Just created a Windows 9 vision... opinions?


Recommended Posts

Horrible concepts, MS has the right idea with where Metro is going, time to get over the antiquated and inefficient star menu and embrace the future 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You could easily get the taskbar in 7 and 8 to resemble Vista. Go into taskbar properties, change Taskbar buttons to "Never combine". Tik "Use small taskbar buttons". Presto. 

Ah, alright, i think ive done that before, if i remember does it also show the running program name beside the programs icon?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ah, alright, i think ive done that before, if i remember does it also show the running program name beside the programs icon?

 

It does when you disable combining. Just did it myself.

 

post-350302-0-90204000-1395711422.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because now I've gotten used to the Start Screen, it would annoy be not being able to group my apps into categories. And most of my screen would be wasted searching for things and opening apps, considering most of my screen real estate is horizontal, not vertical. Or I go back to how I had Windows 7 with all my apps pinned to the taskbar.

 

Some small changes I'd like to see, or made optional to maybe make the start screen less jarring, would be to see the desktop behind it?

 

Right now you've got your desktop.

 

 

 

 

When you press the Windows key you get this.

 

 

 

I'd like this, maybe blur the desktop out, make it darker, but still see it? Like the Startscreen sits on a pane of glass?

 

 

Don't really care for the blur. Really creates a busy, disjointed look... :/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Would be nice if you could remove the taskbar, and attach most used apps to chames on the right of your screen. I think its time to remove the taskbar.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Would be nice if you could remove the taskbar, and attach most used apps to chames on the right of your screen. I think its time to remove the taskbar.

I really believe it's next in line for a massive overhaul, or removal all together.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really believe it's next in line for a massive overhaul, or removal all together.

 

Yea, my way of thinking would be press windows key to access all apps, swipe right to access chames and have most used apps there. Also maybe time to get people onto track pads on windows.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't really care for the blur. Really creates a busy, disjointed look... :/

 

Obviously it's rough. I want Windows 8 to come together, I dislike the separate environments approach. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Obviously it's rough. I want Windows 8 to come together, I dislike the separate environments approach. 

Maybe if the blur effect was there, but didn't show the open windows or desktop icons.

 

 

But here's my thoughts for what we'll see in Windows 9:

 

Metro 2.0 (obviously).

The beginnings of a new taskbar layout.

The beginnings of a new form of window/snapping management.

The beginning of the end for the desktop Control Panel.

Possibly the removal of traditional icons in favor of a live "tile" system.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Screen/Menu hybrid looks good, but it could use a little more space between the tiles. One of the nice things about the Screen is that everything isn't all jammed together like in the Menu. White space improves legibility and scan-ability. Even just a few pixels more between elements might be good. Right now it feels a bit claustrophobic.

 

But overall it looks like one of the best Win 9 concepts I've seen. But how would the tile menu interact with the Modern side? You focus entirely on how things work on the desktop, and that's only part of Windows these days.

 

Yeah, I agree on it being a bit too busy. That's what happens when you try to cram a full screen (actually, not even the whole thing) in a smaller sized menu. I guess a Modern start menu should keep things simple and not showcase all of one's stuff from the start screen. I did mention how the tile menu would work on Modern though, it all has to do with interactions: if you initiate a tile-action with keyboard/mouse you should be treated as a desktop user and thus open modern apps windowed in the desktop. If you initiate the tile-action with touch, then it should be assumed you want it in fullscreen mode (while still giving you the option to set this up otherwise in config). This way OS reactions would be tied to interaction methods, which seems logical to me at least.

 

I find your Metro Start menu concept too fragmented. How about grouping items (ie. apps, files, settings)?

 

Yes, I had thought of including groups, my only problem with this is that then margins may not fit right and different groups could end at different points... though this may be possible to fix with specific group "heights" like the margin limits we have now in the Start screen. This is another mockup I made while thinking of groups in the Start menu and it kind of meshes well with the "mini start screen" rumors that have been flying around from Microsoft:

 

mockupstartmenugroups.jpg

 

I'm not crazy about the spacing (and hate that Start text on top, but I'm mindful that many people would still require that for now to have some context and understand where they are), but it still feels like the desktop while respecting Modern principles... I really think Microsoft will go for something along these lines, it seems like the most straightforward option.

 

It defeats the entire purpose of the Start Screen. The goal is two isolate two different users into two different environments, and it works pretty well.

 

Ahm, no, this is simply wrong. The purpose of the Start Screen was not to isolate both environments, but to offer a new touch friendly context. It might work pretty well for you, I'm also quite happy with it, but the sale numbers are pretty clear: people aren't buying this product because they don't like it. Microsoft will need to cater to the majority of the market, even if sometimes I also feel like the design tradeoffs they're going to make to fuse both environments are not the right ones. Again, my 9.0 concept is not about what I like, but about the direction I feel Microsoft may take to cater to a mass market that so far is pretty much rejecting 8.x.

 

Horrible concepts, MS has the right idea with where Metro is going, time to get over the antiquated and inefficient star menu and embrace the future 

 

Well it's great if you don't like my concept, but your view of embracing the future and forgetting the past seems quite tyrannical and ignorant: you like it so everyone must. Again, I like the 8.x Modern direction, but most consumers out there are not buying this, therefore some better mix of features/design must be found to appease to the mass market. There is absolutely no reason why the desktop cannot evolve and be Modern-ized. The desktop taskbar is, surely, antiquated and inefficient, no argument there, but apply some Modern principles and make it extensible and customizable and you can have a pretty powerful Start menu tool that is basically a mini Start screen. This approach doesn't mean that you will ignore all the Modern environment, it just means you'd be acting respectfully to the millions of desktop users out there and offer them a smooth transition path into the future. Many/most of us in forums like Neowin's are quite ready to be thrown into the ocean and learn to swim on the spot... most people in this world require swim classes and learning progressively before they feel safe enough to go on their own.

 

People need to be educated into this new Modern UI framework and pretending otherwise is arrogant and unproductive. You do realize all the 8.x team is now either gone from Microsoft or jettisoned from the Windows team, right? Who's directing the Windows division now? Windows Phone folks, those who are much more mindful of the big design changes they themselves introduced to the world. Their saner and more democratic approach will surely bring greater advances and evolution to Windows while being thoughtful of those millions of users who need to be guided through these changes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, I agree on it being a bit too busy. That's what happens when you try to cram a full screen (actually, not even the whole thing) in a smaller sized menu. I guess a Modern start menu should keep things simple and not showcase all of one's stuff from the start screen. I did mention how the tile menu would work on Modern though, it all has to do with interactions: if you initiate a tile-action with keyboard/mouse you should be treated as a desktop user and thus open modern apps windowed in the desktop. If you initiate the tile-action with touch, then it should be assumed you want it in fullscreen mode (while still giving you the option to set this up otherwise in config). This way OS reactions would be tied to interaction methods, which seems logical to me at least.

 

 

So by default I'd be stuck on the desktop on my tower and laptop? I don't care for that. I'd rather keep Modern apps fullscreen regardless of how I invoke them, in fact for reading apps like Kindle or Comixology, or games, it's essential. the desktop elements waste space that the apps need.

 

Besides, like I said before, to me the desktop is just one part of Windows these days, not the whole show. I don't need or want it to be front and center anymore. I don't want to be dumped into the desktop for everything.

 

I'd much rather have desktop programs running within Modern than Modern apps on the desktop.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd rather keep Modern apps fullscreen regardless of how I invoke them

Besides, like I said before, to me the desktop is just one part of Windows these days, not the whole show. I don't need or want it to be front and center anymore. I don't want to be dumped into the desktop for everything.

^ Agreed. I'd rather Metro apps stay full screen too. They're better off that way. Shoving them back into the desktop isn't going to work.

As for the desktop, I also agree. Even on my desktop, I'm always running Metro apps, and will switch between quite a few.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^ Agreed. I'd rather Metro apps stay full screen too. They're better off that way. Shoving them back into the desktop isn't going to work.

As for the desktop, I also agree. Even on my desktop, I'm always running Metro apps, and will switch between quite a few.

 

I don't really feel any attachment to the desktop UI like a lot of people seem to. It's just an environment for running programs. Let's keep it around for the programs that use it (especially ones that don't work well in a full screen environment) and for those that prefer it, but there's no need to shove programs that aren't meant for the desktop onto it.

 

(Disclaimer: By desktop, I'm referring only to the desktop UI, not traditional formfactor machines.)

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So by default I'd be stuck on the desktop on my tower and laptop? I don't care for that. I'd rather keep Modern apps fullscreen regardless of how I invoke them, in fact for reading apps like Kindle or Comixology, or games, it's essential. the desktop elements waste space that the apps need.

 

Besides, like I said before, to me the desktop is just one part of Windows these days, not the whole show. I don't need or want it to be front and center anymore. I don't want to be dumped into the desktop for everything.

No, no, no, it's a start menu, it only shows up when you click on the Windows button. Why would anybody want that permanently fixed on screen? Also, I mentioned there's still a start screen and the whole Modern environment so you must not be reading what I posted very accurately. Besides, consider the fact that you don't want to be dumped into the desktop, there's millions of users who only want to live in the desktop. This design takes nothing away from the Modern environment. You have to remain open-minded, Windows is a product that has to appeal to millions of different users and such is the difficulty for Microsoft: to develop an OS that can satisfy both Modern users and desktop users.

 

I'd much rather have desktop programs running within Modern than Modern apps on the desktop.

That's great, but the great majority of windows power users want the opposite. It's not about what you want, it's about what the majority prefers. To be clear, I think the current desktop/Modern division works fine as it is, but I'm not the majority of the user base.

 

^ Agreed. I'd rather Metro apps stay full screen too. They're better off that way. Shoving them back into the desktop isn't going to work.

I completely agree. In fact, this is one of those "design tradeoffs" that I mentioned earlier I don't agree with. I think Microsoft believes that if they throw Modern apps into the desktop, traditional users will start using them. This may be the case, but it would seem much more logical to me to push that Modern 2.0 that advances the UI framework to a more mature Modern environment instead of shoehorning these apps into windows and into the desktop. Although, if they're doing both, then I really have no problem with this: I'll keep using my Modern apps fullscreen while those who want to use them windowed in the desktop like it's the 1990s can still do that. In the end, their key to success is to give enough variety and options, since their consumers are so crazy varied.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, no, no, it's a start menu, it only shows up when you click on the Windows button. Why would anybody want that permanently fixed on screen? Also, I mentioned there's still a start screen and the whole Modern environment so you must not be reading what I posted very accurately. Besides, consider the fact that you don't want to be dumped into the desktop, there's millions of users who only want to live in the desktop. This design takes nothing away from the Modern environment. You have to remain open-minded, Windows is a product that has to appeal to millions of different users and such is the difficulty for Microsoft: to develop an OS that can satisfy both Modern users and desktop users.

 

That's great, but the great majority of windows power users want the opposite. It's not about what you want, it's about what the majority prefers. To be clear, I think the current desktop/Modern division works fine as it is, but I'm not the majority of the user base.

 

I completely agree. In fact, this is one of those "design tradeoffs" that I mentioned earlier I don't agree with. I think Microsoft believes that if they throw Modern apps into the desktop, traditional users will start using them. This may be the case, but it would seem much more logical to me to push that Modern 2.0 that advances the UI framework to a more mature Modern environment instead of shoehorning these apps into windows and into the desktop. Although, if they're doing both, then I really have no problem with this: I'll keep using my Modern apps fullscreen while those who want to use them windowed in the desktop like it's the 1990s can still do that. In the end, their key to success is to give enough variety and options, since their consumers are so crazy varied.

 

I try to be open minded, and this concept is a very good evolution to the desktop. This is probably what the Win 8 desktop should have looked like from the beginning.

 

But at the same time, Modern needs to be improved and matured as well. And I think adding the ability to run desktop programs within Modern, so people realize that it can potentially handle more "serious" functions, would be a good start. For Modern to evolve, Microsoft needs to get users and developers out of the "It's just for little apps" mentality.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The design is not good... too many icons into the start menu... Give it a margin between icons.

Just FYI the tiles are taken from a start screen printscreen, so the spacing is exactly the same Microsoft set. That, however, doesn't mean that this would work for a start menu, I agree, since there are much more severe space constraints.

For Modern to evolve, Microsoft needs to get users and developers out of the "It's just for little apps" mentality.

Agreed! In fact I believe this will start happening once Microsoft releases the modern version of Office. Hopefully that's coming this Thursday, so let's see what they have come up with to prove Modern can be a complex and productive environment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

That's great, but the great majority of windows power users want the opposite. It's not about what you want, it's about what the majority prefers. To be clear, I think the current desktop/Modern division works fine as it is, but I'm not the majority of the user base.

 

 

So why not both? I'd love to see an app that functioned as a wrapper, allowing me to run desktop programs in Modern.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So why not both? I'd love to see an app that functioned as a wrapper, allowing me to run desktop programs in Modern.

 

Oh, absolutely! I thought you meant you only wanted desktop apps to run in the Modern environment and not the opposite. Then yes, of course, I'm all for greater variety and I believe they should allow desktop apps to run in Modern like you said in a wrapper that is hopefully sandboxed (and separate from the desktop process?). Likewise, Modern apps windowed in the desktop will be great for some others. I'd really just be happy to keep those apps separate while making Modern 2.0 a much more full featured and richer environment, but the option to fuse these contexts in a 2 way fashion sounds like a terrific priority. Here's to hoping, right? I can't wait for Build next week.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh, absolutely! I thought you meant you only wanted desktop apps to run in the Modern environment and not the opposite. Then yes, of course, I'm all for greater variety and I believe they should allow desktop apps to run in Modern like you said in a wrapper that is hopefully sandboxed (and separate from the desktop process?). Likewise, Modern apps windowed in the desktop will be great for some others. I'd really just be happy to keep those apps separate while making Modern 2.0 a much more full featured and richer environment, but the option to fuse these contexts in a 2 way fashion sounds like a terrific priority. Here's to hoping, right? I can't wait for Build next week.

 

That's it exactly! Microsoft should be working to make Windows as flexible as possible, not only to adapt to differing hardware, but as many user types as possible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's it exactly! Microsoft should be working to make Windows as flexible as possible, not only to adapt to differing hardware, but as many user types as possible.

That's a slippery slope, though. And quite frankly, it's almost an impossible task. Spread your resources too thin, and it'll be too much for no one. The thing about Windows now, is it allows users to work, while providing a singular UX. I can sit down with any Windows machine right now, and know that nothing will be out of place. Jane's Windows 8.1 isn't going to be different from Jack's Windows 8.1... Bob's Windows 7 isn't going to be different from Sara's Windows 7.

 

Windows 8.1 is quite an adaptable OS. It can run on tablets, full desktop PCs, and everything in between. What needs to happen with Windows 9, is unifying each UX into one, while keeping the pure Metro side separate, and building upon its Windows 8.1 foundation. I feel those will be the keys to success in the next release. Shoehorning Metro into the desktop isn't going to work out, as evidenced by the upcoming update. It looks stupid, it feels stupid, and it doesn't solve anything. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You put allot of work into your design. Very nice. It will be interesting to see what MS showcases in a couple weeks, to see if they will be leaning more towards W8, reverting back to W7, or like you say a happy medium. I think MS needs to be careful this time around how they market W9 and I personally think they need to showcase a few different flavors based on your preference for use, being tablet, W-phone or desktop. Your traditional desktop users don't want anything close to resembling the W8 design and this can be left for the touch screen tablet gadget people. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If MS reverts back to Win7, forget it, they'll be done for. Competitors would have a field day with their marketing, knowing MS wouldn't be a contender.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.