The Great Modern UI Debate Thread

[PGHammer]

Not all user habits. I have a new gamer laptop, top end model and no touchscreen capabilities. not everyone works as you do. some still need a mouse for navigating their respective UI.

And what about ModernUI is mouse-hostile?  It's a question I have been asking since the first complaints appeared regarding it, and I haven't gotten an answer yet!

 

I use MDL-driven software, and ModernUI software, every single day - and I do so with a keyboard+mouse - if it were improbable, let alone impossible, I would have found Windows 8 impossible to use, and I would have been complaining rather vociferously about it AND looked for third-party software to fix the issues.  Instead, I had two words for Windows 8 regarding any supposed issues - "What issues?"

 

Yes - ModernUI does have bigger pointer targets than Win32 pre-Modern.  (I haven't disputed that in the least.)  However, why can't mouse users benefit from that?  If anything, the less-dexterous mouse users (I fall into that category) can hit said points easier than has been the case merely with pre-ModernUI Win32.  Advantage (for mouse users) - ModernUI/MDL.

 

I'm still waiting for that answer - what about ModernUI is mouse-hostile?  I haven't found MDL, or ModernUI, any more mouse-hostile than Android.

[chrisj1968]

And what about ModernUI is mouse-hostile?  It's a question I have been asking since the first complaints appeared regarding it, and I haven't gotten an answer yet!

 

I use MDL-driven software, and ModernUI software, every single day - and I do so with a keyboard+mouse - if it were improbable, let alone impossible, I would have found Windows 8 impossible to use, and I would have been complaining rather vociferously about it AND looked for third-party software to fix the issues.  Instead, I had two words for Windows 8 regarding any supposed issues - "What issues?"

 

Yes - ModernUI does have bigger pointer targets than Win32 pre-Modern.  (I haven't disputed that in the least.)  However, why can't mouse users benefit from that?  If anything, the less-dexterous mouse users (I fall into that category) can hit said points easier than has been the case merely with pre-ModernUI Win32.  Advantage (for mouse users) - ModernUI/MDL.

 

I'm still waiting for that answer - what about ModernUI is mouse-hostile?  I haven't found MDL, or ModernUI, any more mouse-hostile than Android.

It has its place. It works perfectly for for touchscreen systems and those who desire to use it. I'm from an older generation and the start menu/desktop UI works well for how some of us work.... work flow. I don't have a touchscreen system here. Toshiba didn't waste their time putting a touchscreen on this system. Toshiba, a large OEM doesn't or, in this case didn't seem to think Win8.1 modern UI was worthy or important. they had desktop users in mind. HOWEVER!, there is a caveat. That is I have seen HP, Lenovo and other OEM's as well as Toshiba design laptops that are specifically designed for Windows 8.1 because they tout the ability to fold the screen back to make the laptop a... get this!... a tablet! I see lower end or specific models for the modern UI. others allow for the screen to be "snapped off" to act as a... tablet.

 

So please understand that the modern UI has some application in how YOU specifically work. You like it. but I'm seeing a lot of conversations here or posts that say they don't work with modern UI and simply want to use the desktop.

 

Added later: Also, you risk MSFTs customer base. if the world has 500,000,000 users and half liked the modern UI and the other the desktop UI, you risk alienting half of your customer base. will those 250,000,000 users look for a different OS? maybe, maybe not.

[PGHammer]

It has its place. It works perfectly for for touchscreen systems and those who desire to use it. I'm from an older generation and the start menu/desktop UI works well for how some of us work.... work flow. I don't have a touchscreen system here. Toshiba didn't waste their time putting a touchscreen on this system. Toshiba, a large OEM doesn't or, in this case didn't seem to think Win8.1 modern UI was worthy or important. they had desktop users in mind. HOWEVER!, there is a caveat. That is I have seen HP, Lenovo and other OEM's as well as Toshiba design laptops that are specifically designed for Windows 8.1 because they tout the ability to fold the screen back to make the laptop a... get this!... a tablet! I see lower end or specific models for the modern UI. others allow for the screen to be "snapped off" to act as a... tablet.

 

So please understand that the modern UI has some application in how YOU specifically work. You like it. but I'm seeing a lot of conversations here or posts that say they don't work with modern UI and simply want to use the desktop.

"Older generation"?  I'm fifty-two - therefore, older than you, and my IT time alone predates the GUI altogether.  I don't have a touch-screen anything personally (it's my mom with the tablet and smartphone - both are Android, incidentally - and she is seventy-one).  Toshiba doesn't do desktops at all - they sell laptops, and rather traditionally-built laptops at that.  (And some of their laptops - but not in the Qosimo line, which is where the gaming laptops reside - DO support touch - specifically, some of their Intel-CPU and AMD-CPU laptops in the Satellite series, and even those date back to Windows 7 - not 8; you had to uninstall the overlay required by those same laptops for 7 to upgrade them to 8, as the overlay has conflict issues when 8 or 8.1 is installed as an upgrade.)  And by commenting that some users are still insisting on the 7-style user interface, that still makes it personal (as in individual) preference, as opposed to a general failure in ModernUI itself.  I have nothing against individual preferences - it's assuming that said individual preferences are a general trend that I have issue with.  (And that is, in fact, why the entire DEBATE exists - there are those users that continue to assume - incorrectly - that a UI - any UI - can only be used by one class of users.)

[blerk]

which is a pain in the anus to use on the desktop.

 

If you were using a Windows Phone, I'd say you're holding it wrong to be suffering physical pain in that particular part of your body during normal operation of the device. 

 

But Windows 8.1? You're doing something more than just holding that device incorrectly...

[chrisj1968]

as I'll say again, Some systems were designed to suport Modern UI other not. I'm no tmuch younger than you . In generation, I was referring to the time frame not age. But you can't force arbitrarily, a certain UI on all users without risking losing some customer base.

 

What gets me is, I'm under the "impression" (emphasis added) that, to some degree, I'm forced to use win8.1. its fast and snappy. I use the desktop exclusively unless I'm playing "farmville2 country escape" so i can send my farm on facebooks farmville2, items I need. that's it! I'd honestly say my desktop to modern UI is 99% modern UI 1%. maybe 5 minutes tops Toshiba doesn't offer a win 7 downgrade.. sucks!

 

but to say across the board.. do away with the desktop and go exclusively modern UI is .... well, wow!

[blerk]

as I'll say again, Some systems were designed to suport Modern UI other not. I'm no tmuch younger than you . In generation, I was referring to the time frame not age. But you can't force arbitrarily, a certain UI on all users without risking losing some customer base.

 

What gets me is, I'm under the "impression" (emphasis added) that, to some degree, I'm forced to use win8.1. its fast and snappy. I use the desktop exclusively unless I'm playing "farmville2 country escape" so i can send my farm on facebooks farmville2, items I need. that's it! I'd honestly say my desktop to modern UI is 99% modern UI 1%. maybe 5 minutes tops Toshiba doesn't offer a win 7 downgrade.. sucks!

 

but to say across the board.. do away with the desktop and go exclusively modern UI is .... well, wow!

 

If you're using a newer system (i.e. a laptop with touchscreen as opposed to a traditional m+kb laptop), I think that the argument that you're being forced to use ModernUI against your will is less relevant. You're buying the hardware and also getting the software designed to work best with it. But since you're on a more traditional system, I can see where you're coming from, though I somewhat disagree about just how much trouble the ModernUI part of 8.1 causes.

[chrisj1968]

naw. for me personally, I'd like to be able to downgrade from win8.1. at any rate, the whole concept of the Pc from the days of early MSFT or Apple was freedom. granted things and deveopment were limited. But being able to customize the UI, icons and the like were what I enjoyed.

 

Now the mentallity has shifted from customization to a pre determined UI experience. I used to see websites that offered a plethora of icons, colors and customized skins (actual themes) for the desktop. I guess I'm just old school in that thinking.

[PGHammer]

as I'll say again, Some systems were designed to suport Modern UI other not. I'm no tmuch younger than you . In generation, I was referring to the time frame not age. But you can't force arbitrarily, a certain UI on all users without risking losing some customer base.

 

What gets me is, I'm under the "impression" (emphasis added) that, to some degree, I'm forced to use win8.1. its fast and snappy. I use the desktop exclusively unless I'm playing "farmville2 country escape" so i can send my farm on facebooks farmville2, items I need. that's it! I'd honestly say my desktop to modern UI is 99% modern UI 1%. maybe 5 minutes tops Toshiba doesn't offer a win 7 downgrade.. sucks!

 

but to say across the board.. do away with the desktop and go exclusively modern UI is .... well, wow!

The problem with that impression is that the reverse was indeed true with the implementation of the original Start menu, and yet that is actually defended.  In short, the shoe is on the other foot - and, as folks are discovering, the pinch stings.

Also, the issue I have WITH the classic UI is pretty much that it is a poor fit with several hardware-related changes that apply regardless of how you get around your computer (such as higher-DPI displays) - it has nothing whatever to do with touch.  (Again, part of the assumption that it is has to do with such advances appearing on smaller screens/displays first.  Are folks assuming that larger displays will ALWAYS be they way they have been with Windows 7?  I can't - and don't dare - make that assumption; first off, I'd be wrong as heck, as display improvement have shown up, merely at the same display size I have today, and for the same price, if not less.  Second, look at improvements in anything - in or out of computing - said improvements always appear at the higher end first - primarily because they are willing to pay for them; however, as said improvements become cheaper to implement, they DO make it down to the rest of us.)  I'm not saying "do away with the desktop" - I'm saying modernize and IMPROVE the desktop - by not doing so, the desktop itself IS under more pressure than ever - like it or not.  (After all, be honest - why are more "desktop" applications showing up on mobile hardware? An unchanging static desktop is doing nobody any favors.)

[chrisj1968]

improve and modernize the desktop...hmmm, I could definitely agree there. perhaps the desktop to some degree has been left behind. I'm still waiting what 10 will offer. way too early to say now.

[Jim K Global Moderator]

As was the case with the introduction OF the Start menu - without alternatives that are easily accessible, why would folks use them?  As I further pointed out, while Program Manager was not killed outright, it was buried so deeply that it was not exactly easily accessible.  (That has been, in fact, rather thoroughly documented, and not just by me - though I was there, and have, in fact, commented on it.)  

 

Program Manager was easily accessible (Start > Run > Progman.exe) as was making it the default shell.  Microsoft left it there so those who disliked Explorer could switch back.  This is something they failed miserably at with Windows 8x...by not giving an escape hatch and forcing (natively) people to use an unknown, unfamiliar, and very awkward interface.  Metro is taking shape...but it isn't really fair to compare the familiar user interface options of Windows 95/98/Me to that of Windows 8.  In that, I mean people could go back to an old and familiar program manager whereas people with Windows 8 couldn't go back to a start menu (natively). 

[PGHammer]

Program Manager was easily accessible (Start > Run > Progman.exe) as was making it the default shell.  Microsoft left it there so those who disliked Explorer could switch back.  This is something they failed miserably at with Windows 8x...by not giving an escape hatch and forcing (natively) people to use an unknown, unfamiliar, and very awkward interface.  Metro is taking shape...but it isn't really fair to compare the familiar user interface options of Windows 95/98/Me to that of Windows 8.  In that, I mean people could go back to an old and familiar program manager whereas people with Windows 8 couldn't go back to a start menu (natively). 

And the third parties stepped into the breach - that is, after all, part of why they exist.  So why throw them under the bus?  Worse, why the insistence - from the critics - that MICROSOFT throw them under the bus?

[blerk]

naw. for me personally, I'd like to be able to downgrade from win8.1. at any rate, the whole concept of the Pc from the days of early MSFT or Apple was freedom. granted things and deveopment were limited. But being able to customize the UI, icons and the like were what I enjoyed.

 

Now the mentallity has shifted from customization to a pre determined UI experience. I used to see websites that offered a plethora of icons, colors and customized skins (actual themes) for the desktop. I guess I'm just old school in that thinking.

 

Oh well I can't say I've done much in the way of skinning Windows, so I don't really know much about what roadblocks have been placed. 

 

 

I'm saying modernize and IMPROVE the desktop - by not doing so, the desktop itself IS under more pressure than ever - like it or not.  (After all, be honest - why are more "desktop" applications showing up on mobile hardware? An unchanging static desktop is doing nobody any favors.)

 

When people are talking about 'desktop' in a discussion about ModernUI and Windows, I generally assume they mean the desktop = everything not Modern. The way you seem to be talking about it, I get the impression that you are talking specifically about the desktop screen, but then you talk about "desktop applications". Could you enlighten a confused soul as to whether you mean 'everything not metro' or 'just the desktop' desktop?

 

On the latter topic - multiple desktops natively in Windows. Hallelujah. That right there is a big advancement. 

[Jim K Global Moderator]

And the third parties stepped into the breach - that is, after all, part of why they exist.  So why throw them under the bus?  Worse, why the insistence - from the critics - that MICROSOFT throw them under the bus?

 

Probably because Microsoft listened and understood that forcing a Modern UI was alienating (or slowing) the adoption of Windows...and while users could get the start menu back by ways of 3rd party applications...it would be best to include it natively (again).  There are plenty of third party shell replacements which Microsoft isn't "throwing under the bus".  This reasoning is pretty lame.

[onewarmslime]

QuoteFurther, you are claiming that ModernUI is a pain to use entirely due to its differences - basically that the only acceptable change is, in fact, none.  If that isn't being deliberately change-averse, what is?

 

Change for the sake of change is never good. That doesn't mean we don't necessarily want change, it means we don't want change without meaning. Noone, and I mean ALMOST noone over the age of 10 wants huge @$$ squares on his desktop screen and programs that take ages to launch , occupy the entire screen and have no apparent way of closing. This is almost a scientifically proven fact so please just because we don't worship the modern UI don't make us look like the bad guys that are stil living in 1999 and can't keep up with the times...

[ParadiseLost]

Personally I'd rather get rid of it completely and let Microsoft develop their tablet OS separately but if they insist on keeping it in Windows I would personally prefer it if I could use my desktop without having to interact with a single piece of Metro crap.

 

Agreed. Let it burn. If they're going to keep it, I hope they'll do something with the likes of these:

 

http://i.imgur.com/nPoBtDk.png

 

Not getting my hopes up though.

[Jarrichvdv]

Agreed. Let it burn. If they're going to keep it, I hope they'll do something with the likes of these:

 

http://i.imgur.com/nPoBtDk.png

 

Not getting my hopes up though.

I think you'll be surprised by the change Windows 10 will bring.

[Jarrichvdv]

Change for the sake of change is never good. That doesn't mean we don't necessarily want change, it means we don't want change without meaning. Noone, and I mean ALMOST noone over the age of 10 wants huge @$$ squares on his desktop screen and programs that take ages to launch , occupy the entire screen and have no apparent way of closing. This is almost a scientifically proven fact so please just because we don't worship the modern UI don't make us look like the bad guys that are stil living in 1999 and can't keep up with the times...

What in the name of god in wrong with presenting apps and files as squares? Also, if they're really so "huge @$$" on your desktop, maybe try another resolution. Jesus, cut the crap, please.

[Dot Matrix]

Change for the sake of change is never good. That doesn't mean we don't necessarily want change, it means we don't want change without meaning. Noone, and I mean ALMOST noone over the age of 10 wants huge *** squares on his desktop screen and programs that take ages to launch , occupy the entire screen and have no apparent way of closing. This is almost a scientifically proven fact so please just because we don't worship the modern UI don't make us look like the bad guys that are stil living in 1999 and can't keep up with the times...

Except the modern UI no longer acts like this. If you're going to argue, at least argue with up to date facts. Also, there is no scientifically proven facts in your comment at all.

PPS: Your comment also bypasses the swear filter. That's not allowed on this site.

[DConnell Member]

Program Manager was easily accessible (Start > Run > Progman.exe) as was making it the default shell.  Microsoft left it there so those who disliked Explorer could switch back.  This is something they failed miserably at with Windows 8x...by not giving an escape hatch and forcing (natively) people to use an unknown, unfamiliar, and very awkward interface.  Metro is taking shape...but it isn't really fair to compare the familiar user interface options of Windows 95/98/Me to that of Windows 8.  In that, I mean people could go back to an old and familiar program manager whereas people with Windows 8 couldn't go back to a start menu (natively). 

 

Fully accessible? While Progman may have still been included, in 95, and while you could set it as the shell, it integrated very poorly into the design of 95. You lost the taskbar as well as the menu, which meant that if you minimized a program, it effectively disappeared. The old behavior of minimizing to the desktop no longer existed in 95. So anyone who didn't know about Alt-Tab (the majority of users, even today) would have had their minimized programs disappear into a black hole for all intents and purposes. The laughable "choice" offered in 95 was just as much of a failure as the honest omission of choice, and it was completely by design.

 

While there was nominally a choice, everything about the choice was weighted to force users to the new menu design. Even though we technically had a choice, Microsoft did virtually nothing to tell us that the choice existed. (I only learned of it during the discussions of menu vs. screen!) And if enabled, the Progman/95 combo worked poorly at best. So was there really a useful, viable choice like we thus far appear to be getting with 10? NO! It was an illusion at best.

 

I'm certain that if Microsoft had done anything remotely similar in 8, the outcry would have been just as loud as it has been over the removal of the menu. Possibly even louder.

 

IMO its better that MS blatantly gave us no choice with this major change, than insulting us with a nominal, useless crippled 2nd option. (Of course, even the fully-functional menu is crippled IMO!)

[DConnell Member]

What in the name of god in wrong with presenting apps and files as squares? Also, if they're really so "huge @$$" on your desktop, maybe try another resolution. Jesus, cut the crap, please.

 

Or reduce their size. At the smallest setting they're comparable to desktop icons or ones pinned to the Start menu.

[Jim K Global Moderator]

Fully accessible? While Progman may have still been included, in 95, and while you could set it as the shell, it integrated very poorly into the design of 95. You lost the taskbar as well as the menu, which meant that if you minimized a program, it effectively disappeared. The old behavior of minimizing to the desktop no longer existed in 95. So anyone who didn't know about Alt-Tab (the majority of users, even today) would have had their minimized programs disappear into a black hole for all intents and purposes. The laughable "choice" offered in 95 was just as much of a failure as the honest omission of choice, and it was completely by design.

 

While there was nominally a choice, everything about the choice was weighted to force users to the new menu design. Even though we technically had a choice, Microsoft did virtually nothing to tell us that the choice existed. (I only learned of it during the discussions of menu vs. screen!) And if enabled, the Progman/95 combo worked poorly at best. So was there really a useful, viable choice like we thus far appear to be getting with 10? NO! It was an illusion at best.

 

I'm certain that if Microsoft had done anything remotely similar in 8, the outcry would have been just as loud as it has been over the removal of the menu. Possibly even louder.

 

IMO its better that MS blatantly gave us no choice with this major change, than insulting us with a nominal, useless crippled 2nd option. (Of course, even the fully-functional menu is crippled IMO!)

 

What?  It acted like Windows 3.1 (program manager).  Obviously you "lost" the start menu, task bar...etc.  You were using program manager as the shell (shouldn't be a shocker).  Minimize acted the same way as 3.1.  Point being, Microsoft left it there on purpose giving people an escape route if they didn't like the start menu.  I remember using program manager for a bit when I first installed 95.  

[DConnell Member]

What?  It acted like Windows 3.1 (program manager).  Obviously you "lost" the start menu, task bar...etc.  You were using program manager as the shell (shouldn't be a shocker).  Minimize acted the same way as 3.1.  Point being, Microsoft left it there on purpose giving people an escape route if they didn't like the start menu.  I remember using program manager for a bit when I first installed 95.  

 

Looks like the reports I've read on 95's behavior with Progman were wrong then.

 

But the option was still not broadcast - like I said, I wasn't even aware of it until a couple years ago. A shame, because I would have loved to "lose" the Start Menu! That's why I love 8, actually - the hated menu was gone!

 

I still maintain that, even though there was technically an option, MS did everything they could to force everyone onto the then-new menu. An extremely well-hidden option is effectively no option at all.

[cooky560 Veteran]

MS have hidden lots of strange things over the years, like from Windows 95 until today did MS see fit to hide MSConfig from every menu in the OS and pray people discover it through the run dialog, Same applies to regedit.

[SekaiStory]

New screen showing more Modern UI 2.0 and Spartan, not sure if I like the new icon design style.

 

I love the black though, can't wait to see the file explorer. Hope the end result is all of this and not some Frankenstein between the Windows 7/8 desktop UI and this.

[Jarrichvdv]

New screen showing more Modern UI 2.0 and Spartan, not sure if I like the new icon design style.

 

*snip*

 

I love the black though, can't wait to see the file explorer. Hope the end result is all of this and not some Frankenstein between the Windows 7/8 desktop UI and this.

Agreed. Also very excited about Spartan and File Explorer.

BTW is that Fang from FF XIII in your avatar?