backtop


Print 121 comment(s) - last by Mint.. on Feb 26 at 3:59 PM


  (Source: Microsoft)
But it is ultimately good for them, he argues

The Redditors were growing restless in a thread about Microsoft Corp. (MSFT) only selling 200 million Windows 8 licenses at the 15 month mark; quite a bit less than the popular Windows 7.  Flaming was afoot.

I. One Size Does Not Fit All

Jacob Miller -- a UI designer who helped designed Windows 8's "Metro UI" -- happens to be an active Redditor, posting under the handle "pwnies".  He made the risky decision of jumping into the fray and in the process gave some insight into the evolution of Windows 8 and why Microsoft made the changes it did, changes that upset many of its most hardcore users.

Miller starts by telling Windows enthusiasts that they are probably right... Metro is awful.  Or is it?  Actually, he acknowledges that Metro may seem awful for "content creators" (aka power users).  At the same time he says that if Microsoft can refine it, it will represent a "land of milk and honey" for "content consumers" (aka "your computer illiterate little sister").

Windows RT


He writes:

For this discussion, assume that Metro is shit for power users (even if you don't believe it to be)....

Metro is a content consumption space....It is designed for casual users who only want to check facebook, view some photos, and maybe post a selfie to instagram. It's designed for your computer illiterate little sister, for grandpas who don't know how to use that computer dofangle thingy, and for mom who just wants to look up apple pie recipes. It's simple, clear, and does one thing (and only one thing) relatively easily.

That is what Metro is. It is the antithesis of a power user.

rented tuxedo
The Windows 8 designer compares previous versions of the Windows UI to a "rented tuxedo" -- one size fits most.

He goes on to compare previous versions of Windows, including the highly successful Windows 7, to a "rented tuxedo".  In forcing a one size fits all approach, Microsoft was delivering a product of compromise.  As mobile began to dominate the user space and the compromises became more severe, Microsoft was forced to limit the scope of technologies like touch and widgets to keep its power users placated.  Perhaps that's why CNN Money several years back dubbed Windows a "dying" environment.

II. The Future of the Desktop

As Miller sees it, power users will mostly use the Desktop mode, while "content consumers", aka the "computer illiterate" majority, will be happy with Metro.  He explains that with Windows 8, Microsoft chose not to boot to Desktop as its internal research showed most content consumers don't explore their mobile operating system fully.  By his estimation, had they tucked Metro away as an option, most never would have seen it. 

By forcing it initially as the default, he indicates that Microsoft was aware that Windows 8 wouldn't sell well with enthusiasts/power users.  But for the majority of its customers, it introduced the new environment to them.  Then with last year's Windows 8.1, Microsoft relaxed the requirements allowing optional boot to Desktop mode, with the default being booting to Metro.  Now it was inviting power users back on the boat.
 
Windows 8.1 -- Desktop Mode

Now that these two tracks have been established -- Metro for casual consumers and Desktop mode for power users -- he feels Microsoft will be able to evolve both use cases without compromise.

In that regard, Miller argues that Metro is in fact great for power users.  It will allow features like multiple desktops which were cut from previous versions of Windows due to the casual user majority.  He comments:

A great example is multiple desktops. This has been something that power users have been asking for for over a decade now. OSX has it, Linux has it, even OS/2 Warp has it. But Windows doesn't. The reason for this is because every time we try and add it to the desktop, we run user tests; and every time we find that the casual users - a much larger part of our demographic than Apple's or Linux's - get confused by it. So the proposal gets cut and power users suffer.
...
Moving forward, we aren't going to worry about whether or not features on the desktop are too complicated for casual users.  In the future, the desktop may very well be complicated to use, but more powerful as well.
...
In the short term you'll see less resources devoted to [Desktop mode] until we get Metro figured out, but once that happens the desktop is very much a first world citizen. It will be equal with metro. The desktop is not going away, we can't develop Windows in Metro.
...
Once [Metro is] purring along smoothly, we'll start making the desktop more advanced. We'll add things that we couldn't before. Things will be faster, more advanced, and craftier than they have in the past - and
that's why Metro is good for power users.

So, he argues rather persuasively that the introduction of Metro will benefit all, both by offering better content consumption, and by decoupling two user groups with fairly different wants and needs.

Miller also suggests that most power users were savvy enough to use a keyboard for faster operations.  Rather than design a UI for power users focused on the mouse and keyboard, and a UI for casual users focused on touch, Microsoft opted to focus the power user UI solely on the keyboard.  Hence most of the improvements thus far for power users boiled down to new keyboard shortcuts.

He comments:

It isn't designed for mouse. It's designed for keyboard (power users) and touch (casual users) primarily. Many of our power users were familiar with Apple's command+space and linux's alt+f2 methods of launching (that is, search to execute). Time trials showed that these were far faster methods than mouse based navigation on the old start menu, so we optimized for that.

Some will likely disagree, but he has a point there.

By focusing neither design on the mouse, Microsoft also avoided issues withs the small but significant number of users with legacy touch devices (more on that later).

III. Why Don't Casual Users Like Metro?

But wait, haven't some casual users also complained about Metro?

Miller acknowledges this, saying that part of this reaction is human nature, part is due to hardware limiting the UI, and part is due to poor execution on a handful of elements in Metro.  In short people won't like Metro now because it's new and in unrefined form, but as time goes by they will come to love it (he hopes) as it grows more familiar and is tweaked by Microsoft to leverage the latest hardware.

On the human nature part, he comments:

Familiarity will always trump good design. Even if something is vastly better, if it is unfamiliar it will be worse. That's why people act like a unicorn was murdered every time facebook releases a new redesign. The windows 7 start menu IS better because it is familiar. We've used that design paradigm for the last 20 years. Metro is going to take some getting used to. As I mentioned, this is a long term strategy for MS. We knew full well casual users wouldn't like it initially. Hopefully in 5 years we'll look back and see we made the right decision.

On the hardware front, he explains why Microsoft didn't include optimized profiles for mouse and keyboard devices, saving touchscreen UI focus for only when users are using a tablet or hybrid in a touch mode.


Windows 8.1 -- Metro Mode
Miller suggests that such a flexible UI is impossible for now, although it's Microsoft long term plan.  He blames the delay on legacy touch devices, which register the touchscreen as a "mouse".  As Microsoft did not always have a way of determining whether users were on true touch devices or using the mouse, it opted to forgo for now customization of the UI to the detected input.

Thus Windows 8 did not include substantial UI tweaks for Metro with a mouse and keyboard vs. Metro with touch.  Microsoft designed primarily for the touch scenario, realizing that might give subpar results in the mouse and keyboard use case.

This will change, he states, as legacy hardware fades out and Microsoft is able to directly check for touchscreens.  Then you will see truly optimized touch and keyboard Metro UI implementations for the casual consumer.

Windows 8 touchTouch was the sole focus of the Metro UI in Windows 8.

Another example he gets into are the issues with brightness.  The lack of a standard makes supporting consistent brightness/backlighting on devices from a plethora of OEMs highly problematic.  The solution is to move towards a more standardized solution with a uniform firmware interface Microsoft can interface with.

Finally, some parts of Metro just weren't well done. For example, Miller comments:

Settings were designed poorly in my opinion. I have seen mockups of designs that are addressing these issues, so I can at least tell you we're working on it.

So a combination of factors may be slowing casual adoption, some of which are outside Microsoft's control.  Fortunately some of these external factors (like legacy touch) will eventually fix themselves.

IV. Why Did Microsoft...?

A few more interesting remarks/explanations Miller gave offer insight into what Microsoft views as weak points of the design and its long term plans.  He states:

On why Metro apps are fullscreen...

Metro apps are full screen to maximize the screen space and to allow for swipe gestures. A lot of the UI controls in Metro apps are swipes from various edges. These can't be triggered if there's a start bar at the bottom. Again, keep in mind that the Metro apps were designed for touch screens and casual users. The demographic that we're targeting with Metro apps don't juggle many apps simultaneously. For the ones that do, we have the desktop.

...

On why Metro is low in information density versus Zune...

 I'd imagine, and this is initial speculation as I haven't had time to think about the evolution of the design language, that early on the zune UI was only designed for the smaller screen that the Zune had. In addition, the zune player wasn't touch enabled, so information density was possible. Moving forward with it though, we needed larger margins between items to account for touch UIs. The tradeoff of this was less information density.

If you took the original zune mp3 player UI and slapped it on a modern day phone, it'd be horrible. The touch targets are far too small to hit accurately.

....

On why you don't need the Start Menu in Windows....

90% of the time, you shouldn't have to enter the start menu anyway to launch a program. Your main programs should be pinned to your task bar for faster access.

We did a lot of research on usage patterns for users. Well over 90% of the time, users use less than 10 core programs in their day to day tasks. Searching should only be used in that rare <10% time where something isn't in your core group of programs.

This is of course assuming you're using non-metro programs. If you're using Metro programs with a mouse, we threw you under a bus (and privately, we think you're a strange lot).

....

On Microsoft's "tick/tock" cycle and where Windows Vista, 7, and 8 fit in...

I disagree with your statement that Vista was a understandable upgrade. MS operates on a tick/tock/ cycle. Vista was a tick - a major change from the previous model that aggressively introduced features. Windows 2000 and 8 were the same - tick cycles. These are always less refined, stable, and usable than the tock cycles. Tock cycles are refinement cycles, they look at those major features that were introduced in the tick and they fix anything that was found wrong with them. MS's tock cycles were notably XP and 7 - and it shows, those were by far the most polished OSs we've released.

Lastly he answers the inevitable question of why Microsoft feels the need to still weakly couple the casual user play-scape (Metro) to the power user space (Desktop).  He responds:

[The reason for this approach is that] a single person often wears different masks. When I'm working, I'm a power user. After a long day though, I may want something more casual - especially after a joint or a couple beers. The ability to flip between the two spaces was something we valued.

Not everyone will agree with his statements, but they actually seem a lot of sense the more you think of them.  Microsoft seems aware of the flaws of its construct and seems to be headed in the right direction.

Perhaps with Windows 9 Microsoft will finally give the TLC to desktop mode, with new features like multi-desktop, designed to bring power users back into the fold.

Source: Windows 8



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Not really.
By Motoman on 2/18/2014 6:39:07 PM , Rating: 4
He may say that Metro was built for dummies...I say it was built *by* dummies.

And he can say that he understands that the dummies don't like it now, and he's correct. I have not met one single person in real life, either in massive corporations or in home settings, who doesn't hate Metro so much they want to set it on fire. But when he says they'll like it in 5 years...um, no. It's awful now, and it will be awful then. If it even still exists in 5 years, as MS is backpedaling so hard to distance themselves from it that they're probably going to break the sound barrier soon...

Fact are facts, and this is the fact of this matter: Metro is a solution to a problem that didn't exist. The traditional Start menu and desktop is the optimal form for organization of programs on a desktop or laptop PC. Like sharks, this UI evolved over time to perfectly match it's environment, and it sits at the top of the food chain there. Any substantial deviation from this traditional UI is necessarily a degradation in fitness-for-purpose. From this standpoint, Metro should never have been imagined...let alone developed and foisted upon the world.

Now, keep in mind that not all computing devices are the same. A UI like Metro makes all the sense in the world on a tablet or phone. These touch-driven, consumption-based devices are well served by that type of UI. That's where this UI belongs.

Microsoft's insistence on creating a common UI to apply to all computing devices is, quite frankly, an expression of insanity. It makes no more sense to force Metro on all devices from phones to workstations than it does to force a digital interface onto every device in your kitchen. On the microwave? Sure, a digital interface with various options and controls is required. But on the fridge? The toaster? The can opener? These things all have different user interfaces because they *have* to. Sure...you *could* put a digital interface on the freezer. But why would you? It would make no sense. Or, maybe you're getting a new house built, and the contractor decides that since the garage gets overhead doors, every door in the house should be an overhead door. So that your threshold-crossing experience is the same everywhere, you know.

It's obvious that the market has completely rejected Metro on the PC. It's clearly been a contributing factor to the slump in PC sales, as affirmed by massive analyst groups like Gartner and Forrester. And it's clear that MS is finally getting the message through their heads as they are running headlong *away* from Metro now, working feverishly to put a real Start menu and desktop back in the product. Their next step - the only rational step - must be to eliminate Metro completely from the desktop, and stop pretending that it makes even the slightest bit of sense to put the same UI on all computing devices.

Just. Stop.




RE: Not really.
By AdamAnon on 2/18/2014 6:50:34 PM , Rating: 4
Can't agree more. Spot on.

MS just needs to admit they screwed up, apologize and fix it, instead of sending shills all over the web trying to justify the existence of the Metro GUI on the desktop.


RE: Not really.
By superPC on 2/18/14, Rating: -1
RE: Not really.
By michael67 on 2/19/2014 2:56:58 AM , Rating: 3
quote:
You and Motoman are way off base here.

The problem is, many people cant see past there own user expectations of what they want and how they like it, but in this case its mainly MS own fault as they are clueless how to introduce new technology, and instead of promoting it, they turn very often the users against it, because they push it true the end users throat, in the wrong way or to fast.

I personally think Metro is great as it is now (W8.1 & Server 2012R2), but it was also really really bad executed and implemented when it just came out in W8.

Metro should have bin from the start a option, and not bin pushed down the throat, from the start i hated Metro, why because i had less control or at least harder control over my machine then i had with W7.

Next to that Metro was at best beta, who in there right mind takes a way functionality and delivers a beta replacement?

How is it possible that a company with that many people and that much cash, shoots its self every time in the foot.

Vista is just as good as W7, when W7 came out, but everyone still hates Vista because it was unworkable in the beginning, and it never lost that bad name.

I just hope that it will not end that way for Metro, as it certainly has it uses.

I use Metro now on 3 (4) places.

WindowPhone on a Lumia 920, and like it better then my old Android of Galaxy II.
Desktop W8.1 + StartIsBack and it works at least just as well as W7.
Windows 2012R2 Server , and loved Metro there.
Asus Transformer Book T100 ware i use both desktop and Metro depending if i use it as a Tablet or Netbook.

- WP - The type of OS for your mobile is very personal, and i can see why people would like iOS or Android better then WP, but for me what i do with it WP works best with its easiest to use and fast UI.

- Desktop - dont use it there much on a normal PC, but on my own desktop i like it, as i have a Eyefinity on 3 Korean cheap-ass 30'' 2560x1600 monitors, and have 3 old 17'' monitors above them, that i use for all the background tings and one of them runs most of he time the Metro UI.

But what idiot estranges its bread and butter costumers, just in the name of so called needed progress of the UI.

As what use has Metro on a business desktop, 2 of my friend work pretty high in the IT at the government (Norway), and they have now switched over to W7, mainly because they could not turn of Metro in W8, and even Linux became a real option for all the desktops, as they could not see what course MS was taking with the desktop.

- 2012R2 test Server - Loved the Metro UI there, as you dont use a server for contend creation, and the Metro UI gives you a quick look how the server is doing, and wish that more programs used the Metro tiles to display information there.

I however switched over from W2008R2 with NTSF to Linux with BtrFS for the server as my home sever with 35TB of storage space, i needed a better file system then old antiquated NTSF, and ReFS (next gen Win file system) is still far behind BtrFS and ZFS.

- ASUS T100 - If i use it as a Tablet, Metro is a great UI, when i go back to NetBook mode with the keyboard attached i dont use the Metro UI, as its easier to use the classic UI.

So imho Metro sure has it uses, and is not as bad as it made out to be, but that mainly because of the idiots that work at MS, that never knows how to implement new idea's in the real world, and always are to fast or to slow with implementing them.


RE: Not really.
By superPC on 2/19/2014 7:59:48 AM , Rating: 2

quote:
Metro should have bin from the start a option, and not bin pushed down the throat


Well if MS did that, metro will suffer the same fate as windows media center in windows 7. Metro is a (rather bold or maybe even overconfidence) statement from MS. That going forward, MS will treat touch based interface equally to mouse and keyboard interface.

If MS made metro an option while maintaining desktop, that will make metro seems like an afterthought and will make it more difficult for devices like Asus TF100 or Dell Venue pro 8 to attract consumers. Same as HTPC that struggled to attract a wider user-base.


RE: Not really.
By Da W on 2/19/14, Rating: -1
RE: Not really.
By Reclaimer77 on 2/19/2014 10:46:21 AM , Rating: 4
Yeah because sitting two feet from my 55" TV so I can use its touch UI is something I'm totally jonesing for!

/s


RE: Not really.
By Schrag4 on 2/19/2014 12:42:52 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
True.
MS force-feeded Metro to all desktop so that developper find it lucrative to develop apps for it. Period.


IMO, there's some dissonance in the arguments I'm hearing for forcing METRO in the beginning. One is that the PC power-user is a dying breed and that we're going to tablets and smartphones exclusively soon. The other is what you're repeating, that they had to force it on all devices or else developers wouldn't develop for it.

If desktop users are a dying breed, why would developers create a non-Metro UI? It seems like developers should be able to see that desktop users really are a dying breed and come to the conclusion that they should develop for Metro on their own.

Let's put it another way. Say Win8 defaults to Metro but can be changed. Is grandma going to change it to desktop? No. So why force it in the beginning?


RE: Not really.
By michael67 on 2/19/2014 5:30:06 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Well if MS did that, metro will suffer the same fate as windows media center in windows 7. .... MS will treat touch based interface equally to mouse and keyboard interface.

Rubbish, Metro is not a replacement for mouse and keyboard on the desktop, its a new input method for tablets and other touch input devices, but the new and the old are pretty incompatible for continued use.

quote:
will make it more difficult for devices like Asus TF100

Again rubbish, like i said, i have a TF100 that i use both in desktop and tablet mode, and if i switch between them i also switch UI.

MS pushed Metro way to hard, and the wrong way, and by doing so it left a real bad impression.

Both the (beta) Metro UI and the hardware ware not ready, and still MS pushed it so hard by making it the mandatory default UI.

Now x86 hardware with the Atom ''Bay Trail'' and also the UI are ready for prime-time, to make it to the market.

But now Metro has bad name, and it will have a much harder time convincing consumers that they should buy Windows tablet instead of a Apple or Android tablet, even do Windows has much more native software then Android and Apple combined.

quote:
Same as HTPC that struggled to attract a wider user-base.

Are you seriously comparing a UI with a application?


RE: Not really.
By superPC on 2/19/2014 11:44:48 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Are you seriously comparing a UI with a application?


Sorry, should've said windows media center. Add to that project origami while we're at it.


RE: Not really.
By Qzma on 2/22/2014 4:31:02 PM , Rating: 2
Win8 version of Metro is mutch better (faster to use) than win8.1. With win8.1 version it takes more time to aim for some small and needless button.


RE: Not really.
By TheJian on 2/24/2014 12:50:39 PM , Rating: 2
You SEE/TOUCH the monitor on your servers a lot? I rarely see any server or even PC's in person these days barring hardware failures or rolling out a PC, as I thought the object of IT is to never leave your chair if it can be done remotely ;)

The second I leave the chair I'm less productive in most cases. In my chair I can roll out updates/patches, install OS's, update to new software versions, etc etc all at once with eyes on all of it going on in a dozen radmin etc windows. :) Not to mention actually going into the server room is a pretty chilly affair. If you have to go in there long, you take a coat with you...ROFL.


RE: Not really.
By superPC on 2/19/2014 3:14:35 AM , Rating: 3
Think for a moment here. Microsoft included windows media center in windows 7. User for that kind of interface is very low even now, since very few people use HTPC and people that uses them usually has their own preference such as XBMC or other. Still Microsoft included that interface. Now tablet with touch screen are in use by a lot more people than windows media center ever did. It just makes sense to bake in such interface to windows OS from windows 8 forward. And look at XBOX One interface. It’s a dead ringer to windows 8, so it can work as 10 foot UI to replace the old media center interface (provided a good input device preferably wireless).

At first I am worried that this would spell the end of desktop, but as the article clearly stated, Microsoft are not abandoning desktop, now that the casual user have their own interface, desktop interface can be more powerful than ever and more complicated too.

What Microsoft need is a clear divide between metro and desktop. Bring start menu back to desktop and have a different shortcut to metro start screen and start menu. Maybe add multiple desktop to placate power user.

Please people, don’t knock it till you’ve tried it. Use a hybrid device for once. Such device is only possible because of windows 8. Asus transformer TF 100 is such a great device. Vaio flip too (I know this from experience). Those are devices that only OS like windows 8 can accommodate.

And devices like this are moderately successful. Look at Lenovo. They have at least 6 hybrid windows 8 devices (tablet 2, 2 type of Miix, 2 types of Yoga, and thinkpad tablet pro). Compare that to only 2 hybrid with Android OS (the recently announced A10 and Yoga android). Remember that Lenovo is the only company that manages to grow their PC business in the past few years.


RE: Not really.
By domboy on 2/19/2014 9:48:42 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
lease people, don’t knock it till you’ve tried it. Use a hybrid device for once. Such device is only possible because of windows 8. Asus transformer TF 100 is such a great device. Vaio flip too (I know this from experience). Those are devices that only OS like windows 8 can accommodate.


I kind of have to agree. While I'm not a huge fan of modern ui, it makes sense on my Surface RT, where I like being able to flip between interfaces. I actually use the desktop on it far more than modern ui, so I just hope Windows on ARM gets the more powerful desktop option in the future as well.


RE: Not really.
By inperfectdarkness on 2/20/2014 2:44:59 AM , Rating: 2
That's what I've come to believe after using 8.1 for a month. Desktop needs serious work, but the idea of switching between it and Metro on the fly is a fantastic idea for dual-interface devices.

Bring back the start menu, eliminate the sidebar, and you have a pretty nice desktop.


RE: Not really.
By coburn_c on 2/18/14, Rating: -1
RE: Not really.
By Motoman on 2/18/2014 7:56:34 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Now, keep in mind that not all computing devices are the same. A UI like Metro makes all the sense in the world on a tablet or phone. These touch-driven, consumption-based devices are well served by that type of UI. That's where this UI belongs.


I said that. You said this:

quote:
It's hilarious that you call people stupid yet don't understand this simple fact even tho it's in the article.. who are we kidding, you didn't read the article.


So...who, exactly, isn't reading what? Game...set...match.


RE: Not really.
By inighthawki on 2/18/2014 8:05:55 PM , Rating: 2
To be fair, you also stated:
quote:
Fact are facts, and this is the fact of this matter: Metro is a solution to a problem that didn't exist


and mobile competition was very clearly a problem area for MS. But it sounds like he didn't read [far enough] to see your clarification below.


RE: Not really.
By coburn_c on 2/18/14, Rating: -1
RE: Not really.
By Motoman on 2/19/2014 11:39:31 AM , Rating: 1
You two are both being manipulative in the quotes you pull. Look at the difference between the quote you pulled, and when you leave it in it's context:

quote:
Fact are facts, and this is the fact of this matter: Metro is a solution to a problem that didn't exist. The traditional Start menu and desktop is the optimal form for organization of programs on a desktop or laptop PC.


It is crystal clear, beyond the shadow of a doubt, that I was talking about forcing Metro on desktops and laptops. Unless you want to plead illiteracy, there is no way you can deny that.

And that, when coupled with my nod towards phones and tablets later, made my position about Metro on all devices absolutely accurate.

Neither of you is behaving appropriately.


RE: Not really.
By rsmech on 2/18/14, Rating: -1
RE: Not really.
By inighthawki on 2/18/2014 8:13:00 PM , Rating: 2
2 problems with your assessment:

1) Some of us think that Windows (at least the non-metro portion) is superior to Linux. Why would I then prefer Windows to make a product that is worse for me and move to an environment I don't like as much?

2) The desktop is used by WAY more than just "10% of power users." Ever heard of enterprise? It's the largest part of Microsoft's market. Consumer devices actually make up a much smaller market than you think.


RE: Not really.
By rsmech on 2/18/2014 8:31:32 PM , Rating: 1
There was sarcasm in my statement. Their arguments have been metro sucks windows 8 no good. My point, the articles, and if I'm not mistaken yours is if you don't like metro, don't use it. If your a power user why complain about an "extra feature" not intended for you.

If you don't like it smoke a bowl and you may change your mind.


RE: Not really.
By inighthawki on 2/18/2014 9:03:25 PM , Rating: 3
Ah I understand, I believe I misunderstood where you were applying your sarcasm. I do partially agree. Metro (being the start screen + metro apps) are really easy to avoid as a desktop user, so I've never fully understood that argument, but my main problem is how it leaks into the desktop. The desktop visual style was changed to be more like metro. Flat, butt ugly, and pretty awful all around. The lack of depth, no transparency or translucency support for those who liked it, solid colors with poor support for dark colors, and an unnaturally awful inactive gray color with an almost non-existent border which bleeds together with every other inactive window into a mass blob of "wtf is that." That is my primary complaint about Windows 8.


RE: Not really.
By Motoman on 2/19/2014 11:34:56 AM , Rating: 1
Where in the f%ck did you come up with the concept that 90% of desktop PC and laptop users *like* Metro?

I interact with hundreds of people on a regular basis, from the biggest corporations in the world to mom & pop with their 1 PC at home.

The % of all users, everywhere, who have expressed an appreciation for Metro? 0.


RE: Not really.
By rsmech on 2/19/2014 2:25:54 PM , Rating: 2
I don't know how you interact with so many people with a mouth like that. Especially when I. Didn't say 90% like it. If you read the article MS said it was for 90% of their test groups.

Your attitude is misdirected, misguided, and overstated. I don't think people come here to be told to f-off. If your profanity was directed to what I said vs. what you think it might not seem personal.

This is getting ridiculous.


RE: Not really.
By Reclaimer77 on 2/18/2014 10:11:40 PM , Rating: 4
Enterprise makes up WAY more than 10% of Windows users. Those are the power users too.

Don't you apologists ever get tired of being so demonstrably and categorically wrong about Windows 8?

The debate is long over. Windows 8 failed, end of discussion.


RE: Not really.
By rsmech on 2/19/2014 12:21:21 AM , Rating: 1
Sorry misstated, they were talking about 90% of those in their studies use so few apps that they can pin them to task bar. I think that since I'm talking about their polling and target audience and this article and his quote. I would feel safe saying according to whom they were concerned (not including yourself) 90% of their target were not "power" users, just users.

quote:
Don't you apologists ever get tired of being so demonstrably and categorically wrong about Windows 8?


I forget your the expert with very little experience. My experience tells me I've had easy install, hassle free updates, no crashes or conflict, zero downtime, more control over my kids computing habits, the simplest integration and sync across devices I've used (tablet, pc, phone) and have been using it since it came out. These are more important than a start button to me. I must be a quick learner.

Your right, the debate is long over, Windows 8 has delivered and that's why I waited for the complete package. pc, tablet, phone. I wasn't looking for a device, I was looking for an ecosystem.


RE: Not really.
By Reclaimer77 on 2/19/2014 8:25:18 AM , Rating: 2
Yes as long as every device you use is from Microsoft, that "ecosystem" works. How convenient for them.

You're knowingly locking yourself into a single vendor proprietary walled garden. How sad.


RE: Not really.
By rsmech on 2/19/2014 2:34:30 PM , Rating: 2
It's very convenient. I prefer to do work with my devices, not work on them. I don't have time to configure, sync, ECT. Some people do and enjoy it. I don't have the time.


RE: Not really.
By chripuck on 2/20/2014 2:56:23 PM , Rating: 2
And what computer company isn't?

Unless you're Linux, you're locked into somebodies walled garden, be it iOS, Android or Windows. Each wall may be of a different height and strength, but you're in it.


RE: Not really.
By retrospooty on 2/19/2014 8:52:43 AM , Rating: 2
"Sorry misstated, they were talking about 90% of those in their studies use so few apps that they can pin them to task bar."

That would be great if 90% of Windows users liked Windows 8. too bad its reception has been overwhelmingly negative. We get it, you like i. No problem, you can use it happily... But stop knocking people that dont like it. Surely you must see how it doesn't work well and why most people despise it.


RE: Not really.
By Motoman on 2/19/2014 11:42:08 AM , Rating: 2
No sh1t.

The unwavering reality is that the number of people who *like* metro on a desktop or laptop is so small that it may as well be 0%. Including the most un-savvy of users, who never do anything but Facebook and Farmville.

Realistically, it's even worse for those most casual users, as they're the ones most incapable of change.

Metro is the worst disaster in the history of Microsoft, and it's rejection by computer users is essentially 100%. And that's the way it is.


RE: Not really.
By rsmech on 2/19/2014 2:31:17 PM , Rating: 2
I do understand most don't like it. But as the article states in the past MS was being dismissed as being stagnant. Windows 7 is a great OS. So with that still an option 8 becomes the experiment. If you don't like it no ones complaining of 7. This is the tick tock.


RE: Not really.
By retrospooty on 2/19/2014 3:20:25 PM , Rating: 2
Sorry, it boils down to this... They removed the old start menu, on purpose before the final release to try and push thier own agenda. Forcing a touchscreen UI for all non-touch screen computers. Had they left it in as an option to use either, there would have benn zero complaints. It was a horribly bad decision period, and nothing you can say changes that fact. Like I said, MS publicly admitted it and has officially announced that it will be fixed in the next release... You cant seem to make that same leap that MS themselves did, but whatever.


RE: Not really.
By R3T4rd on 2/19/2014 6:03:01 AM , Rating: 2
Correct that Enterprise makes up more than 10% of the overall Windows end users. However, I beg to differ. I work in a Enterprise. 80% of users in the Enterprise world does exactly what 80% of the normal users do - Check email, surf the internet/intranet, have most used program shortcuts pinned or on the desktop. The very few power users to admins consist of less than 10%. So in retrospect, he is correct that most people (Enterprise included) would suffice with Metro.

Seriously, how many Enterprise allows end users to install, modify, and run Apps or custom Apps as power users or admins? In my enterprise 0%. You want something installed? Open up a ticket for me to install said program as an admin or call the dreaded Help Desk to do so, or there are other ways to push installs, patches, and updates, remotely without administrator intervention. Most end users run Win7 or XP in UCA mode and that right there coincides with what this guy is saying.

However, implementation and compatability in the Enterprise world is something else. As others have stated, it is the reason alot of Enterprise (mine included) and big companies are still running Windows XP, OS2/Warp, etc. You cannot have an application causing millions of dollars outages across the globe let alone the US.


RE: Not really.
By FaaR on 2/19/2014 12:04:19 PM , Rating: 2
Teh point isn't how many percent of home, corporate or "power" users could or would suffice with metro according to some person's arbitrary opinion, the real point is that metro is a huge, VAST divergence from how PCs traditionally have looked and functioned. In fact, so much a divergence that it outright confuzzles and annoys to the point of angering a huge number of people.

It's not just the missing, invisible hot-point start button with 8.0, it's a lot of other similarly idiotic changes in the user interface including having separate control panels for changing behavior in the metro and desktop interfaces even though they're both intertwined, being able to drag the desktop like a metro app even though you might not have any other metro apps open at the time, hiding the restart/shutdown options behind a friggen "charm" (stupid name that again just confuses people), hiding the desktop completely for no reason whatsoever when running searches, defaulting certain actions to metro apps with less functionality than the equivalent windows desktop program (like image viewing for example). ...And so on.

Win8 is a terrible, terrible schizophrenic operating system that needs to be dragged kicking and screaming out back behind the toolshed and shot through the brainpan. It's crap. End of story.


RE: Not really.
By chripuck on 2/20/2014 2:54:52 PM , Rating: 1
Enterprise users are the power users? Are you stupid?

Enterprise users are my 58 year old mother who's an administrative assistant. Enterprise users are my clients in various Fortunte 500 companies that are mid-level managers all the way to CFO's. None of these people are power users, in any way, form, or fashion. Power users are people who work in IT fields, not the guy from accounting.

Furthermore, Enterprise users can have their computers automatically managed by Group Policy which can automatically set a Win8 PC to boot to desktop, remove hot corners, uninstall all Metro apps and remove the Metro store... AUTOMATICALLY. After that literally the only difference between Win8 and Win7 is the fullscreen start menu. You can hate it or like it, but it's categorically stupid to claim that that single feature somehow makes the OS a complete failure and ruins a persons productivity.

And no, I'm not a fanboy in the slightest. I own Android, iOS, webOS and Windows products in my house. I'm just a realist who isn't afraid of change...


RE: Not really.
By DiscoWade on 2/18/2014 9:20:10 PM , Rating: 2
I think of this way. Different tools have different purposes. A hammer is not a screwdriver; a tablet is not a desktop or laptop. Each tool has a different purpose. Just like trying to put a screw in with a hammer is annoying and less than ideal, so is putting a touchscreen interface on a desktop or a laptop.


RE: Not really.
By Da W on 2/19/2014 6:56:14 AM , Rating: 2
Here's one guy who likes it.
In fact i installed Retro UI the other day. It lasted 10 minutes and i uninstalled it. I do prefer classic metro. Windows key, see all my programs at a glance, open the one i want with a mouse click and voila.


RE: Not really.
By EasyC on 2/19/2014 7:28:05 AM , Rating: 2
I should give you the email of a buddy of mine. He constantly argues that Windows 8 is vastly superior to Windows 7. I've argued and argued about what a steaming pile Windows 8 actually is, but in the end he always said it's because dumb people can't handle change. The kicker is, he actually does content creation.

While that might be true in some regard, the change in this instance, completely and utterly sucks.


RE: Not really.
By chripuck on 2/20/2014 3:00:28 PM , Rating: 2
Content creator here too and I like Windows 8 fine. Yes, there are some stupid decisions and they muddled the settings up quite a bit in places, but it's not this horrific, death inducing software people make it out to be.

I will give you this tidbit for content creators: the multi-monitor improvements alone make Windows 8 an upgrade over Windows 7. Having 3 monitors open and each having their own taskbar with their own sets of active icons = AMAZING.


RE: Not really.
By HoosierEngineer5 on 2/19/2014 10:00:37 AM , Rating: 2
As has been pointed out to me the user interface formerly referred to as "Metro" is not part of the operating system. Why Microsoft chose to only offer a single graphical user interface as part of its latest operating system is a real puzzler. I can understand having different operating systems for different classes of central processing units (from calculators to mainframes), but why limit thmeselves to a single user interface for different classes of input/output devices (from simple toggle switches to virtual reality)?


RE: Not really.
By name99 on 2/19/2014 12:21:48 PM , Rating: 1
"The traditional Start menu and desktop is the optimal form for organization of programs on a desktop or laptop PC."

I agree with everything you've said. I'll just add one point. (And I want to say this as an explanatory point, not a "rah rah Apple" point.)

Just because the traditional desktop/menus/windows/mouse combo works well for its purposes doesn't mean that it CAN'T be improved. But the improvement has to be done based on intelligence and what's useful to the user, not on some bizarre corporate theory of "Ein Windows uber Alles".

For an example of what I mean, look at where Apple is going with OSX. It is simply blindness to claim that Apple operates on "touch for mobile, tradition for OSX". Apple is DEEPLY into touch (and not just touch, but multitouch) for OSX. The best way to use OSX is using a trackpad --- either on a laptop, or via the MagicPad next to your keyboard for a desktop. OSX uses multitouch in much the same way as on iOS --- "direct scrolling", rescaling content, panning to move between different content "frames", and so on.

But there are a number of important differences between a touchpad and a touchscreen. One is that the touchpad+cursor combo allows for much finer motion, just like a traditional mouse with pixel accurate motion. A second is that use of the touchpad means your finger is not covering what you want to press (which is a huge problem when you try to convert use of the cursor to touch "clicks" and which remains a (largely unsolved) problem when trying to edit text, on iOS and Android (and WinPhone 8 for that matter).

A second line of difference is that Apple did not start with some sort of grand unified theory of common gestures even on iOS, let alone on iOS+OSX. This may seem like messy incompetence, but it has allowed for a learning period where the gestures that make sense (for EACH platform separately) have grown over time --- occasionally steered together,but never FORCED together. So, for example, scrolling on iOS is direct touch of one finger. On OSX it's direct touch of TWO fingers (because one finger is used for cursor movement). You can insist that this is "inconsistent", but you'd be a twit to do so. It's trivial to learn and feels natural in both cases. Apple has a huge pool of users scrolling on iOS and OSX every day, and few of them are complaining that they use a different number of fingers on the two platforms.

An example of Apple's on-going learning right now is the use of pans. Across various iOS apps pans are used differently (compare Safari vs Chrome) but there is something of a commonality starting to build up, and that common pattern is being moved (again tentatively) to OSX with the three-fingered pan gesture.

My point is that I think even with something as well understood as the desktop, there is room for improvement. But that improvement requires a few elements.

One is a willingness to evolve gradually, to see what developers and users want, and to be willing to admit and undo past mistakes.

Another is a willingness to see the problem from all sides, to admit that there ARE problems (SEVERE problems) with using a touchscreen as a mouse replacement, and so look outside the box for alternative solutions, not just shout loudly that the problems people are experiencing are imaginary.

A third (and here Apple has a real advantage, but MS has built this trap for itself, and still shows no willingness to unbuild it) is you have to be willing to pay a certain minimum hardware cost. Every person I know (including myself) uses a mouse when possible when using a Windows laptop, because on every Windows laptop that I've ever used, the touchpad is utter shit. Really REALLY bad.
MS has allowed this situation to persist for fifteen years or so, and now they are screwed. Not only can they not rely on old laptop trackpads as a bridge to an OSX type solution (the way Apple did, where their older single touch or double-touch trackpads flowed into multi-touch pads, but worked acceptably --- like they always had --- with the new multitouch enabled versions of OSX), they also have no mechanism in place to demand a certain level of acceptable quality for multi-touch trackpads or magic pads.

I don't know how this gets fixed. Everything I see within MS, from what this designer is saying to the analyses of their new CEO and new business organization, suggests that they still don't get any part of this. They don't get the idea of frequently UI releases with small changes to evolve the UI. They don't get ditching the parts of the UI that clearly fail. They don't get an insistence on certain minimum hardware quality levels to ensure that your UI actually works because the tracking device is fast enough, rebounds from a click fast enough, has a certain type of acceleration curve, whatever.
Primarily they still don't seem to get that they CANNOT FORCE SOMETHING ON THE WORLD AND MAKE THE WORLD ACCEPT IT.


RE: Not really.
By robinthakur on 2/24/2014 11:08:40 AM , Rating: 2
Agreed. Those clamouring for touch screen Macbooks seem to conveniently ignore the fact that the glass Multi Touch track pad works so well at this point, that any touch pad I'm using on a windows device feels broken next to it. When I was looking for Windows laptops recently I became quite disheartened at the build quality on most, and even those that had comparable build quality to Apple lacked basic things like SSD's, decent screens, adequate RAM, were bulky or suffered in battery life. For a while I wondered why there was nothing on the market, until I realised that people in the PC market (even corporates, to an extent) simply want the cheapest they can get and this necessitates a race to the bottom, with tiny margins, which means that for somebody wanting build quality as well as top components and tasteful design, there is only really one option left (or at best a more expensive custom built PC Laptop) There is something very wrong when your best option for a Windows laptop is a MBP/MBA running Windows...or a Lenovo that could heat a room.

Your point about minimum hardware cost are one reason why quality bits of PC kit like the Surface look so phenomenally expensive to pc users, because they have become used to commoditised $300 disposable laptops from Acer which are obviously appalling, but it sets the mistaken expectation of "value" on paper. MS are in a position to set a minimum hardware spec in the same way that Intel specs Ultrabooks, but again not many people buy them because they are now seen as "expensive" in a post iPad, post Netbook world. Slow bloated installs, underspecced machines, viruses and bulk are all the reasons you need as to why Windows users switched to iPads in their droves having waited for a decent MS solution for far too long.

I also can't see a way out of this from MS's perspective which doesn't result in total contrition to the very Power Users it has infuriated, and then ceding the consumer space to Apple and Android. They have unintentionally shaken a load of users off of the Windows platform, if not through direct bad experiences then through a cloud of negativity or incompatibility. What this guy said seems quite arrogant when talking about users and does indicate a "we know best" approach which is totally the wrong way to play this PR disaster. Microsoft still seem to think that they wield the power in the way that they used to in the XP days, and they don't any more. Having built up their Azure Cloud-based offerings to an admittedly strong footing, they are now pushing every business down that path, threatening for future versions of SharePoint etc. that non-cloud features might be deprecated. Of course this will only come to pass if businesses go for the SSAS model and relinquish control of their on premise infrastructure. As Adobe before them, with the Move from CS6 to Createive Cloud, this is bold to the point of arrogance. The reason behind this is revenue generation, pure and simple.

None of this is surprising, given that MS are bad at explaining new features and the reasoning behind them (generally) and that their users are also (generally) dimwits. They are like monkeys playing with a loaded shotgun. I am a long-time Windows user and used it all my life, but now choose OSX as my main desktop because it is better in all the respects which are important to me right now. The fact that Windows can run happily in a VM allows me to develop against SharePoint if I need to, and that's all the exposure I need, thanks.


RE: Not really.
By Connoisseur on 2/19/2014 1:11:54 PM , Rating: 3
I dunno. Speaking specifically about the start menu, I actually like the idea of relegating it to a secondary role in the OS. It reminds me a lot of the Office 03 to 07 transition where the ribbon took over the majority of the interface duties. The start menu does provide a lot more options but it shouldn't be used as a primary navigation tool, even for power users. With today's screen resolutions, it seems silly that a lot of users still rely on accessing all their apps on a small screen that's pinned to the bottom left.

The start menu should be more of an app drawer where a user can access less frequently used apps or those whose names they forgot. But then if they go this route, they would be aping Apple/Linux. That's not such a bad thing.


RE: Not really.
By chripuck on 2/20/2014 2:48:47 PM , Rating: 2
Power user here and it's fine, nothing to see, just yet another person whining about something they don't get.

I mean seriously, set boot to desktop, turn off hotspots, unpin/uninstall all metro apps, boom, you're done. If you're in the corporate world group policy can be implemented that will do this for every PC on your domain automagically.

Meanwhile when I get home and try to use desktop apps with my Win 8 touchscreen hybrid it's pathetic. Touch targets are too small, icons are too small, menu items are REALLY too small. Metro apps are perfect and what I use almost exclusively.

Touch is the next generation of computers and Win 7's interface was woefully lacking in that area, unless you were on a 24" screen.


RE: Not really.
By Qzma on 2/22/14, Rating: 0
Windows 8 is 2 stones that killed 0 birds
By splatter85 on 2/18/2014 5:45:57 PM , Rating: 3
They created two separate operating systems, one tablet oriented and one desktop oriented, then FORCED everyone to use both. Keep your OSes separate, don't confuse people. Compare this to Apple... MacOS for the desktop and iOS for mobile. Why in the sam hell would I want to mash those together when I do different things on those different platforms. iOS is for content viewing and MacOS is geared towards content creating.




RE: Windows 8 is 2 stones that killed 0 birds
By rsmech on 2/18/2014 8:53:05 PM , Rating: 2
How are you forced to use metro and not desktop?


RE: Windows 8 is 2 stones that killed 0 birds
By retrospooty on 2/18/2014 11:02:50 PM , Rating: 1
Uh... Start menu gone. Aweful menu repaced it. Have you not paid any attention at all in the last year and a half? Maybe you should google windows 8 UI complaints. Maybe you can figure out why enterprise, the bread an butter of the windows ecosystem, wont touch it with a 10 foot pole.


RE: Windows 8 is 2 stones that killed 0 birds
By rsmech on 2/19/2014 12:43:46 AM , Rating: 4
I asked why your forced to use metro (tile screen). I don't have to Bing it, I use it.

If you don't like it install an app for a start menu. So again how are you forced to use metro, it's a lame argument. I can understand if you don't like it. But I know you guys have apps on all your phones and tablets, what's so different with you PC?

As far as enterprise, is that somehow supposed to answer my posted question.

By the way, if you don't like 8 MS is still making money off you 7 installs. If 7 is so great how come it's not fueling PC sales?


By retrospooty on 2/19/2014 7:12:56 AM , Rating: 2
I am not forced. I am not the target market, and I am not the issue that MS has. The "dull masses" it was designed for arent going to install an app to fix what shouldn't have been broken. Look, clearly they realize it is a mistake. MS has come out publicly and announced they are bringing the old menu back for the next OS. If they can see it and admit it, so can you. Horrible for non-touch devices period.


RE: Windows 8 is 2 stones that killed 0 birds
By Fritzr on 2/19/2014 1:54:38 AM , Rating: 4
Enterprise installers are (quite rightly) allergic to change.

Change means new bugs.

There are companies still using XP and IE6 because the newfangled Vista is still in evaluation and Win7 will be considered once Vista has been fully vetted.

Give then another 4 or 5 years and they will be ready to look at Win8, possibly even being extremely daring by jumping directly to Win8.1

Change means errors ... errors mean cost
Change means training ... training costs
Change means new OS licenses ... upgraded licenses cost
Change means replacement equipment ... equipment costs

A good CEO/CFO dislikes unnecessary expense, they believe that it reduces the profit margin.

Give them a new OS that does not require training, replacement of custom software and does not introduce new bugs and they might be able to trim the approval time down to the 2 or 3 years required to verify those claims.


By retrospooty on 2/19/2014 7:09:28 AM , Rating: 1
"Give them a new OS that does not require training, replacement of custom software and does not introduce new bugs"

Bingo


RE: Windows 8 is 2 stones that killed 0 birds
By superPC on 2/19/2014 8:12:22 AM , Rating: 3
quote:
Why in the sam hell would I want to mash those together when I do different things on those different platforms


Because of devices such as Dell venue pro, Asus TF100, Lenovo Miix 2, Sony vaio flip and scores other. These hybrid devices obviously sell well enough because most of them are on their second iteration / generation.

Lenovo is the only company that manages to increase their PC sales in the past few years, and they have the most extensive hybrid lineup.

Have you ever use any of windows 8 hybrid? The exact duality that you mention are what made windows 8 a joy to use in these devices.


RE: Windows 8 is 2 stones that killed 0 birds
By name99 on 2/19/2014 12:44:24 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Lenovo is the only company that manages to increase their PC sales in the past few years, and they have the most extensive hybrid lineup.


I think you are reading WAY too much into this. If you read the Lenovo annual report they don't make nearly as big a deal about this as you do.

Firstly, much of their growth appears to come from China. In other words, they've increased sales because they have a native advantage in the largest growing market, not because they have better products in some hot selling new category.

Secondly they provide no data to allow you to break out sales of hybrids. And the usual suspects like IDC don't (at least not yet) provide that break out either.

Third they don't, in the fluffy words, make a big deal about hybrids, when they're talking about their great growth prospects going forward, blah blah. Hybrids get a small mention as a kind of "yeah, by the way we're also doing this stuff", nothing more than that.

Right now I see no evidence that hybrids are anything more than the netbooks of 2013/2014 --- lots of talk, lots of claims about the future of the industry, but all puff and BS. I may be wrong on this; I don't have a super strong opinion. But to convince me will take real data (preferably actual sales numbers) not vague hunches and insistence.


RE: Windows 8 is 2 stones that killed 0 birds
By superPC on 2/19/2014 4:08:04 PM , Rating: 2
The proof is what Lenovo themselves actually did. They're on the second generation of hybrid windows 8 devices now and adding new devices. They have 7 types of hybrids windows 8 devices (3 types of Yoga, Flex, 2 types of Miix 2, and thinkpad tablet 8), compare to at most 3 from other company. They won't be doing this if hybrids didn't do well in the market.


RE: Windows 8 is 2 stones that killed 0 birds
By name99 on 2/19/2014 4:46:32 PM , Rating: 2
Really?
How many generations of netbooks did we get? How many generations of ultrabooks?
When companies are desperate, they'll grab at anything, regardless of its actual relevance.


RE: Windows 8 is 2 stones that killed 0 birds
By superPC on 2/19/2014 6:51:07 PM , Rating: 3
Maybe, but it can be argued that without windows 8, there won't be that much hybrid at all (how much hybrid android we have? Asus only made 1 model per generation, the transformer; Lenovo only makes 2 android yoga and A10, so arguably the market is considerably weaker for hybrid android devices). Windows 8 was build for hybrid.

Anyway, have you tried windows 8 hybrid? I can't imagine using OS any other than windows 8 in it, simply because of the stark duality of the device itself, and the duality of windows 8 complements that very well. It still has issues. Would be nice to have start menu in desktop and have a different shortcut to it that metro start screen for one thing.


RE: Windows 8 is 2 stones that killed 0 birds
By name99 on 2/19/2014 10:53:43 PM , Rating: 2
So what exactly is your argument? That Windows8 is great because it enables a device that (as far as I can tell) nobody much wants; and it doesn't even work well on that device it enables?

That's one hell of an endorsement...


By superPC on 2/19/2014 11:39:51 PM , Rating: 2
Yes windows 8 enables hybrid. As far as how popular that class of a device is, you can't say that it's not popular; I can’t say that it's popular. I've given examples on why it might be more popular than you think, but maybe not as popular as I think. Lenovo are not the only one increasing their hybrid presence. Everyone from Dell to Sony now makes more hybrid windows 8 devices than last year.

Breaking into completely new territory is difficult, especially if no one ever attempt it before. MS is the only company ever tried to break into hybrid. Windows 8 is their second attempt. The first is Project Origami (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultra-mobile_PC ). The last one is a failure because it was an option. Worse yet, it was a downloadable option.

They’re not making the same mistake with windows 8, but I think we both can agree that they’re making a completely different mistake now.

Who knows, maybe someday you’ll be as happy as I am right now owning a hybrid device. By that time, you may be grateful that MS makes another attempted at hybrid with windows 8. Because if they don’t try now, how long will they wait to try to compete with ipad and scores of android devices? That would make MS even further behind android and ipad.


Hmm
By spamreader1 on 2/18/2014 5:33:38 PM , Rating: 3
I disagree with this.
"The windows 7 start menu IS better because it is familiar. We've used that design paradigm for the last 20 years"

It is better not because it is familiar. It is better because it is hierarchical. Most I know that use Windows 8 agree.

When on thier tablet devices they use for entertainment it's great.

On thier laptops, even the touch enabled laptops, it drives them nuts to have to manually re-organize thier "home page" (start menu) everytime they add a new app or when we upgrade to a new release, which is quarterly. I still see users who've used win8 for several months using an external mouse to open thier apps on thier touch enabled laptop. Some admittedly do it to keep thier screen clean which makes it easier to see, some do it because they're going to have to use thier mouse and keyboard for all thier apps anyway. And these users aren't power users by any stretch of the mind. These are users who still ask where the upside down i key is ! (exclamation point), or you ask them to reboot a pc they turn the monitor off and back on.




RE: Hmm
By bsim50 on 2/19/2014 3:46:32 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
It is better not because it is familiar. It is better because it is hierarchical. Most I know that use Windows 8 agree.

Well said. When you have 200 pieces of software installed that can very easily be grouped into half a dozen categories (Accessories, Applications, Development, Games, Internet, etc), it just makes perfect sense.


RE: Hmm
By Mint on 2/19/2014 5:40:49 AM , Rating: 1
Why is hierarchical innately superior?

Do you like your desk to be 1D hierarchical or a 2D freeform space? How about your bookshelf? Your toolshed? Your closet? Most of your fridge?

If you know where something is, then burying it in a hierarchy is a waste of time. If you don't, then Vista/Win7 proved that the fastest way to launch something is through search. Miller is right: it's about familiarity, not the superiority of a hierarchical UI.

Yes, Metro apps are almost useless for power users, and MS was stupid not to have kept the start menu as an option. But as a launcher, the start screen provides flexible one-click access that we didn't have before.


RE: Hmm
By spamreader1 on 2/19/2014 9:49:51 AM , Rating: 2
I don't guess I understand your point.

Do you leave your clothes in a basket after they've been washed and dried, or neatly arrange them in a chest of drawers?

As to my desk, other than a notepad which is linier, I only keep a hand full of stress releavers (toys), hand sanitizer, a mouse, keyboard, and speakers.

Any physical files that I have to keep, I file in a hierarchical a-z method as has been done by hundreds of thousands of others for years. 1 tray for software a-z, 2 for personell a-z. 1 tray for contracts a-z, etc.

My toolshed is organized by type of tools, Garden tools have a few feet of shelf space all together, my automotive tools have thier own toolbox and are organized by types of tools in the toolbox (a perfect example of hierachy). My wood working tools have an entier wall and are loosely organized by type/size of job they are for. Overhead rafters hold long items such as leftover 2x4's etc.

My closet is divided up with pants together, shirts together, sweaters together, jackets together. I don't go as far as my wife by grouping colors, but then again I'm green deficient so...

My fridge has butter, milk and small bottled condements in the door. Veggies and fruits in different crispers, leftovers go on the top shelf (in your face if you will) while other things needing temporarily refrigerated take the middle shelf (thawing meat, etc.) and any larger or heavy items take the bottom shelf.

I've rarely found anything that needs organized to make more sense to use a constantly changing space.

As to the one-click access, I've been pinning my 18-20 most used apps to my taskbar for years? It's highly flexible and is easier to control position of the pinned applications than the metro start menu. And it has the added benifit of not shifting things around when you uninstall old or install new apps.


RE: Hmm
By Mint on 2/26/2014 3:59:51 PM , Rating: 2
You're repeatedly proving my point, whether you understand it or not.

A laundry basket is not a 2D space. A chest is.

I rarely see desks as barren as you're describing, whether at companies, homes, or universities.

Your fridge description is that of a freeform 2D space, not a heirarchy. Same with your toolshed wall.


RE: Hmm
By Schrag4 on 2/19/2014 12:59:41 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
If you know where something is, then burying it in a hierarchy is a waste of time.


This is essentially the argument I would use when my parents told me to clean up my room. "But mom, I know my jeans are right there! (pointing down at the floor by my feet) If I put them away I won't know where they are anymore!"

My fridge has areas designated for different things. Meats go in the meats drawer, condiments go in the door, you get the picture. My tools are arranged as well. Fasteners go in one place. hand-held power tools in another, hand-held non-power tools in yet another. I certainly wouldn't adopt a system where I left nails and screws and drills and hammers in random places and "just remember" where they all are. That's insanity.


RE: Hmm
By bsim50 on 2/19/2014 1:57:42 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
"Do you like your desk to be 1D hierarchical or a 2D freeform space? How about your bookshelf? If you know where something is, then burying it in a hierarchy is a waste of time."

I take it you've never set foot in a library in your life where every book is arranged in some kind of hierarchy? Eg:-

500 Natural sciences and mathematics
->510 Mathematics
->516 Geometry
->516.3 Analytic geometries
->516.37 Metric differential geometries
->516.375 Finsler Geometry

Maybe we should throw all fiction & non-fiction all in a big random pile on the floor as a "trendy improvement" so that people could "have fun" picking through them whilst wearing their "Change-Master!" badge with pride?...

After that we could make sure all future MP3 players "force shuffle" every track into one giant album so people won't have the "waste of time" of picking an album in a hierarchical A-Z album order?

And then after that, we could ban all databases, chapters, indexes, table of contents, bullet points, tables, etc, from documents...

This is why W8 users are falling over themselves to install Classic Start Menu. It's simply human nature to group related things together.


RE: Hmm
By Mint on 2/26/2014 3:54:04 PM , Rating: 2
A library has tens of thousands of books. Not even power users have tens of thousands of apps on their machine.

I said bookshelf, not library. Do you label your books with the Dewey decimal system? That already has more items than a power user's start menu, yet we don't put books in nested filing cabinets.

So why is that? Simple: A 2D freeform space is more efficient.


Headline
By cochy on 2/18/2014 4:28:13 PM , Rating: 3
The headline for this article is pretty unfortunate. Seems like you're quoting him way out of context.




RE: Headline
By piroroadkill on 2/18/2014 4:47:54 PM , Rating: 5
Ah, but I think it's a good piece of clickbait.

In fact, the headline makes the article look cheaper than it is.

It does indeed have good content, and the man makes a great point.

But that means they'd need to spend resources on cleaning up the desktop too.

That's actually a great thing, because it means they don't have to make Metro feature rich.


RE: Headline
By cochy on 2/18/2014 5:24:21 PM , Rating: 2
And the headline's been changed.

Thanks for that.


RE: Headline
By Brandon Hill (blog) on 2/18/2014 5:31:02 PM , Rating: 2
You're welcome :)


RE: Headline
By Jeffk464 on 2/18/2014 5:30:40 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
On Microsoft's "tick/tock" cycle


Lol, ya tick - ill thought out bad OS/tock - cleaned up great OS.


Graphics creation with out pointing device?!?
By dnoonie on 2/18/2014 7:03:36 PM , Rating: 1
This guy is making wrong assumptions about power users. Consequently Grafics, video content creators, audio content creators are switching to apple.

These are power users that use pointing devices. I've useed both a
Walcom tablet and mouse in the same app. Command line UI. Data centric workflow within multiple running apps is impossible in Metro. No pointing device support? How am I supposed to do hirez drawing?

This person hasn't thought things through well.




RE: Graphics creation with out pointing device?!?
By coburn_c on 2/18/14, Rating: 0
By inighthawki on 2/18/2014 8:21:17 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Hot corners

While I don't mind them, hot corners and hot edges have been debatable as one of the worse ideas ever used in UIs and applications since the dawn of software.

quote:
admin menu

While nice, it really only adds like 2-3 things that weren't already on the start menu, or an extra click away

quote:
no more power/resource wasting aero

Aero glass (not the same as Aero) was not that big of a resource or power hog. I've noticed a negligible difference in battery life with or without aero, but if you're that worried, you can just have it off on battery. Or instead of making everyone else suffer, you could just turn it off yourself and let everyone else decide if they liked it better or not. In my opinion, for example, the Windows 8 desktop is by far the ugliest UI in a windowing system I've ever used in my life. To each his own. If it weren't for the aero glass mod available for Win8/8.1, I'd be on Win7. Yes, it's that important to me. If Win9 doesn't have glass and a UI that doesn't make my eyes bleed, I won't be touching it with a ten foot pole.


By w8gaming on 2/18/2014 9:42:05 PM , Rating: 1
The Aero removal is indeed solely due to the obsession of MS to have a unified UI across all devices. On a desktop or a notebook Aero is hardly a resource hog, and it will make the UI much prettier. It is the mobile devices that cannot deal with this. And in its folly, MS decides to punish all users who do not own a mobile devices by making an uglier desktop. Their marketing department has expected the OS to continue to sell well, but it did not, which obviously surprised very few people except whoever in charge of making such decisions in MS. There is no reason or need for it. This shows MS is seriously out of touch of making a good product that appeals to the market and recent shake up in its management can indeed be a good thing. They need new people that can actually champion better and more useful ideas. They do not need people who are already so rich and used to getting cash flowing into the company with so little effort, they have already forgotten what the general public really want.


By kmmatney on 2/18/2014 9:32:51 PM , Rating: 2
I've been running windows 8 for over a year, but recently had to install Windows 7 32-bit for a project, making my system dual-boot. I had forgotten how nice Windows 7 was. It was like getting an upgrade to my machine, instead of the other way around. Aero is very nice - and oh yeah - I can turn it off if I want. I have yet to find any value in hot corners, besides the fact that they are completely annoying - especially when I'm working with virtual machines. The only nice thing about windows 8 is that you can install a 3rd party start menu, which is even better than the Windows 7 start menu.


RE: Graphics creation with out pointing device?!?
By rsmech on 2/18/2014 8:38:16 PM , Rating: 2
I think what he's saying is what are you doing in metro. That's where it's not mouse centric. Because any content creation programs that work with didn't suddenly lose functionality in 8 desktop. If so it's the software developers issue.


By dnoonie on 2/20/2014 11:15:16 AM , Rating: 2
All the feedback is useful. I'm still running win xp and trying to figure out an upgrade path. Most of my buddys have gone with Apple.


He's mostly right
By bug77 on 2/18/2014 5:26:09 PM , Rating: 2
In the future, maybe, MetroUI will not be awkward. In the meantime, as a power user, I thank God for Linux. And play games on Win7.




RE: He's mostly right
By Jeffk464 on 2/18/2014 5:31:48 PM , Rating: 3
As long as its a hybrid OS its going to be awkward.


RE: He's mostly right
By bug77 on 2/19/2014 10:33:02 AM , Rating: 2
The plan is not to keep it hybrid forever. The plan is to push every developer to Metro in time. Because that's a paid API. That's the whole raison d'etre of Metro.


RE: He's mostly right
By formulav8 on 2/21/2014 12:05:53 PM , Rating: 2
Bingo, one of the biggest reasons. Short term loss for long term gain. Its all about the money. Slowly creating an extra source of income. To me, that is one of the biggest things I noticed out of all of this Win8 stuff going on.


By DunpTheDesktop on 2/18/2014 9:15:24 PM , Rating: 3
The dislike for windows 8 has nothing to do with METRO. The people complaining do not want to use anything other than a desktop metaphor. Any alterative (didn't have to be Metro) would have been meet with the same negative response.
If the 20 year old desktop is so great then the market for traditional PCs and Macs would not be declining. Microsoft needs an alternative because the desktop is dying. If they (MS) refuse to realize this (like many on this forum) than their OS business will die too. Forget the desktop and put your focus on developing apps that can adapt to run on mobile devices (ie Metro apps). That's the future. Times change deal with it.
MS risks becoming the next IBM. IBM refused move from the mainframe and, of course the mainframe users (the power users of that era) hated PCs.




By w8gaming on 2/18/2014 9:54:57 PM , Rating: 2
Go to a typical office environment and try to imagine how pure touch based environment work with that. Even Apple is not that crazy to think desktop is dying and fading away. A rational person would have seen that the world is splitted betwen 2 groups, a group of casual users who needs a simplified UI to work on simple things, and a group of power users who needs a more complicated UI to work with high data density presentation and precise data input. Currently desktop metaphor still do not have a replacement in the second category, and the touch UI is definitely not it.


By Fritzr on 2/19/2014 1:59:50 AM , Rating: 3
Which is why power users tap the Win key for victory


dsds
By p05esto on 2/18/2014 6:02:32 PM , Rating: 2
Even Win7 has issues.... like why can't I create folders and group applications int he start menu like I could in Vista? I have around 100 apps and it's stupid to have no ability to group them. WHY MS WHY?

Don't get me started on Win8, what a steaming pile of crap that is.... shoot me. I have it on my kids laptops and it's the worst thing I've ever tried to work on and manage. I actually start yelling and swearing on how counter intuitive and convoluted everything is. It's so dumbed down that you can't find anything. Great if all you do is check facebook but crap for anything else.




RE: dsds
By AdamAnon on 2/18/2014 6:51:58 PM , Rating: 2
Even simple users who don't do much besides web, mail and facebook hate the Metro GUI.


RE: dsds
By chripuck on 2/20/2014 3:05:25 PM , Rating: 3
Because most simple users don't have someone explaining it to them. I finally spent 20 minutes training my wife on our new tablet and she actually loves it. Other than Excel she never goes into "Desktop mode".

The smart guy who works for Microsoft is right and **gasp** is smarter than most of the schmucks on this board. Give it time, Microsoft will fix things that are wrong with it, people will get used to it and life will move on.


Problem with windows
By HoosierEngineer5 on 2/18/2014 5:59:33 PM , Rating: 2
They hide stuff, and once you have found what you are looking for, don't explain it completely. If they do explain anything, enough is incorrect (i.e. just plain wrong) to completely mislead a user, and uses obscure jargon that most folks simply don't use. More times than not, when following instructions, you run into a brick wall.

If Microsoft would only pay attention to the casual user and attempt to help them along, things would work out much better. I can't believe they haven't figured this out yet. Today, I had Word do something unexpected, that I couldn't figure out how to undo. I had to re-type the entire document.




RE: Problem with windows
By HoosierEngineer5 on 2/18/2014 6:26:23 PM , Rating: 2
One other thing that could help Microsoft considerably (including the Linux advocates). Lose the attitude that if somebody doesn't know something, they are too stupid to understand.

Trivial jargon example - Assuming my desktop is the thing my computer is sitting on, how can I add a desktop to my desktop as the article suggests?


Multiple desktops...
By croc on 2/18/2014 6:06:57 PM , Rating: 2
"In that regard, Miller argues that Metro is in fact great for power users. It will allow features like multiple desktops which were cut from previous versions of Windows due to the casual user majority. He comments:

A great example is multiple desktops. This has been something that power users have been asking for for over a decade now. OSX has it, Linux has it, even OS/2 Warp has it. But Windows doesn't. The reason for this is because every time we try and add it to the desktop, we run user tests; and every time we find that the casual users - a much larger part of our demographic than Apple's or Linux's - get confused by it. So the proposal gets cut and power users suffer."

When I think of multiple desktops, I think of Unix variants that use the CDE framework. For my needs these are perfect. I can have one setup for multiple consoles, one setup for common office tasks, one setup for specialized services, and another for <whatever> and another for... Really cuts down on clutter, gives a single focus to a single desktop.

As to whether Microsoft ever tried to provide a CDE - lookalike, I don't know. I'm not even sure if the kernel could handle it. I DO know that I was never invited to test a version with any functionality like that. And with the outrageous number of SKUs that MS had (has?) certainly this feature could have been accommodated in the 'Ultimate Professional' SKU, eh?

So, I think that I am going to call a bit of BS on this one...




We told MS so
By w8gaming on 2/18/2014 6:51:53 PM , Rating: 2
The problem is Microsoft knew Metro is not designed for power user content creation and yet they think selling Surface using MS Office as the main focus is a good idea. That's why they failed. They should have focus on media consumption; ie audio/video, games, social networking etc when they launched Windows 8. They released an not refined OS with little useful apps and hoped for the best. Selling Surface at much lower price would have helped, which eventually they were forced to do so anyway.




Problem found...
By kfonda on 2/18/2014 7:35:29 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
[The reason for this approach is that] a single person often wears different masks. When I'm working, I'm a power user. After a long day though, I may want something more casual - especially after a joint or a couple beers. The ability to flip between the two spaces was something we valued.


There's your problem right there...they were drunk and stoned when the designed Metro. The legalization of pot in Washington state is just going to make it worse. :-)




MS just doesn't get it...
By Kaisha on 2/18/2014 8:34:46 PM , Rating: 2
I understand the 'theory' that Metro is for casuals and desktop is for power users, but this just isn't true.

The Metro UI, despite being simplistic, is not easy for casuals. My father (a college chemistry professor) bought a touch+pen laptop for work which he loves. But he can't figure out Metro for the life of him. Sometimes you swipe from one side, sometimes from the other, sometimes the corner. The organization of things is seemingly arbitrary. Switching between apps by swiping from the left is more difficult than alt-tabbing, sometimes you swipe fine, sometimes you end up with a split screen, sometimes you end up with the wrong app. While trying to draw on the screen you're constantly hitting the corners/edges canceling your drawing and/or switching apps accidentally. The whole notion of having two versions of many programs, a Metro version and a desktop version is a source of endless frustration. The list goes on and on...

As a power user I can't stand the Metro UI, and wish it'd just get out of my way, but that I expected. What I didn't expect is just how hard the UI was to grasp by non-power users. The failing of the Metro UI is that it is a casual UI that requires the knowledge of a power user to operate. It will never 'catch-on' in its current form, because it caters to no one...




By Hakuryu on 2/18/2014 9:49:50 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
90% of the time, you shouldn't have to enter the start menu anyway to launch a program. Your main programs should be pinned to your task bar for faster access.

I like a clean desktop. Every time I see a person with an entire desktop of icons, or a huge list of icons pinned to the taskbar, I wonder how they keep track of it.

Win Key + Up Arrow + Enter (open Start Menu, select, and open) when I get on the program I want is second nature, and I guarantee you it is faster than clicking on the taskbar and selecting an icon. Or just Win Key and type 'calc' and hit enter to open the calculator (granted you can do this with Win Key + R, but that takes two hands; my way is still faster - that is if you have a start menu).

It's this 'telling us how it should be done' attitude with Win 8 that really ticks me off. Screw you MS; I'll work the way I want to.




i think WIN8 is great!
By techman-jef on 2/18/2014 10:54:06 PM , Rating: 1
So sad for all these folks that can't adapt. Win 8.1 works great. Way faster and more stable than WIN 7. It's getting tiresome hearing all these folks crying about a start button. Get over it.

I have had WIN 8 since it came out. Yes - I used a free start button for awhile (pooki) but rarely use it anymore. It took me a couple of days to get to 95% of the proficiency where I was with WIN7. Sure - there were a few deeper things in the OS I had to figure out, but hey, these are things 99% of the folks probably would never deal with
.
Just FYI - the desktop is exactly like the WIN7 desktop , and the metro has the same stuff as your "all important" start button has.

Oh - you want something easier - try installing Ubuntu on a laptop with a Nvidia Video card. I finally got it to work after visiting numerous forums and learning about all the work a-rounds. Seriously not any easier or more user friendly (unless you love typing in a lot of code)




By villageidiotintern on 2/20/2014 12:02:21 PM , Rating: 1
Because the version number and your age is the same, 8!


Touchscreens
By SDBud on 2/19/2014 12:58:52 AM , Rating: 2
I don't see touchscreens EVER being commonly used for a desktop computer. Just TOO awkward!

Few home users will be able to afford the "Hawaii 5-0' tabletop displays, or the "NCIS Los Angeles" wall of monitors, NOR do they have the need for them.




By bsim50 on 2/19/2014 3:51:54 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
"He goes on to compare previous versions of Windows, including the highly successful Windows 7, to a "rented tuxedo""

A 'rented tux" which fits me perfectly thank you...

quote:
"90% of the time, you shouldn't have to enter the start menu anyway to launch a program"

I often don't:-

- Right-click on Word in your Start Menu, under "Shortcut Key", type in something like CTRL + ALT + W...

- Or you could just create a desktop shortcut...

- Or you could pin it to the taskbar...

- or create a classical "Quick Launch Bar":-
http://www.howtogeek.com/howto/windows-7/add-the-q...

The "problem" was already solved 4 times over before "Metro" even launched...




Usability and intended audience
By MTEK on 2/19/2014 8:03:04 AM , Rating: 2

quote:
your computer illiterate little sister


Ah, so that's why Windows Server 2012 looks the way it does.




The Next IBM?
By bitmover461 on 2/19/2014 9:59:14 AM , Rating: 2
In 1993 IBM was very close to going out of business. The short answer on why was that they had pushed unpopular solutions down the throat of customers for too long. This same "we know best" attitude is much too prevalent in this gentleman's interview, and Microsoft is headed for the same fate unless they start listening.




Metro isn't even a decent touch UI
By jamawass on 2/19/2014 10:39:29 AM , Rating: 2
I'm using an Asus T100 transformer tablet and I rarely use it in tablet mode because metro is a poor touch and tablet UI. For example the lock screen will display unread messages/missed voip calls. Once the screen is unlocked there's no way to identify which app generated the message ( I use viber and skype) so I have to remember to go to each app individually. Secondly the time, battery life and connectivity should always be displayed rather than requiring a swipe plus it takes 3 taps to put the device to sleep.
Metro UI is far from the user friendliness of iOS, Android or even the extinct webOS, if he thinks windows has almost finished with it then M$ is in more trouble than we think.




By KOOLTIME on 2/19/2014 1:23:41 PM , Rating: 2
The new UI simply put is garbage for traditional desktop use.

for touch screen use, it has more purpose.

for todays market, with still billions of traditional desktop PC's in the world, and non touch/swipe screens on most desks currently. Its no good.

To find anything swiping around scrolling around its not an easy read.

One of the biggest problems is way to many icons in true UI to search every time someone needs access to something.




People voted with their wallets
By Handson on 2/19/2014 3:22:13 PM , Rating: 2
Most existing windows users held their nerve and just sat back and watched what happened. Some even questioned whether they needed a PC at all.

MS also tried to hold their nerve whilst their OEM partners jumped ship and started diversifying.

For the first time in about 20 years a customer can go into best buy / pc world or whatever store they buy their electrical from and see something other than Windows on the shelf. Funny thing is: they actually bought those other less powerful devices.




ridiculous...
By zodiacfml on 2/19/2014 11:48:30 PM , Rating: 2
I could not accept even one of his defense for Metro. It's just awful with any device that has a keyboard and mouse.

I have a notebook with touchscreen and never used the touch screen at all. The charms and metro taskbar at the left is just cumbersome.

Metro only makes sense with a tablet! Simple as that.




failings of W8
By wallijonn on 2/20/2014 10:12:12 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
The demographic that we're targeting with Metro apps don't juggle many apps simultaneously. For the ones that do, we have the desktop.


That's the problem - you didn't really have a desktop and many times working from the desktop activated Metro Apps (music, video, .PDF, photo viewer, etc.) The Desktop User then has to go in and re-set the program defaults. The desktop user shouldn't have to remember Dos commands to be able to navigate the system. It's because shutting down the system is so cumbersome that he has had to "remember" Alt-F4.

The reason why W8 didn't get along with the desktop is because the touch keyboard/mouse peripheral was never invented - a touch screen that is really a keyboard sized mouse pad. Had such a peripheral been invented then it would have replaced the keyboard and mouse whilst allowing gestures - basically a touch pad that your fingers rest on just like they would on a keyboard, but with the ability to instantly switch to a keyboard layout by hitting a corner with one's pinky finger.

No, it takes more time to get to the Control Panel through the Metro interface than it does with a mouse hovering over the Start Menu radio button.

If it is indeed 10 apps that is the average accessed by any user then a configurable dock is the better choice since they are telephone button sized, making them easier to activate than having to scroll through a Metro screen.

This article re-defines a Power User as being one who never touches a mouse, that only uses keyboard commands to switch between apps and to launch apps. That user may just as well be using Linux. The vast majority of us want to switch between tabs and windows, to run three or four apps. at the same time. Launching an app from the desktop, automatically being thrown into a Metro app., then having to switch back (why doesn't Alt-Tab also include the Metro App?) is time consuming.

No, since the demographic that you were targeting was the touch screen tablet and cell phone user what you did was make the desktop user collateral damage.




Here's a clue, Microsoft:
By wallijonn on 2/20/2014 3:40:04 PM , Rating: 2
The people most likely to buy Windows 8 are desktop users. The people most likely NOT to buy Windows 8 are those who buy new desktops, laptops, netpads or tablets because they expect Windows 8 to come already installed. No sales, there.

Now that WXP is no longer being supported users will be forced to upgrade their computers. Many users would probably want to upgrade to a wireless laptop or a tablet. If the laptop comes with W8 the customer is not likely to buy the computer since it will need a touch screen, which translates to more money. The desktop user isn't interested in buying a new touchscreen monitor, either. Therefore PC sales will slump - there will be no new desktop purchases, there will be no laptop purchases, there will be no net book purchases, there will be no tablet purchases.

Since W8 is inimical to desktop users there will be no sales of Windows 8. Simple, really. If the new computer cannot be "down graded" to an included free copy of Windows 7 then it won't be bought. No sales there.

The desktop user may upgrade to Windows 7, but the tablet user will buy anything else but a Windows 8 machine.

Windows 8 on a cell phone? Great. Just don't expect people to pay $100 to have it installed on their phones. They're more likely to live with it until the contract is over, or trade it in or buy another phone that does not have Windows 8 on it. If it's not free they're not going to buy it.

You created a product for the tablet user but the tablet buyer expects it to be free. Therefore there will be no sales of Windows 8. Since Windows 8 was created for tablets the desktop user will not buy Windows 8. Therefore there will be no sales of Windows 8. What's not to understand?




W8 may soon be but a memory
By wallijonn on 2/21/2014 9:59:09 AM , Rating: 2
All the problems of Windows 8 will probably soon be forgotten when Windows 9 debuts in April. Hopefully the desktop power user will have a Windows 7 like experience, the tablet user will have his touch sensitive tablet GUI and the laptop and net book user will be the true beneficiary of Microsoft's diligence.

Since XP support ends in April that should translate to many millions of users needing new OSs. The majority of these home based XP desktop users will probably gravitate to laptops and net books since the world is going towards wireless connectivity. Hopefully the GUI will inspire them to learn the new OS yet be as familiar as their old XP experience.

Hopefully there will be three flavors, W9 Desktop, Laptop or Tablet, - to choose from upon initial boot install, with perhaps the laptop version geared more to a docking station OS (which was woefully inadequate in Vista and W7 since it really only used widgets) since screen space is at a premium on a laptop.

Perhaps MS can emulate desktop spaces just as the desktop is extended on dual screen monitors, say, calling them "Clean Slates," where the desktop is cleared of all clutter and only a clean slate is presented which can be customized with only the necessary app. icons on it. Just as one can pin a Metro app. to the start screen, perhaps an app. can be pinned to a desktop, allowing the user the ability to switch between desktops as easily as switching between apps.

Windows 9 is a "tock" version, and if it holds true to the past it should ensure almost universal adoption. The WXP users will all upgrade, (hopefully the transition will be seamless), all the W8 users will upgrade, and perhaps most of the W7 users will upgrade. That should ensure massive profits for Microsoft.




idiots
By DocScience on 2/21/2014 9:25:03 PM , Rating: 2
I guess Microsoft doesn't want the business market any more.

Are there any adults working there?




Grandma :(
By Doctor Drew on 2/23/2014 1:01:18 PM , Rating: 2
My grandmother bought her first computer, a windows 8 equipped HP last year and absolutely hated it. My brother installed Fedora on it and now it does exactly what she needs it to do without nonsense tiles or buggy internet explorer.

She's especially thrilled to have solitaire.




Bubble reality
By Ammohunt on 2/18/2014 5:30:48 PM , Rating: 1
This guy just proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that Microsoft is completely clueless. The majority of the market is computer literate and they are literate in the start menu + desktop interface duh! The mistake they made was forcing people to learn a new interface (better or not) without providing support for the legacy interface so people could ease into a new interface at their leisure or not at all.




Shove it
By SteelRing on 2/18/2014 6:09:00 PM , Rating: 1
What I don't appreciate is they knowingly shoved this unrefined (as he said it), immature UI down your throat regardless of how it's perceived. It's one thing if MS starts by marketing and education campaign to get people to warm up to touch UI and start to appreciate the simple mindedness it brings to the table. Instead it acts like it's declaring war on long time users, power or not, telling them to change their behavior overnight coz they know best and you and their very own start button is in the wrong.

Cant help to notice the arrogance flair by this UI designer guy too with a great deal of presumption that this is the future while in fact they're simply playing catch up. So you have built the windows desktop so it runs on powerful intel chips and basically allow you to almost literally run the world on your lap, then you turn around and replace it with a simple OS made for toddler and you pat yourself in the back.

And I'm supposed to just take that because you're MS and you own me? No thanks.




Hogwash
By Zaranthos on 2/19/2014 1:37:36 PM , Rating: 1
I'm sick of Microsoft zombies posting about how Metro is better and you just have to learn to use it. Then shut the hell up and switch to a Dvorak keyboard because we all know it's really better if you just learn to use it. Windows 8 should have remapped the keyboard to Dvorak by default and forced people to learn it and if they didn't like it they are just stuck in their ways and afraid to learn new things.




Speak it brotha
By coburn_c on 2/18/14, Rating: -1
RE: Speak it brotha
By villageidiotintern on 2/18/2014 5:53:47 PM , Rating: 1
I'm not reading this article. It is masturbatory in nature. I just scrolled down to the first moron who denigrated critics of Windows 8 and you are it. What you wrote is the stupidest goddamn thing I have read all week. Not only are you an idiot, you are an asshole, too. Do you take both of your brain cells out at night to play with them or just one?


We'll file this under...
By retrospooty on 2/18/14, Rating: -1
RE: We'll file this under...
By Reclaimer77 on 2/18/14, Rating: 0
"Young lady, in this house we obey the laws of thermodynamics!" -- Homer Simpson














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki