Just how many people hate Windows 8?

[Noir Angel]

And because MS is trying to teach people not to add **** to the desktop. firstly when you have 100+ icons on the desktop, you can't find them. secondly you have to close everything to get to the desktop making it the least accessible place to put stuff. and it's not a launcher.

I don't need mindless hand holding, I am capable of managing my own file system thanks. One of the reasons I avoid Apple stuff is because of the ridiculous over simplification of common tasks.

[Detection]

Or..

Something more current.. most of all computers now come with a laser mouse. Also, a mouse is very easy to replace.

Yea exactly, and those new mice can move across a full HD screen or two much faster than an arm > hand > finger can, which was the point we were getting at

[+LogicalApex MVC]

this is exactly the reason I hate it.

because its taking a leaf out of the apple book of lets dumb down everything so it just "Works for the masses"

so as a user who has multiple programs open, with heavy reliance on mouse, dual monitor setup etc. windows 8 is pathetic for the desktop.

This is all a push to reduce computing to appliance like status. Where users become accustomed to being walled in and using computers for singular tasks. There is no catering to users like us with triple head setups and a need to multitask because they are hoping we'll go away. Overall, this whole trend is bad for consumers and bad for the technology ecosystem. It was one thing when Apple was doing it and not really dominating it is very concerning now that Microsoft has jumped on the bandwagon.

[fusi0n]

Yea exactly, and those new mice can move across a full HD screen or two much faster than an arm > hand > finger can, which was the point we were getting at

oh, well.. good job then.. lol I guess i'm irritable due to lack of sleep =) sorry

[MorganX]

Or..

Something more current.. most of all computers now come with a laser mouse. Also, a mouse is very easy to replace.

Pass the Q-Tips and alcohol, do they even make those anymore?

It was one thing when Apple was doing it and not really dominating it is very concerning now that Microsoft has jumped on the bandwagon.

Microsoft is going through a period of lack of leadership, vision, and being disconnected from their consumers due to finding themselves so far behind the mobile growth trend, it may be unrecoverable. They, in desperation, are trying to leverage their desktop dominance to make inroads in those mobile market segments.

1) They need new, connected, dynamic leadership.

2) They must continue, as Blue leaks suggest, to listen to, and address the complaints of their base and respond as much as possible.

[fusi0n]

Pass the Q-Tips and alcohol, do they even make those anymore

Unfortunately yes, I ordered 100 from dell that where suppose to be laser.. and they had balls..

..lol balls

[Dashel]

Like anythign that requires right clicking or click and drag.

Pray explain that one.

And because MS is trying to teach people not to add **** to the desktop. firstly when you have 100+ icons on the desktop, you can't find them. secondly you have to close everything to get to the desktop making it the least accessible place to put stuff. and it's not a launcher.

Several things wrong with that: Start Screen creates more icon bloat because more must be pinned (remember, it can show 'more stuff' derka); no harder to locate a desktop icon than start screen because that IS the philosophy it uses (Desktop and Start are combined); close everything to see Desktop, really? Did you Mac loving keyboard shortcut Nazis forget about Win+D or the Show Desktop QL?

the right click function itself is more ... mmmm... powerful, in the classic start menu, that doesn't make it better, not when it's something hardly anyone used. and as a launcher the start screen is much better than the start menu

Again a false comparison. The taskbar is clearly superior for Desktop app launching and is the same as Desktop shortcuts without the 'flip'.

Well said Logical Apex, I agree 100%.

[AJerman]

Yea exactly, and those new mice can move across a full HD screen or two much faster than an arm > hand > finger can, which was the point we were getting at

I think you guys are missing the point with the speed discussion. I don't particularly think a mouse is any more fast than my finger. There's no issue with the speed of your hand, it's the precision. With a mouse, I can click small links, and in turn, I can have more links on my screen at once, more information, more useful use of space. With touch, I have big giant buttons so my finger that probably hits around 25-50 square pixels can be accurate vs a mouse that hits within 5 square pixels or so of where you want to be with a simple flick. Touch has absolutely no real use in advanced computing, but it's very exciting if used correctly. Unfortunately, Windows 8 is a perfect example of trying to force it where it doesn't fit. Now when I'm using it with a mouse, I have pointlessly massive buttons that waste space and provide terrible UI layouts, even though I'll never have touch on that device.

[Dot Matrix]

True, but the risk Microsoft has is that they can be punished for using their Windows monopoly in the tablet market. In reality, since the Surface is a lot like a Nexus device Microsoft should have played it safe by allowing users a way to turn off secure boot (as I can on my Nexus 4) and load custom firmware. They could then ship it with it enabled, as Google does, and side step many of the concerns (and it may offer a reprieve if they get challenged).

You CAN turn off Secured Boot, on Intel PCs. If you're crying over the Surface RT, ask yourself this, why would I pay top dollar for a top line device, just to potentially break it by loading third party firmware?

[Detection]

I think you guys are missing the point with the speed discussion. I don't particularly think a mouse is any more fast than my finger. There's no issue with the speed of your hand, it's the precision. With a mouse, I can click small links, and in turn, I can have more links on my screen at once, more information, more useful use of space. With touch, I have big giant buttons so my finger that probably hits around 25-50 square pixels can be accurate vs a mouse that hits within 5 square pixels or so of where you want to be with a simple flick. Touch has absolutely no real use in advanced computing, but it's very exciting if used correctly. Unfortunately, Windows 8 is a perfect example of trying to force it where it doesn't fit. Now when I'm using it with a mouse, I have pointlessly massive buttons that waste space and provide terrible UI layouts, even though I'll never have touch on that device.

The speed issue was not started by us, Dot brought up his fact of the day that he could move his finger across the screen and click on things with his finger faster than he could using a mouse, we disagree.

[HawkMan]

Pray explain that one.

Several things wrong with that: Start Screen creates more icon bloat because more must be pinned (remember, it can show 'more stuff' derka); no harder to locate a desktop icon than start screen because that IS the philosophy it uses (Desktop and Start are combined); close everything to see Desktop, really? Did you Mac loving keyboard shortcut Nazis forget about Win+D or the Show Desktop QL?

Again a false comparison. The taskbar is clearly superior for Desktop app launching and is the same as Desktop shortcuts without the 'flip'.

Well said Logical Apex, I agree 100%.

My point as I explained clearly is that the start screen in general works better with mouse and keyboard than touch, it's not designed for touch,it designed to work well as touch and mouse controlled.

No the start screen does not create more icon bloat. It's for launching apps only. It allows you to organize apps in named groups. Big easily recognizable icons, and you ping your most used or favorite apps. Not every app on your computer. And if you think it no harder to locate a desktop icon than a start screen icon, you've never used the start screen.

The Superbar is a good launcher for a limited amount of always running apps. But you can't put all your favorite apps there. And how is it the same as desktop shortcuts....

[threetonesun]

This is all a push to reduce computing to appliance like status. Where users become accustomed to being walled in and using computers for singular tasks. There is no catering to users like us with triple head setups and a need to multitask because they are hoping we'll go away. Overall, this whole trend is bad for consumers and bad for the technology ecosystem. It was one thing when Apple was doing it and not really dominating it is very concerning now that Microsoft has jumped on the bandwagon.

I'm quite certain that in OSX you can use Expose, virtual desktops, and multiple monitors. If that's not enough to handle all of your multi-tasking skillz, perhaps you should write your own operating system.

Windows has not caught up to what OSX offers (or Linux, by using extensions), but quite frankly given the option between running programs which minimize to the (small) taskbar, or ones which exist off screen in full screen, I'd much rather have the full screen.

[Dot Matrix]

I think you guys are missing the point with the speed discussion. I don't particularly think a mouse is any more fast than my finger. There's no issue with the speed of your hand, it's the precision. With a mouse, I can click small links, and in turn, I can have more links on my screen at once, more information, more useful use of space. With touch, I have big giant buttons so my finger that probably hits around 25-50 square pixels can be accurate vs a mouse that hits within 5 square pixels or so of where you want to be with a simple flick. Touch has absolutely no real use in advanced computing, but it's very exciting if used correctly. Unfortunately, Windows 8 is a perfect example of trying to force it where it doesn't fit. Now when I'm using it with a mouse, I have pointlessly massive buttons that waste space and provide terrible UI layouts, even though I'll never have touch on that device.

Even without touch, bigger elements on screen are needed, unless you plan on hitting tinier and tinier objects as screen resolutions get bigger. Which is why I'm a fan of the Start Screen. Even on my 1680x1050 screen, 32x32 and 16x16 icons were worthless. You couldn't see them, let alone hit them with a precise hit.

[AJerman]

The speed issue was not started by us, Dot brought up his fact of the day that he could move his finger across the screen and click on things with his finger faster than he could using a mouse, we disagree.

Right, no I understand. I'm just saying, it's a weak argument on either side because speed is only fractionally different, though yes, a mouse is faster given the same scenario. Precision, however, is one of the most important failures of Windows 8. The entire Metro UI is massively oversized and wastes so much space. I like to use the ESPN app as a good example of this. The ESPN app has an interesting layout, but it's beyond awful for actually wanting to look for something specific. Everything is box links with 3 lines of text and 2 words per line making it difficult to scan through and read quickly, and massive amounts of space are wasted with these gigantic buttons for people's fat fingers. Usability is reduced VERY drastically.

Even without touch, bigger elements on screen are needed, unless you plan on hitting tinier and tinier objects as screen resolutions get bigger. Which is why I'm a fan of the Start Screen. Even on my 1680x1050 screen, 32x32 and 16x16 icons were worthless. You couldn't see them, let alone hit them with a precise hit.

No, that's called DPI scaling, something Windows still isn't very good at, but eh, I guess it's halfway decent now. All elements of the screen are getting smaller, so you don't need bigger buttons, you need proper DPI scaling.

[Dashel]

Windows has not caught up to what OSX offers

ROFL

My point as I explained clearly is that the start screen in general works better with mouse and keyboard than touch, it's not designed for touch,it designed to work well as touch and mouse controlled.

No the start screen does not create more icon bloat. It's for launching apps only. It allows you to organize apps in named groups. Big easily recognizable icons, and you ping your most used or favorite apps. Not every app on your computer. And if you think it no harder to locate a desktop icon than a start screen icon, you've never used the start screen.

Sorry, but that isn't an explanation to my question (how does Start make click and drag, and specifically right-click better?) The ideal is MetroIE, not Mail regarding rt-click contextuals.

Nothing you cite is functionally different than the (imo unclean) behavior exhibited by users of desktop shortcuts regarding launching (except that SS is as phobic about files as the Superbar is). The SS was made for them.

Again, explain how SS makes it easier to locate an icon vs a Desktop shortcut? The dirty truth is that currently, Metro is simply an Active Desktop with an inferior taskbar and no start menu.

[HawkMan]

On touch for certain stuff you need to click and hold this works a millions times better with right click and a mouse. Same with dragging stuff. With a mouse you just click a d drag. On touch you need to first click and hold, then drag.

Basically it just works better with a mouse.

ROFL

Sorry, but that isn't an explanation to my question (how does Start make click and drag, and specifically right-click better?) The ideal is MetroIE, not Mail regarding rt-click contextuals.

Nothing you cite is functionally different than the (imo unclean) behavior exhibited by users of desktop shortcuts. The SS was made for them.

Again, explain how SS makes it easier to locate an icon vs a Desktop shortcut? They are functionally equivalent. The dirty truth is that currently, Metro is simply an Active Desktop with an inferior taskbar and no start menu.

S you're saying a larger better labelled shortcut, ORGANIZED in NAMED GROUPS is not better for finding than a desktop filled with 100+ icons mix of app shortcuts, folders temp downloads and documents among other crap... Seriously ?

[MorganX]

You CAN turn off Secured Boot, on Intel PCs. If you're crying over the Surface RT, ask yourself this, why would I pay top dollar for a top line device, just to potentially break it by loading third party firmware?

::chuckle:: smh. Sounds like reasonable question ... ... ...

[Dashel]

Basically it just works better with a mouse.

S you're saying a larger better labelled shortcut, ORGANIZED in NAMED GROUPS is not better for finding than a desktop filled with 100+ icons mix of app shortcuts, folders temp downloads and documents among other crap... Seriously ?

SS lacks containers (common complain from converted shortcut users, do you really think people who didn't bother to organize\clean their SM or Desktop are going to take the time to do the same for SS?)

The flipside of hiding the files is that it trades a good behavior (file associations, knowing where my data 'is') for an app based one - which the all data on desktop types don't like.

SS works far better with touch for all the examples you cited, less the first selector action not needed with the mouse. (directional and edge swipes, and no cursor travel make all aspects of this easier) I assume you are talking about the less elegant iPad implementation of such gestures.

[MorganX]

I'm quite certain that in OSX you can use Expose, virtual desktops, and multiple monitors. If that's not enough to handle all of your multi-tasking skillz, perhaps you should write your own operating system.

Windows has not caught up to what OSX offers (or Linux, by using extensions), but quite frankly given the option between running programs which minimize to the (small) taskbar, or ones which exist off screen in full screen, I'd much rather have the full screen.

OS X's faux MDI is romper room compared to Windows. Why minimize, just tile or cascade them. Drag and drop between them with ease. Multiple instances of same app, just hover over it on taskbar and view previews, drag and drop from file system to a preview.

This will go on forever, I just couldn't resist. I won't respond to your incoming response, but I will read it in fairness. But we both know it would never actually end, lol.

SS lacks containers (common complain from converted shortcut users, named groups and the auto-sorting is confusing)

The flipside of hiding the files is that it trades a good behavior (file associations, knowing where my data 'is') for an app based one - which again the shortcut types don't like.

SS works far better with touch for all the examples you cited. (directional and edge swipes, and no cursor travel make all aspects of this easier) I assume you are talking about the less elegant and efficient iPad implementation of such gestures.

When you have to use the most extreme, rare, and unlikely scenario, 100 icons on the desktop, yea, right, that happens often, you know someone is reaching. Try 100 blocks on the SS. At least on the Desktop you can create folders for related apps, use the Start menu hierarchical links, or search without the additional change in UI to a cumbersome search interface (which is being fixed in blue, how well remains to be seen.)

It's hard to imagine at some point in the future either Microsoft or a third party app adding containers to the SS.

[HawkMan]

SS lacks containers (common complain from converted shortcut users, do you really think people who didn't bother to organize\clean their SM or Desktop are going to take the time to do the same for SS?)

The flipside of hiding the files is that it trades a good behavior (file associations, knowing where my data 'is') for an app based one - which the all data on desktop types don't like.

SS works far better with touch for all the examples you cited, less the first selector action not needed with the mouse. (directional and edge swipes, and no cursor travel make all aspects of this easier) I assume you are talking about the less elegant iPad implementation of such gestures.

Try the start screen on touch. It's far better to use with a mouse. Faster to navigate and click with the wheel as well compared to dragging.

[Dashel]

I disagree. There are few areas that I don't find the SS much easier and enjoyable on touch. A couple examples:

Charms

Task switching

Context menu

Multiple selections

Sign-on

Scrolling

etc...

Navigate and click with wheel vs dragging?

[HawkMan]

Charms, task switching, context menu are irrelevant on a desktop though. Since I only use it s a launcher. And it's a better launcher than the start menu.

Multiple selection works good enough for its purpose, only used during organization of the start screen anyway.

Sign on has... Pretty much nothing to do with the start screen. And I only sign on Ike once a month after a necessary reboot if I must anyway. Or on my laptop after sleep to and from work. Ad writing password and hitting enter doesn't differ from before...

Scrolling... Umm I roll my wheel and my start screen scrolls. Better than scrolling around the old start menu.

[AJerman]

Charms, task switching, context menu are irrelevant on a desktop though. Since I only use it s a launcher. And it's a better launcher than the start menu.

Multiple selection works good enough for its purpose, only used during organization of the start screen anyway.

Sign on has... Pretty much nothing to do with the start screen. And I only sign on Ike once a month after a necessary reboot if I must anyway. Or on my laptop after sleep to and from work. Ad writing password and hitting enter doesn't differ from before...

Scrolling... Umm I roll my wheel and my start screen scrolls. Better than scrolling around the old start menu.

Well now that makes no sense at all.

[MorganX]

I disagree. There are few areas that I don't find the SS much easier and enjoyable on touch. A couple examples:

I think he's talking about the SS itself. The SS itself is easier to navigate with a scroll mouse than it is with touch. I agree with that.

[Dashel]

Hawk, I thought we were talking about the SS and not the Desktop...nor did you contradict my claims. Outside of a few drag and selection actions which I'll grant you, on the whole Metro remains better with touch.

I guess I've run into nothing but scrolling issues on the Metro side of things with mouse and especially a touchpad. A mouse tends to stick or lose focus where touch does not. On a 1080 panel, I don't have enough items pinned to even require scrolling (smaller tile sizes will reduce that even more). In apps its much more problematic (Weather's mix of horizontal and veritical scroll areas for example, the cursor will catch on the vertical when using the wheel while touch does not.

I still think most of you that say you use SS for common app launching are misguided and holding it wrong. :) (And Desktop shortcuts are just as viable an overflow, and preferable in many cases). Once you fill your taskbar (and Desktop) with your working set, SS is for RT apps and the medium to low use Desktop apps (ie the All Programs menu).

That way you can avoid Metro Search and All Apps for the placeholder they are.