems that interact with a surrounding environment. This environment, often described as a heat bath, can exchange energy and information with the system. The researchers used this framework to study how a direction of time might appear even when the underlying physics does not enforce one. A key part of the analysis involved the Markov approximation. This is a simplification used in many models where the system is assumed not to retain memory of its past states. The idea is that changes depend only on the current state, not on earlier history. This is commonly used when studying thermalisation, which is the process where a system settles into equilibrium with its environment. The study also used concepts such as master equations, including the Lindblad and Pauli equations, which describe how probabilities of different quantum states change over time. Another related model discussed was quantum Brownian motion, which describes the random-like movement of a quantum particle interacting continuously with its environment. In these descriptions, a “memory kernel” can appear, which is a mathematical term that accounts for how past states influence current behaviour. The researchers found that applying the Markov approximation did not break time-reversal symmetry. Even when the system interacted with an effectively infinite heat bath, the resulting equations of motion remained symmetric in time. This meant that the same mathematical description could, in principle, run forward or backward in time without contradiction. The study further showed that standard frameworks used in open quantum systems, including quantum Brownian motion and master equations like the Lindblad and Pauli forms, could be written in a time-symmetric way. These equations are typically used to describe processes that look irreversible, such as dissipation and thermalisation, but the results suggested they can also be interpreted as allowing evolution in both time directions. Thomas Guff, Research Fellow in Quantum Thermodynamics, said: "The surprising part of this project was that even after making the standard simplifying assumption to our equations describing open quantum systems, the equations still behaved the same way whether the system was moving forwards or backwards in time. When we carefully worked through the maths, we found that this behaviour had to be the case because a key part of the equation, the "memory kernel," is symmetrical in time. We also found a small but important detail which is usually overlooked – a time discontinuous factor emerged that kept the time-symmetry property intact. It’s unusual to see such a mathematical mechanism in a physics equation because it's not continuous, and it was very surprising to see it appear so naturally." The researchers also noted that deriving a one-way arrow of time from time-reversal symmetric microscopic dynamics remains an open problem across fields such as thermodynamics, statistical mechanics, particle physics, and cosmology. Their results suggested that some standard descriptions of irreversible behaviour in open quantum systems may be better understood using a time-symmetric formulation of Markovianity. According to the study, processes such as thermalisation, which are usually treated as irreversible, could in theory be described in a way that allows evolution in either time direction under the same rules. This does not imply that time reversal occurs in everyday life, but rather that the underlying equations do not strictly enforce a single direction. Overall, the findings suggested that the perceived direction of time may emerge from how physical systems are modelled and approximated, rather than from a fundamental asymmetry in the laws themselves. The researchers noted that this perspective could have implications for ongoing work in quantum mechanics, thermodynamics, and cosmology on the origin of time’s arrow. Source: University of Surrey, Nature This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing
    • A bit premature... 100% Marketing. Bizarre.
    • A $300 price hike is insane! No one is going to want to pay that much!
    • Since the 1st one flopped, there is really no reason to make another one. It's just losing money left and right.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Reacting Well
      BizSAR earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • First Post
      AndreaB earned a badge
      First Post
    • Week One Done
      Huge Trailer earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      Classifyskilleducation earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      eurospharma62 earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      581
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      182
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      75
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      73
    5. 5
      neufuse
      64
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!