Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 17th Sep 2011 00:18 UTC
Windows In the article on Windows 8, I already mentioned that in order to demonstrate the viability of Metro for something other than Facebook and Twitter, Microsoft should come up with a Metro interface for Microsoft Office - one that doesn't leave out 90% of Office's features. Well, Microsoft has hinted that they are, indeed, working on Metro Office. In addition, it turns out Microsoft isn't entirely sure to how to address the issue if legacy applications on ARM.
Order by: Score:
mrstep
Member since:
2009-07-18

An ARM tablet that won't run legacy apps. Hey, I have an idea, go buy that nice tablet over there that has a lot more apps and doesn't break into schizophrenic UI daydreams from time to time?

An x86 tablet that's thicker, heavier, with shorter battery life, and that needs a stylus or mouse & keyboard to use those legacy apps. Hey, wasn't this called a TabletPC for the last 10 years nobody wanted it?

It's just a one-two powerhouse combo.

Reply Score: 4

fran Member since:
2010-08-06

Microsoft has stellar developments tools.
It wouldn't be suprised if the visual studio of the future ease this x86&ARM portability issue.

Reply Score: 3

glarepate Member since:
2006-01-04

AIUI, all you need to do right now with the W8 version of VS is to port any existing code to the new WRT framework and them compile it for your target architecture. (I have not tested this!)

As has been said here and there, this doesn't mean that you can run legacy x86 apps on ARM. It simply doesn't have the horsepower to do x86 emulation. At least not yet. Given that it is a low energy design it will likely never be an ideal platform for x86 emulation until massively parallel hardware is available.

Reply Score: 2

mrstep Member since:
2009-07-18

The bad news is that any apps that are using older/other tools or that have assembly optimizations are immediately not just a recompile away. Not to mention, if you don't own the app and it isn't actively being supported anymore, you're even further from a port. And that's without getting into the point that if it needs a re-compile for ARM to most likely work on a tablet, you really would want the interface re-done to support touch, not the original app. Otherwise just get a laptop already...

Reply Score: 2

fran Member since:
2010-08-06

Glare what do you think about these developments.
All of these seems to have release dates coinciding with the Win 8 release. Is the "not powerfull enough" argument really valid?

http://androidandme.com/2010/09/news/arm-reveals-quad-core-2-5-ghz-...

http://blogs.nvidia.com/2011/01/project-denver-processor-to-usher-i...

another story on this
http://www.pcworld.com/article/240183/why_windows_8_on_arm_matters....

Reply Score: 2

glarepate Member since:
2006-01-04

Glare what do you think about these developments.
All of these seems to have release dates coinciding with the Win 8 release. Is the "not powerfull enough" argument really valid?

http://androidandme.com/2010/09/news/arm-reveals-quad-core-2-5-ghz-...

http://blogs.nvidia.com/2011/01/project-denver-processor-to-usher-i...

another story on this
http://www.pcworld.com/article/240183/why_windows_8_on_arm_matters....


I'll start by disclaiming. (o;)

I have been at odds with the M$ fanbois for some time that ARM will never be useful as a PC CPU. That said, it may be that I have been influenced by their negativity in my assessment.

In the first article the announcement of a 2.5 GHz 4 core for a timeframe that is close to that expected for W8 seems promising. Especially when coupled with the promise of 5 times the performance of the A8. However the intended application of these is still for phones although given how the iPad performs now it could be a pretty snappy tablet with the updated CPU.

This is still intended to sit in a 'small' device. This means short data paths, low power, tight video coupling. Good application for laptops as well as tablets, phones and tab-phones. It remains to be seen how well the chips will be integrated with the other parts of the system. What type of bus(es) will they sit on and how power consumption will be affected by that design when put to non-phone/tablet uses.

The second article extends out to address their usefulness in the embedded space. Not a big jump from phones and tablets, but still a distinct niche. It points up how the power efficiency is also due to the architectural efficiency of the RISC design. That would tend to bode well for taking on the chore of x86 emulation, but again, once the CPU crunches the numbers the results have to be passed around the circuitry to be made useful. Both Intel and AMD have made great strides doing this. ARM CPUs might well do so too, especially with highly parallelized GPUs. Can they go from promise to performance in the sigificantly different area of emulation of the CISC/RISC blend that is x86? Well, we should see in about a year.

The last article seems to address the emulation conundrum most directly and most successfully. 16 cores and DirectX support. Although not strictly adhering to the definition of massively parallel it's 16 times more parallel that existing single core devices and coupled with other likely efficiencies and speedups it looks like it may be up to the task. In a year. (;

So while they are powerful now, for what they are as well as in the sense of being able to do work in general, the task they would be taking on still leaves some room for doubt as to whether they would be "powerful enough". It seems like that room for doubt is being pretty well compressed though.

I suspect that what we will see is that the need for emulation of x86 CPUs will be tapering off, possibly quite sharply. The end of backward compatibility? Massive replacement of existing codebases that are working fine simply for the purpose of throwing new hardware at existing solutions in order to displace them for no economic benefit? Not so much that as powergrid and, possibly automated, refactoring of existing source code to work on upcoming devices that will provide some enhanced utility and economic benefit.

My speculations on these points. A knowledgeable person may have something very different to say.

Reply Score: 2

Neolander Member since:
2010-03-08

ARM will not be useful as a desktop CPU until it gets some standard hardware architecture like the one x86 has. A computer is simply more than a set of CPU registers and instructions.

Reply Score: 2

fran Member since:
2010-08-06

"ARM will not be useful as a desktop CPU until it gets some standard hardware architecture like the one x86 has. A computer is simply more than a set of CPU registers and instructions."

O ye of little faith.
Microsoft has a working windows 8 running on an ARM processor.
Were just not privy to all the ins and outs yet but ARM and Windows is making this work.

Reply Score: 2

dsmogor Member since:
2005-09-01

ARM is just at the beggining of the out of order path, that Intel has entered with introduction of P6 whole 16 years ago. That's a lot of time to catch up. Of course they have better ISA and can pump up the core number (much easier from the power management pov) but that won't change the need for single core IPC for productivity apps.

Reply Score: 2

Maybe Microsoft does know what it's doing ...
by MacTO on Sat 17th Sep 2011 01:48 UTC
MacTO
Member since:
2006-09-21

Microsoft is an easy target because they haven't been compelling in the tablet market as of yet, but they may know what their doing with Metro.

First off, I don't think that it is going to be a one-size-fits-all solution like existing tablets are. I suspect that we're going to see ARM based tablets that will be of limited functionality (at least initially) when compared to iOS and Android products. As many people have pointed out, the apps simply aren't there yet. But they could be in time.

I suspect that we will also see a variety of Intel based tablets. They will have serious shortcomings compared to ARM based tablets, e.g. in term of cost and battery life, but they will be able to run a broad range of native Windows and Metro applications.

But, in the long run, I suspect that will all be temporary. At least it will be if Microsoft is as serious about WinRT as they sound. Once applications are developed for WinRT they will run on both platforms, albeit they may have to be compiled for Intel and ARM if they are using native code. Now something tells me that the serious applications are probably going to ignore the UI guidelines that Microsoft it bound to develop for Metro, and stick to something more conventional, but they would run on your ARM tablet quite nicely if you hooked up a keyboard and a mouse -- and would be just as powerful as existing software.

It will take time though. After all, the existing Windows software ecosystem wasn't created overnight. Heck, Windows developers have even had to go through major transistions. Heck, Mac developers have had to go through major transitions and there was even a smaller market base to justify it. But Microsoft will probably succeed in the long run.

(Sorry iOS and Android fans, but everything I've seen from those platforms have been toys in comparison to what you find on Microsoft's platforms. I'm also not convinced that developers are eager to jump to iOS or Android for serious applications.)

Reply Score: 1

tomcat Member since:
2006-01-06

Microsoft is an easy target because they haven't been compelling in the tablet market as of yet, but they may know what their doing with Metro.


Microsoft's previous attempts at tablets tried to get people to touch the desktop -- which was fraught with peril and essentially the wrong choice because windowed/desktop UI is small, complex, and difficult to target properly. Think about all of the toolbars and menus and junk UI that's impossible to target with a fat finger. Metro changes all that. It removes the chrome and clutter, and gets down to the essence of what the user is trying to manipulate. A lot of geeks will resist this change because they believe that the simplification somehow dumbs-down the user experience to the point where geek hegemony doesn't rule supreme anymore. But that's okay, because they still have their command-lines and desktop, if they really want it. It's just that the rest of the world wants a simpler experience.

Reply Score: 1

Anonymous Penguin Member since:
2005-07-06

It's just that the rest of the world wants a simpler experience.


How can you be so sure? Any computer user, including grannies, who isn't a total idiot, will know how to use Windows, from XP to 7, or OS X.
As it has already been said, if you can't use such simple interfaces, you have no business using a computer.
But what matters most, time will tell and users will vote with their wallet. My money is on Windows 8 doing worse than Vista, regarding sales.
This will be also a great opportunity for OS X, if only Apple had somebody in charge who was visionary enough to bring Macs to the masses, by making prices more affordable.

Reply Score: 1

tomcat Member since:
2006-01-06

How can you be so sure? Any computer user, including grannies, who isn't a total idiot, will know how to use Windows, from XP to 7, or OS X.
As it has already been said, if you can't use such simple interfaces, you have no business using a computer.


Sales of laptop computers (easily the largest category of computers sold today) are declining, while sales of the iPad are increasing. I think it's reasonable to conclude that sales of iPads (and smartphones) are eating into laptop sales. The market is speaking. IDC, Gartner, and everybody else echoes these sentiments. Microsoft is responding.

But what matters most, time will tell and users will vote with their wallet.


Agree.

My money is on Windows 8 doing worse than Vista, regarding sales.


I disagree. Vista didn't really offer much value over XP. The interface was pretty much the same, and it created some glaring performance issues. Windows 8 is a different animal altogether. The interface has been completely revamped, it's a new programming model, there's a Store ecosystem developing, and thus ... this won' be your father's version of Windows. I believe that the market will respond favorably.

This will be also a great opportunity for OS X, if only Apple had somebody in charge who was visionary enough to bring Macs to the masses, by making prices more affordable.


Disagree. OSX is mired in old school desktop thinking. It's not going to build significantly more market share, other than the iPad and iPhone.

Edited 2011-09-18 23:14 UTC

Reply Score: 2

vault Member since:
2005-09-15

A lot of geeks will resist this change because they believe that the simplification somehow dumbs-down the user experience to the point where geek hegemony doesn't rule supreme anymore. But that's okay, because they still have their command-lines and desktop, if they really want it. It's just that the rest of the world wants a simpler experience.

I think even the geeks agree that Metro is a superior interface on touch-based devices. What we don't want to accept is Metro being forced on the desktop computers. If you tried it you'd know that it's next to useless on a 24" monitor, operated with mouse and keyboard.

You could say that we don't have to use Metro if we don't want to, but the fact that normal desktop is suddenly being called "legacy", and all the new APIs target Metro, win32 supposedly being phased out, THAT'S what makes us nervous. It seems like Microsoft is forcing Metro on us, no matter the device, it's size, shape or controls.

Reply Score: 2

Metro Interface Sucks
by looncraz on Sat 17th Sep 2011 02:24 UTC
looncraz
Member since:
2005-07-24

I've said it before, and I'll say it again:

Metro SUCKS!

I see it serving nobody any good. Destroy it and those who need such a simplistic interface to use a computer!

Survival of the fittest!! DO NOT cater to the weakest minds!!

--The loon

PS: How do you shutdown Windows 8?? Anyone know??

Reply Score: 7

RE: Metro Interface Sucks
by kedwards on Sat 17th Sep 2011 02:38 UTC in reply to "Metro Interface Sucks"
kedwards Member since:
2009-04-25

There are two ways to shut down:

1. Move your mouse over to the start menu, select settings and on the right hand side the settings panel will appear and select power and there you can select reset, shut down or sleep.

2. On the legacy desktop press Alt + F4 and it will give you options to log off, switch user, shut down, restart or sleep.

Hope that helps.

Edited 2011-09-17 02:39 UTC

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Metro Interface Sucks
by spinnekopje on Sat 17th Sep 2011 09:44 UTC in reply to "RE: Metro Interface Sucks"
spinnekopje Member since:
2008-11-29

Move your mouse over to the start menu, select settings and on the right hand side the settings panel will appear and select power and there you can select reset, shut down or sleep.


To translate that to the average user: ask someone who knows it and write it down, so you can find it again in the future.
Please make it easy, not more difficult. That would save me a lot of time explaining people how to do a lot of simple tasks on their computer.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Metro Interface Sucks
by mrstep on Sun 18th Sep 2011 03:41 UTC in reply to "RE: Metro Interface Sucks"
mrstep Member since:
2009-07-18

Hahahaha. "Move your mouse over to the start menu, select settings and on the right hand side the settings panel will appear and select power and there you can select reset, shut down or sleep."

So back on XP, it was a lot more complex - click 'Start' and then select 'Turn Off Computer...'. Admittedly, the 'Start' thing made no sense then and still doesn't, but geez, it's like every iteration is an exercise in making things worse instead of thinking of ways to improve it.

Ballmer needs to be go ASAP. Every idiotic laugh of his just puts Windows further behind where it needs to be. A new marketing push for TabletPC under the guise of Windows8 isn't going to suddenly turn a decade of crap into gold.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Metro Interface Sucks
by transputer_guy on Sat 17th Sep 2011 02:39 UTC in reply to "Metro Interface Sucks"
transputer_guy Member since:
2005-07-08

Ctl Alt Del still works as in 7, red button still there.

I used 2 monitors so I always see the desktop on one and mostly on the other if I don't trigger Metro.

Also I used RocketDock to add links to various Win apps, control panel etc buried in the programs folder tree plus my regular apps.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Metro Interface Sucks
by Bill Shooter of Bul on Sat 17th Sep 2011 02:39 UTC in reply to "Metro Interface Sucks"
Bill Shooter of Bul Member since:
2006-07-14

If Microsoft had not catered to the weakest minds, they would have continued to develop their UNIX offering in full command line glory. They would have always shipped a compiler with every operating system, and expected the user to be proficient in its use. But instead it took the easy route and made windows. Microsoft made its Billions by making computers cheap and usable for most people.


Its like you are complaining to a giraffe that its too tall to be a church mouse.

Reply Score: 5

RE[2]: Metro Interface Sucks
by looncraz on Sat 17th Sep 2011 05:12 UTC in reply to "RE: Metro Interface Sucks"
looncraz Member since:
2005-07-24

Prior versions of Windows catered to those who were willing to put a little thought into their actions, though it was still dumbed down too much.

There is a happy medium that must be achieved, Windows 7 is a nice medium, a nice balance. The system itself doesn't require too much of you, and it doesn't get in your way when your trying to do something you've down 1,000 times on other versions of Windows.

It is hard for me to describe how badly Metro is: it alienates old users completely, it lacks intuitive interface cues (I'm sure they'll work on that **cough**), it shoe-horns a new paradigm into an old box, and it is outright expecting touch-screen usage.

If you make an interface designed to be used by a baby, then those using it will begin to also think like a baby.

--The loon

Reply Score: 4

RE[3]: Metro Interface Sucks
by mrstep on Sun 18th Sep 2011 03:47 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Metro Interface Sucks"
mrstep Member since:
2009-07-18

The joke is that they're talking about x86 tablets that half expect touch-screen usage, with the other half being either stylus or keyboard/mouse. So let's mix the content consumption paradigm that apparently is very appealing to users who don't need a full PC - or don't want one when sitting on a sofa - with the old interface, in which case you have every nightmare that TabletPC brought to the table. What? Hey Steve, you do know you can still deliver a laptop/desktop OS without having to actually mix touch apps directly into it, right? Like... tablets using WP7 without turning Win8 into a bastardized piece of crap? But this is apparently Ballmer's personal quest, making sure that stuff like Courier doesn't see the light of day if it isn't running full-blown Windows.

It's just too strange.

Reply Score: 1

Bill Shooter of Bul Member since:
2006-07-14

Once I discovered Linux ( and once they had decent fonts) I couldn't stand windows anymore. Its too much of a walled garden. You can make it work decently with enough effort and the right applications installed, but that's too much of a hassle to do simple tasks on a friends computer. Win 7 is already too stupid.

Reply Score: 1

Bill Shooter of Bul Member since:
2006-07-14

Win 7 is already too stupid.
... For me. Left out the qualifier.

I didn't mean to diss anyone who finds it perfect for their needs. Obviously some people do like it and it works well for them. Just as obvious, to me, is that some people will also like windows 8 Metro and it will work well for them. I'm betting the next big transition ( windows 14?) will bring the same gripe from some of the people who love win 8 metro ( its dumbs down the interface so you can apply direct thought to the machine, instead of just using a finger!).

Reply Score: 2

RE: Metro Interface Sucks
by WorknMan on Sat 17th Sep 2011 03:25 UTC in reply to "Metro Interface Sucks"
WorknMan Member since:
2005-11-13

Metro SUCKS!

I see it serving nobody any good. Destroy it and those who need such a simplistic interface to use a computer!


Metro = Microsoft Bob for a new age. I bet the iDiots are going to love it.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Metro Interface Sucks
by viton on Sun 18th Sep 2011 02:34 UTC in reply to "RE: Metro Interface Sucks"
viton Member since:
2005-08-09

LOL. So true. I'm an iDiot and I like metro.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Metro Interface Sucks
by FealDorf on Sat 17th Sep 2011 22:51 UTC in reply to "Metro Interface Sucks"
FealDorf Member since:
2008-01-07

"Survival of the fittest!! DO NOT cater to the weakest minds!!"
Survival of the fittest isn't a cause, it's an effect. If the simplistic interface wins, it is the fittest.
Windows 95 wasn't the best OS, but it won. Why? It was most fit.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Metro Interface Sucks
by glarepate on Sun 18th Sep 2011 02:27 UTC in reply to "Metro Interface Sucks"
glarepate Member since:
2006-01-04

Besides the methods described by kedwards and transputer_guy, if you are not logged in, while looking at the wallpaper you can hit 'Enter' on the kb (clicking with the mouse just makes it jump for a second and then you are looking at the wallpaper some more) and the login screen will come up. In the lower right area is the bisected-circle on/off power icon. It works as expected.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Metro Interface Sucks
by mrstep on Sun 18th Sep 2011 03:48 UTC in reply to "RE: Metro Interface Sucks"
mrstep Member since:
2009-07-18

That's fantastic, so it's almost easier to log out and then shut down, but of course log-out is probably hidden under 4 menu layers too.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Metro Interface Sucks
by glarepate on Sun 18th Sep 2011 07:19 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Metro Interface Sucks"
glarepate Member since:
2006-01-04

That's fantastic, so it's almost easier to log out and then shut down, but of course log-out is probably hidden under 4 menu layers too.


If you are in the Metro environment then just go to the user icon (upper far right, past the last app icon, in my case Silverlight), click on it and you get a context menu which offers Change User Tile, Lock, Log Off and Add User.

I also found out that clicking on the wallpaper before you log in is a waste of time. Hitting the Enter key makes it scroll away. Or drag it out of the way and the login screen appears. The login screen has the powerdown/on-off icon.

Reply Score: 2

.net
by th3rmite on Sat 17th Sep 2011 03:18 UTC
th3rmite
Member since:
2006-01-08

I imagine that .net applications will be able to be quickly recompiled on Windows ARM. I bet that is how they are going to do it.

Reply Score: 1

RE: .net
by invent00r on Sat 17th Sep 2011 07:39 UTC in reply to ".net"
invent00r Member since:
2009-04-27

Actually, the .NET applications will stay as they are.
There won't be any recompiles since they are stored as bytecode.

This is a big advantage to develop in .NET - your apps will continue to run on x86 while also being able to run on Windows 8 in the future.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: .net
by malxau on Sat 17th Sep 2011 18:38 UTC in reply to "RE: .net"
malxau Member since:
2005-12-04

Actually, the .NET applications will stay as they are.
There won't be any recompiles since they are stored as bytecode.

This is a big advantage to develop in .NET - your apps will continue to run on x86 while also being able to run on Windows 8 in the future.


There are different issues here. It's true that .NET bytecode can run on any processor architecture, but that doesn't mean MS is committing to supporting desktop-based WinForms apps on ARM. Obviously the system would be leaner and meaner on ARM with as many pieces removed as possible, which directly affects compatibility. An entire set of .NET VMs (for different versions) on a tablet is quite a load. As the article said, either not decided or not announced.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: .net
by kristoph on Sat 17th Sep 2011 19:53 UTC in reply to "RE: .net"
kristoph Member since:
2006-01-01

It depends on what .net means to you.

The current crop of .net apps, just like everything else, are considered 'legacy' (apps which are considered 'legacy' can't be sold in the app store, can't carry the 'Ready for Windows 8' logo, won't be featured by Microsoft etc, won't work on platforms that don't have the Win32 stack, etc.)

You have to build to WinRT basically, irrespective of what language you use.

(I think the whole .net language is going away.)

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: .net
by modmans2ndcoming on Sat 17th Sep 2011 22:02 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: .net"
modmans2ndcoming Member since:
2005-11-09

.net is not a language... it is a framework.

Yes, it is going away because it is being replaced with WinRT which will have all the same framework tools of .net, but also add in the hooks needed to manipulate the OS at a system level.

Reply Score: 2

VS
by earksiinni on Sat 17th Sep 2011 05:19 UTC
earksiinni
Member since:
2009-03-27

It ain't over 'til they port VS to Metro.

Reply Score: 3

RE: VS
by transputer_guy on Sat 17th Sep 2011 13:51 UTC in reply to "VS"
transputer_guy Member since:
2005-07-08

Actually I just wish I could run VS6 again on Win 7, I could on Vista but not on 7. VS6 was about as complex an IDE as I could use or needed and I knew it inside out.

Same for office, I still pine for the utter simplicity of WriteNow (about 40KB of pure MacOS 68K asm) and many other smaller apps fallen by the way. Actually I always liked CodeWarrior for MacOS, Windows, and its BeIDE version, cross OS and cross processor with ease and then snuffed out.

The problem with MS and Apple is that general purpose apps and OSes keep getting bigger by trying to be all things to all people at the same time. We really do need to keep apps at different levels appropriate to the users needs.

Reply Score: 3

RE: VS
by modmans2ndcoming on Sat 17th Sep 2011 22:02 UTC in reply to "VS"
modmans2ndcoming Member since:
2005-11-09

VS 2010 is a WPF app so it should be a very quick port.

Reply Score: 2

RE: VS
by phoudoin on Mon 19th Sep 2011 09:48 UTC in reply to "VS"
phoudoin Member since:
2006-06-09

Yeah. Two square blocks:
- Build
- Debug

Both with live info displayed (compile ETA and bugs left, respectively).

It'll be *so* nice.
:-)

Reply Score: 2

MacTO
Member since:
2006-09-21

Please cut the negative crap. Just because you perceive Metro as being a dumbed down interface doesn't mean that the people who it seems to be designed for are stupid. A lot of those people are actually quite intelligent. It is just that they place their priorities in life elsewhere. Some of them may even be quite proficient at using a computer, they just want to use something that provides a lot of information at their fingertips (those tiles are live) or something that they perceive as beautiful (which boxy menus and terminal windows ain't).

As for the ones who simply aren't as proficient with computers as we are, well, they may demonstrate intelligence in other ways. Many of them have this thing called "people skills." Now I know that a lot of geeks look down at that but hey, being able to motivate people to get the job done (e.g. good managers) or to make people deal with their problems (e.g. psychologists) or to encourage them to learn (e.g. teachers) are incredibly important functions. And if their focus on people makes them dorks in front of a machine because they couldn't give a damn about the machine, so be it.

Of course, I'm picking on the people skills part because a lot of technically inclined people come off as rather abrasive. And when we are dealing with our own kind, that's usually okay because we understand the content of the message (i.e. we don't take things personally). But even some technically inclined people can demonstrate an ignorance of how computers work. Believe it or not, there are many scientists and engineers who can barely handle a computer. Sure they may know a few programs remarkably well, and those programs may be so complex that most people couldn't handle them. Yet the moment you toss a new piece of software their way it is almost as though they are starting at ground zero. Since they don't understand the underlying principles they're behaving like trained chimps. But just because they are trained chimps in front of computers doesn't mean that they are trained chimps while designing bridges or interpreting data received from distant galaxies or whatever.

So please appreciate those other people for who they are, and please reject the notion of degrading them because they have different values and skills than you do.

(Sorry about being tangental to the topic, but some of the comments were deplorable.)

Reply Score: 6

shotsman Member since:
2005-07-22

The percentage of the population in the developer world that do not have at least some rudimentary computer skills is dropping all the time.
ergo, the need for a dumbed down interface is reducing all the time.

I have the Win8 demo installed on a VBox VM on my Macbook. It was running when I wanted to show my 89yr old Mother some pictures of the Cycling tour of Britain I took in Scotland last weekend. She saw it and asked what that was.
After a bit of explanation she tried it out. For someone with no IT skills and the nearest she gets to a computer is a TV remote control she soon commented.
'It is not very good is it?'
When I asked why, she said that compared to how easy it was for me to move around apps on OSX,'you have to click an awful lot'.
Now I don't know all the shortcuts yet but most of them are useless for me when I use a mouse as I'm a lefty but now that I look at it in the light of her comments, she is right.

As it stands, Metro is going to be very frustrating to use on the desktop for any length of time.

This equals failure in my eyes.
If I were a teacher, i'd probably mark it as 'Could do better'.
It remains to be seen if MS can persuade us to use a mobile phone interface on a 24in LCD screen without wanting to give Mr Balmer a good kicking.

Reply Score: 3

tomcat Member since:
2006-01-06

s it stands, Metro is going to be very frustrating to use on the desktop for any length of time.


If all you use are desktop apps, you can live in the desktop in Win8. The only time you have to flip into Metro is on the Start screen. But EVEN THAT can be disabled and use the standard Start menu, if you find that easier to use. So, your point is kind of moot.

Reply Score: 2

transputer_guy Member since:
2005-07-08

And where is the switch to turn standard Start menu back on and hide Metro, I saw the registry hack on a previous post, that didn't work for me. Registry hacking should never be the normal way of switching things around.

You know what, if MS would just alter the login boot to allow users to choose either classic or novelty mode that would be fine for everyone, wouldn't it?

Reply Score: 2

tomcat Member since:
2006-01-06

And where is the switch to turn standard Start menu back on and hide Metro, I saw the registry hack on a previous post, that didn't work for me. Registry hacking should never be the normal way of switching things around.


And yet that's precisely how zillions of utilities work.

http://www.neowin.net/news/windows-8-how-to-re-enable-the-classic-s...

Reply Score: 2

Alfman Member since:
2011-01-28

tomcat,

http://www.neowin.net/news/windows-8-how-to-re-enable-the-classic-s.....

This worked for me, the system crashes are still happening, unfortunately.

"And yet that's precisely how zillions of utilities work."

This is unacceptable for such a basic requirement. transputer_guy is right it's a glaring omission by microsoft. However let's assume they will fix it.

Switching back to the classic start menu makes all the new OS apps inaccessible, why? The apps on the metro start menu should be present on the standard start menu. Otherwise microsoft is punishing those who don't like the metro start menu by making win8 apps incompatible and inaccessible under win8 classic.

Ideally metro apps from the classic start menu would either launch themselves full screen, or even in a window. Both are perfectly obvious and reasonable solutions to the incompatibility which microsoft invented.

Reply Score: 2

BluenoseJake Member since:
2005-08-11

It's a developers preview, by definition it is incomplete. It is not a "it's a glaring omission by microsoft" perhaps they haven't written the gui to allow you to change it? Perhaps you need patience.

Reply Score: 2

Alfman Member since:
2011-01-28

BluenoseJake,

"It's a developers preview, by definition it is incomplete. It is not a 'it's a glaring omission by microsoft'"


Sure it's incomplete, but it's still a glaring omission. None of us have a clear picture of what microsoft intends to do with metro, will they make metro apps and standard apps compatible? I've learned not to trust that they'll do the right thing.


"perhaps they haven't written the gui to allow you to change it? Perhaps you need patience."

Perhaps, perhaps not. I don't have faith in MS doing the right thing - I hope I am wrong though!

Reply Score: 2

phoudoin Member since:
2006-06-09

Sure, if you disable Metro, Metro will be far less frustrating to use.

You made a very nice point.
;-)

Reply Score: 2

SeeM Member since:
2011-09-10

It's that simple, as some distro switch a default desktop. At first there is complaining everywhere and (click-click) back to work.

Metro will bring something, that was on Linux for years: user can use his favorite desktop. Gnome, KDE, XFCE, WindowMaker, Fluxbox and many more. And they are 100% compatible. I may have Gnome 3 in my laptop and IceWM, or Gnome 2 at work and it make no difference for Firefox or Pidgin.

MS is going to make .net apps work in both environments, just as Nokia tried with QT. It's brilliant. It's like Pidgin would switch to old and rusty interface under WindowMaker and shiny awesome thing under KDE4.

Reply Score: 2

Alfman Member since:
2011-01-28

SeeM,

"It's that simple, as some distro switch a default desktop. At first there is complaining everywhere and (click-click) back to work."

Are you saying it *will* be that simple when released? Because in the preview I saw no way to simply get the old functionality back.

"Metro will bring something, that was on Linux for years: user can use his favorite desktop. Gnome, KDE, XFCE, WindowMaker, Fluxbox and many more. And they are 100% compatible. I may have Gnome 3 in my laptop and IceWM, or Gnome 2 at work and it make no difference for Firefox or Pidgin."

Yes under linux this is true. But from what I've seen of this dev preview, microsoft has omitted any such compatibility between metro apps and standard apps. If they bridge this gap, then the choice would be good for users. However the preview offered no such choice to the user.

Reply Score: 2

Comment by marcp
by marcp on Sat 17th Sep 2011 05:40 UTC
marcp
Member since:
2007-11-23

Metro interface ....

STOP IT!

Reply Score: 3

Anyone an expert in everything?
by 3rdalbum on Sat 17th Sep 2011 07:38 UTC
3rdalbum
Member since:
2008-05-26

Is everyone here an expert in everything? Or an advanced user of everything?

Well, here's a newsflash for you. Not everyone actually has an interest in computers. Not everyone finds Windows or Linux as easy to use as you. Some people get frustrated when using a computer because it feels like there's too much complexity and it makes them feel inferior or uncertain because they don't really know too much about what they're doing.

I haven't used any Metro interface, but people have been complaining that it's "too dumbed-down", with the implication that "people should just learn as much about computers as I have".

That's a dumb point of view - sorry, but it is. If you don't like Metro, don't use it. You have that option. But by opposing its development you're trying to exclude people from being able to use computers. Metro could possibly help "computer-illiterate" people to actually accomplish more with their computers and feel more confident doing so.

To use an analogy, it's like insisting that everyone be made to drive manual transmission cars that require double-clutching and controlling the engine revs when changing gear, like they used to do in the olden days. Because anyone who can't do that is an iDiot and shouldn't be allowed to drive. Right? Oh, and get rid of that starter motor - hand cranking is good enough.

Reply Score: 3

RE: Anyone an expert in everything?
by Alfman on Sat 17th Sep 2011 08:53 UTC in reply to "Anyone an expert in everything?"
Alfman Member since:
2011-01-28

3rdalbum,


"I haven't used any Metro interface, but people have been complaining that it's 'too dumbed-down' ... That's a dumb point of view - sorry, but it is. If you don't like Metro, don't use it. You have that option."


You profess to have no experience with it and yet you judge the opinions of those of us who've tried it? Good grief.

And no, personally I don't dislike it because it emphasizes a single application interface over a multi-window one. What sucks is metro's implementation of a single-window interface. Metro's implementation it's just awful, illogical, confusing.

"But by opposing its development you're trying to exclude people from being able to use computers. Metro could possibly help "computer-illiterate" people to actually accomplish more with their computers and feel more confident doing so."

I don't think anybody said this, the problem is that metro is just as confusing as what it replaced. There is no harmony between metro mode and standard modes. Eliminating chrome actually hurts user navigation and increases the learning curve. Efficient workflow between metro/desktop is impossible.

"To use an analogy, "

Here is a better car analogy:

Metro, as it stands in the preview, is like a road network, only all the signs have been taken down. You have no idea where you are, no idea where you can go. You either have to recognize your surroundings from memory or drive around randomly until you get somewhere.

Reply Score: 2

FealDorf Member since:
2008-01-07

Well, I have used metro and I'd disagree. Metro will be godsend to most laymen. If anything, it's unfamiliar.

>> What sucks is metro's implementation of a single-window interface. Metro's implementation it's just awful, illogical, confusing.
I'm genuinely interested as to why you believe so. GUIs on windows are already an inconsistent mess.

The only real complaint about metro would be a complaint with all touch-interfaces -- they're not discoverable. The prime advantage that WIMP-based GUIs have over CLIs is precisely that you don't need to RTFM. That said, with cryptic and tiny icons, modal interfaces most of this advantage is lost. Even so, Metro has strict guidelines including for gestures as well, so I have more hope for it.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Anyone an expert in everything?
by M.Onty on Sun 18th Sep 2011 15:33 UTC in reply to "Anyone an expert in everything?"
M.Onty Member since:
2009-10-23

To use an analogy, it's like insisting that everyone be made to drive manual transmission cars that require double-clutching and controlling the engine revs when changing gear, like they used to do in the olden days. Because anyone who can't do that is an iDiot and shouldn't be allowed to drive. Right?


Most of the rest of the world out side of the USA still drives manual rather than automatic. In the UK almost everyone learns manual, and almost everyone can drive. So what your analogy really suggests is that if people find something mildly difficult you should take it away; even if pretty much everyone is capable of learning to use it and, consequently, of using the machine more efficiently and broadening their options should they ever wish to go somewhere a bit out of their comfort zone.

Reply Score: 2

"You're holding it wrong!"
by jbauer on Sat 17th Sep 2011 09:40 UTC
jbauer
Member since:
2005-07-06

I mean... I believe some of you are looking at this matter the wrong way. I don't think this is about "dumbing down" the desktop at all, this isn't about making the PC easier to use for the average Joe. No, this is about that old trick: leveraging your privileged position in one market to compete better on another market where you're not relevant.

What benefits do they get by forcing Metro on desktops? I'm thinking there are at least two:

- First, they're familiarizing users with the UI. Once they've used a PC with Windows 8 for a while, they already know how to work with a Windows 8 tablet or phone. No more puzzled faces when faced with a Windows mobile device. No more "what the hell is that thing with all those tiles?"

- Second, and perhaps more important: developers, developers, developers. You only need to watch the Build keynote to realize how often they talk about how big the current Windows ecosystem is and the huge opportunities it provides for developers. Or in other words, how do you get people to develop apps for your new mobile platform? Simple, just force it on the product that will ship without a shadow of a doubt in thousands of new PCs as soon as Windows 8 hits RTM. No one can say "maybe nobody will use this Metro thing, why should I develop for it?" because even if reception is really terrible, new PCs are going to be sold and even in the worst case scenario, not everyone is going to downgrade to Windows 7. Just remember Vista, which with all the backslash, managed to capture a decent market share.

Think about it. What do they have to lose anyway if they alienate their traditional desktop users? They survived the Vista fiasco almost unscathed because (let's face it, shall we?) they have virtually no competition on the desktop, and they received no benefit in exchange. If they get some flak for forcing Metro UI on desktops but this time manage to be successful on tablets and phone spaces, maybe they're thinking it's a trade-off well worth making.

Reply Score: 4

RE: "You're holding it wrong!"
by transputer_guy on Sat 17th Sep 2011 14:04 UTC in reply to ""You're holding it wrong!""
transputer_guy Member since:
2005-07-08

Vista was terrible on so many levels and still is, I still have to boot it on occasion. It did untold damage to MS good will the likes of which they never really appreciated, I curse it and them every time I am using it. I paid good money for that.

Now they repeat the process with 8, a simple login switch to disable Metro is all it takes.

Actually I really doubt whether many Windows users will buy a Metro tablet, so the few that do will justify all of this pain.

Product segmentation is a good thing, Apple seems to understand this better.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: "You're holding it wrong!"
by FealDorf on Sat 17th Sep 2011 22:47 UTC in reply to "RE: "You're holding it wrong!""
FealDorf Member since:
2008-01-07

The reason Vista was terrible, is that it's a rushed inconsistent mess. Not to forget, it had bad rap before it was released as well.

Windows 8 on the other hand is bimodal -- a strict paradigm shift. Not so with Metro interface; it has been well received on cellphones from what I know.

Reply Score: 2

modmans2ndcoming Member since:
2005-11-09

please tell me how they can disable it? It is the UI of the OS... it is not a shell on top of windows 7... it is the UI.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: "You're holding it wrong!"
by jbauer on Sun 18th Sep 2011 22:50 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: "You're holding it wrong!""
jbauer Member since:
2005-07-06

please tell me how they can disable it? It is the UI of the OS... it is not a shell on top of windows 7... it is the UI.


Actually... http://www.sevenforums.com/chillout-room/187152-windows-8-heres-tri...

Reply Score: 2

RE: "You're holding it wrong!"
by ddc_ on Sat 17th Sep 2011 21:44 UTC in reply to ""You're holding it wrong!""
ddc_ Member since:
2006-12-05

They survived the Vista fiasco almost unscathed because (let's face it, shall we?) they have virtually no competition on the desktop, and they received no benefit in exchange. If they get some flak for forcing Metro UI on desktops but this time manage to be successful on tablets and phone spaces, maybe they're thinking it's a trade-off well worth making.
If they did not really face the competition on desktop, there would be no Vista at all. They released a beta quality software because they were close to loosing the position. In fact, they are clearly on decline as the numbers state.

As tablets are now just the toys, they could easily release a tablet-only Windows version with a good degree of media support, a good e-mail client (capable of corporative stuff) and a descent viewer (with limited editing capabilities) for office document formats - and they could hook the majority of tablet users as they did with palm users once. There is no need in sacrifices at all.

They clearly state that they see tablets and PCs as two distinct products that are going to merge in "a couple of years". If so, forcing Metro on PC just means that they are putting their money in this statement. It's not about extending to another product market, it's just securing own positions.

Reply Score: 1

what Microsoft desperately needs is ...
by kovacm on Sat 17th Sep 2011 10:19 UTC
kovacm
Member since:
2010-12-16

PROFESOR BALTAZAR!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ar7e1XMYotA ;)
(hi, to Tomislav from PEEK&POKE ;) )

hint to rest of world:
Profesor Baltazar ALWAYS have "magical"™ solution to ANY problem... ;)

Reply Score: 2

Comment by Stephen!
by Stephen! on Sat 17th Sep 2011 12:21 UTC
Stephen!
Member since:
2007-11-24

Microsoft should come up with a Metro interface for Microsoft Office - one that doesn't leave out 90% of Office's features.


Then again, does the average user even need 90% of Office's features.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Comment by Stephen!
by westlake on Mon 19th Sep 2011 05:38 UTC in reply to "Comment by Stephen!"
westlake Member since:
2010-01-07

Then again, does the average user even need 90% of Office's features.


The features are there when you need them:

whether its just one guy or a clerical staff of 500 to 15,000.

There was a time when WordPerfect offered about a dozen flavors of its core word processor ---

for the law office, the medical professional and so on.

This looks plausible.

But in fact it adds layer upon layer of cost and complexity at every step along the way.

Reply Score: 1

Comment by fran
by fran on Sat 17th Sep 2011 14:40 UTC
fran
Member since:
2010-08-06

"An x86 tablet that's thicker, heavier, with shorter battery life"

That problem has been solved. No power disadvantage over others in the very near future.
http://www.pcworld.com/article/239972/intel_shows_off_tablets_using...

Reply Score: 2

Whiners!
by MacMan on Sat 17th Sep 2011 21:23 UTC
MacMan
Member since:
2006-11-19

I bet the same kind of person is bitching about Metro as those bitching about Gnome 3.

All these people bitch about "dumbed down" "dumbed down", well....

maybe its just DIFFERENT! maybe it DOES NOT LOOK LIKE WIN95!

So, you actually have to think about interacting with your machine differently than you did with Win95 and all the Win95 interface clones like Win2000/WinXP/Vista/7/KDE/Gnome2.x...

The impression I get of all these Metro / Gnome3 haters is that they are just afraid of change.

Now, I have not tried Metro, but I do like Win7 Phone, and I hugely like Gnome 3.1, in fact I like Gnome 3.1 a lot better than Lion, and I now pretty much use Gnome 3.1 as my full time desktop.

Edited 2011-09-17 21:26 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE: Whiners!
by Anonymous Penguin on Sat 17th Sep 2011 22:02 UTC in reply to "Whiners!"
Anonymous Penguin Member since:
2005-07-06

I bet the same kind of person is bitching about Metro as those bitching about Gnome 3.


So what? Metro, Gnome 3 (and KDE 4 for that matter) all belong to the same kind of crap: change just for the sake of it.
Imagine that applied to cars or houses, all of a sudden crazy designs with no thought to usability: how many do you think they would sell?

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Whiners!
by modmans2ndcoming on Sat 17th Sep 2011 22:04 UTC in reply to "RE: Whiners!"
modmans2ndcoming Member since:
2005-11-09

with that attitude we would all be using a terminal today.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Whiners!
by Anonymous Penguin on Sat 17th Sep 2011 22:36 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Whiners!"
Anonymous Penguin Member since:
2005-07-06

And all living in caves and riding donkeys? Wrong!

For real improvements it takes a very long time. In order to destroy what you have created, very short.
It has taken 30 years or longer to bring personal computers where they are now, while a bunch of idiots is trying to destroy them in no time.

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Whiners!
by FealDorf on Sat 17th Sep 2011 22:50 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Whiners!"
FealDorf Member since:
2008-01-07

But this has never been a strict slow progressive evolution. Instead, it's a sporadic one, of ridicule and hype. iPhone for instance was a tremendous game-changer in smartphone market. It's not a "bunch of idiots".

Reply Score: 1

RE[5]: Whiners!
by Anonymous Penguin on Sat 17th Sep 2011 23:09 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Whiners!"
Anonymous Penguin Member since:
2005-07-06

While I own a 17" MacBook Pro, I have never cared for iPhones. What are they? Phones? No, a simple but fully functional phone costs 20 Euro. Cameras? Buy a better camera for much less. Surf the intenet? Hardly, with a 3.5-inch display. It is just human madness, we allow to get ourselves brainwashed by hype.

Reply Score: 1

RE[6]: Whiners!
by modmans2ndcoming on Sun 18th Sep 2011 18:06 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Whiners!"
modmans2ndcoming Member since:
2005-11-09

iPhones/Android Phones are multi-modal communication devices....that means that I can e-mail, IM, SMS, phone,video chat, remote desktop, find information on the web, snap a picture of something that I need to send to someone so they have a concept of what I am talking about... From nearly any place I have a cell signal.

There is a lot of value in that for a lot of people.


I can also, listen to my music, play games, and read books.

Mobile computing is a very important aspect to modern computing and communication that is probably as game changing as the Web was.

Reply Score: 2

RE[7]: Whiners!
by Anonymous Penguin on Mon 19th Sep 2011 02:50 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Whiners!"
Anonymous Penguin Member since:
2005-07-06

iPhones/Android Phones are multi-modal communication devices....that means that I can e-mail, IM, SMS, phone,video chat, remote desktop, find information on the web, snap a picture of something that I need to send to someone so they have a concept of what I am talking about... From nearly any place I have a cell signal.

There is a lot of value in that for a lot of people.


I can also, listen to my music, play games, and read books.



Most of those things can be done, more comfortably, if you have a camera, a cheap mobile phone and a computer. I have friends who are not young and not particularly tech savvy who do all the above very well without a smartphone.

Edited 2011-09-19 02:57 UTC

Reply Score: 1

Perhaps I was a bit harsh
by MacMan on Sat 17th Sep 2011 23:30 UTC in reply to "Whiners!"
MacMan Member since:
2006-11-19

Earlier, I said the Metro/Gnome3 haters were afraid of change, perhaps thats true, but consider this.

You have one group of interfaces that are all fundamentally Windows95 UI clones, this include Win2000/XP/Vista/7/KDE/Gnome2.x and to an extent OS/2 Warp4. I'll bet the people who really like this set of interfaces are people who's first computer experience was Windows 95. We tend to like what we first learn.

Now, whilst I may be in the minority here, I never liked Win95, in fact, I despised it. At the time (1995) I had an Amiga at home, and used a NeXTs and Suns at school. That might explain why I'm a huge Amiga/NeXT/BeOS and to an extent Mac fan, and why I liked Gnome 1.x but not Gnome 2.x.

Anyway, as I see it, we have the Windows95 based interfaces and non-Windows95 based interfaces. Metro/Gnome3 haters might just be fans of Windows 95 UIs and Metro/Gnome3 fans might never have cared for Windows95.

I for one am glad that FINALLY Windows95 is perhaps no longer the gold standard of user interfaces.

Edited 2011-09-17 23:31 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE: Perhaps I was a bit harsh
by Anonymous Penguin on Sun 18th Sep 2011 00:17 UTC in reply to "Perhaps I was a bit harsh"
Anonymous Penguin Member since:
2005-07-06

Where would you put people who believe that OS X is the best OS?
OS X is certainly not comparable to Metro or Gnome3.
And in which family of operating systems would you put OS X?
BTW I never used Windows 95, at the time I was refusing to use computers, I found them glorified typewriters.

Edited 2011-09-18 00:20 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Perhaps I was a bit harsh
by MacMan on Sun 18th Sep 2011 02:32 UTC in reply to "RE: Perhaps I was a bit harsh"
MacMan Member since:
2006-11-19

Where would you put people who believe that OS X is the best OS?
OS X is certainly not comparable to Metro or Gnome3.
And in which family of operating systems would you put OS X?


Actually, I think Gnome3 has some similarities with OSX, namely the dock.

No, I don't think OSX is in the Win95 family of interfaces, OSX is obviously a blend of Mac Classic and NeXT, and oddly enough, I liked both of them better than OSX:) (from a UI standpoint).

Mac fans are an eclectic bunch, sadly many of them are "hipsters", the iPod generation that follow anything Apple says because iPods cool.

I'm Mac fan (with reservations), I've been using Apples since the Apple ][. I'm not particularly happy with OSX Lion, like I said, I switched over mostly to Gnome3. Again, I like a lot of things about Gnome3, but it still has some obvious issues.

Frankly, the OSs I've liked best of all are NeXT, BeOS and Amiga. Sadly, I think OSX has gone downhill since it was NeXT, and with Lion, seems to be accelerating.

Edited 2011-09-18 02:46 UTC

Reply Score: 3

Anonymous Penguin Member since:
2005-07-06

I don't know, actually I quite like Lion.
It has been optimized a lot under the hood. My MacBook Pro used a lot of resources and run very hot under Snow Leopard. Now it runs cool and quiet.
There are a few changes in the graphical interface, but I find them improvements (some fine tuning still needed).
As I have already said in a previous post, I like Macs, but I am not a zealot, I don't desire everything created by Apple.

Reply Score: 2

modmans2ndcoming Member since:
2005-11-09

you like Lion but hate Windows 8?

weird because Lion is incorporating mobile interface features into the OS just like Win 8 is...though it is at a much different pace.

Reply Score: 2

Anonymous Penguin Member since:
2005-07-06

you like Lion but hate Windows 8?

weird because Lion is incorporating mobile interface features into the OS just like Win 8 is...though it is at a much different pace.


Come on, in which way does Lion look like Windows 8 to you? Launchpad? That is only an applications menu, OS X needed one.

Edited 2011-09-19 00:19 UTC

Reply Score: 2

modmans2ndcoming Member since:
2005-11-09

They changed their scrolling paradigm and they have changed their window management to bring it in line with what Users are familiar with in a touch based environment.

I did not say it looks like Win8 at all... you are complaining about Win8's touch-centric UI, I pointed out that Apple is moving in the same direction, only slower

Reply Score: 2

RE: Perhaps I was a bit harsh
by Alfman on Sun 18th Sep 2011 03:18 UTC in reply to "Perhaps I was a bit harsh"
Alfman Member since:
2011-01-28

MacMan,

I don't know why metro sympathizers (many who've never even tried it), keep coming back to "afraid of change" and "it DOES NOT LOOK LIKE WIN95!"? These statements attack the critic, but don't address the criticisms.


A single application interface could work very well for many people who don't use a computer for more than one task at a time...that includes my own parents. However the metro interface shown here is unnecessarily confusing and difficult to use on it's own terms. This has nothing to do with "win95", though there are a number of compatibility issues metro introduced quite unnecessarily. It's a garbage implementation of a potentially good idea.

Edit: Maybe they will fix metro based on all the negative feedback they get, however there is a lot not to like about metro as it stands. Maybe they won't fix it and just try to force it onto all of us instead. With microsoft, this isn't unheard of.

I find that functionally, but not aesthetically, metro seems to be a very distance descendant of the old DOSShell, which had the ability to switch between full screen dos programs (text and graphic) in much the same way metro does.

Edited 2011-09-18 03:24 UTC

Reply Score: 2

Metro itself is not about compartibility
by ddc_ on Sat 17th Sep 2011 21:29 UTC
ddc_
Member since:
2006-12-05

I'm writing this from a metro-style IE on brand new Windows [8] Developer Preview. I'm playing with the thing the whole day and it seems to me that Metro itself is a clear message: Microsoft don't want to cope with legacy any more.

It seems that Microsoft has worked out a plan for moving customers to Metro:

1. Provide Windows 7 as the last desktop PC with some tablet capabilities.

2. Provide Windows [8] Developer Preview as early as it is barely usable, with the quick start kit for developers.

3. Provide Windows 8 with ugly (x86) to no (ARM) legacy applications support.

As Microsoft has stated, they separated the new Metro apps and libs from the legacy, so they can regard Windows 8 as Windows 7 plus Metro add-on. So, they keep maintaining legacy part in a bugfix mode and concentrate resources on Metro.

At the same time Microsoft encourages developers to start experimenting with Metro right now, so when Windows 8 hits end users there will already be a number of third party apps at avail.

If so, Windows 8 is targeted at early adopters who want to switch to Metro as soon as it is possible. At the same time the release of Windows 8 with Metro as a main UI will show the big software houses that it is the right time to move to Metro.

Effectively, when Windows 9 (or 10) reaches users as the first Metro-based version of Windows targeting the general public with i386/amd64/arm hardware configurations, the Metro ecosystem will be already built.

Reply Score: 0

Comment by ilovebeer
by ilovebeer on Mon 19th Sep 2011 03:36 UTC
ilovebeer
Member since:
2011-08-08

It's absurd the way some people are reacting to the _current_ and _non-final_ details of Windows 8. And that some people are crying that this or that is somehow being forcefully shoved down their throats....as if someone is standing over them with a gun making them install it. How can you post such ridiculousness without embarrassment?

Don't like Windows 8? Don't use it, you aren't forced to. Don't like Windows <fill in whichever flavor you wish>? Don't use it, you aren't forced to. Want to whine and moan about what I've said? Don't bother, I'm not interested in hearing it.

You may resume your childishness now.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Comment by ilovebeer
by Alfman on Mon 19th Sep 2011 04:41 UTC in reply to "Comment by ilovebeer"
Alfman Member since:
2011-01-28

"It's absurd the way some people are reacting to the _current_ and _non-final_ details of Windows 8."

Until the final windows 8 is out, we can (and should) criticize the preview. It would be pointless to withhold criticism until it's complete, by which time it's already in the market and we've lost the opportunity to fix it.

"And that some people are crying that this or that is somehow being forcefully shoved down their throats....as if someone is standing over them with a gun making them install it."

Unfortunately, microsoft does shove things down consumer's throats which we don't want. They use a number of monopoly tactics to eliminate reasonable choice. Most people are still content with XP, yet if their computers die, they are frequently forced to purchase a new OS which they neither needed nor wanted.

"How can you post such ridiculousness without embarrassment?"

Bit of an exaggeration isn't it?

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Comment by ilovebeer
by ilovebeer on Mon 19th Sep 2011 06:17 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by ilovebeer"
ilovebeer Member since:
2011-08-08

"Until the final windows 8 is out, we can (and should) criticize the preview. It would be pointless to withhold criticism until it's complete, by which time it's already in the market and we've lost the opportunity to fix it."

Who exactly is "we" supposed to be here? This may come as a surprise but once Windows has reached the preview point, it's well along the way to being a market-ready product. I don't know why you think your criticism has anything to do with what the retail version will be. The only "opportunity" that exists for you is forming opinions about the preview, not making business decisions about the product. If you believe otherwise then you have to accept that Windows is exactly what people have asked for.

"Unfortunately, microsoft does shove things down consumer's throats which we don't want. They use a number of monopoly tactics to eliminate reasonable choice. Most people are still content with XP, yet if their computers die, they are frequently forced to purchase a new OS which they neither needed nor wanted."

I'm a consumer and Microsoft has never threatened me, shoved anything down my throat, or done anything beyond provide an OS option, among other software, should I choose to use it. I no longer use Windows XP, by my own choice, but if I did and my box died, I would simply reinstall it.

Microsoft hasn't and doesn't eliminate choice. For example, while I use Windows 7 for my desktops, I use Linux for my servers. Why don't I just use Linux for the desktops too? Because I think Linux is trash for desktops. The point is I, and everybody else, does in fact have choices available to them. Those who think Microsoft is some evil empire that forces their dictatorship on the poor helpless consumer is pure fantasy. It's simply not based in reality.

There's something else people seem to have forgotten. Microsoft does not answer to anybody but their shareholders and board of directors. They are a company that creates products & services made available for public consumption. NOBODY is forced to buy or use those products or services. I don't believe for one second you have ever been forced to buy and install Windows -- but if you have, you should file a police report immediately.

Microsoft makes some great software. It escapes me why that is so hard for some people to acknowledge. Further, I can't help but wonder why those few who think Microsoft is so "evil", and Windows such a pile of crap, invest so much time & energy into talking about it. I guess some people just need something to complain about or they're not happy.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Comment by ilovebeer
by Anonymous Penguin on Mon 19th Sep 2011 06:37 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by ilovebeer"
Anonymous Penguin Member since:
2005-07-06


I'm a consumer and Microsoft has never threatened me, shoved anything down my throat, or done anything beyond provide an OS option, among other software, should I choose to use it. I no longer use Windows XP, by my own choice, but if I did and my box died, I would simply reinstall it.



You won't be threatened at gunpoint, but once Microsoft releases a new OS, PC manufacturers will start selling their laptops or desktops with the new OS.
I had to buy a laptop in 2008 with Vista. True, I could (and did) "downgrade" to XP, but that is because I know how to install an OS and where to find the drivers (if available).
Joe User doesn't know how to do that.

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Comment by ilovebeer
by ilovebeer on Mon 19th Sep 2011 06:51 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by ilovebeer"
ilovebeer Member since:
2011-08-08

You won't be threatened at gunpoint, but once Microsoft releases a new OS, PC manufacturers will start selling their laptops or desktops with the new OS.
I had to buy a laptop in 2008 with Vista. True, I could (and did) "downgrade" to XP, but that is because I know how to install an OS and where to find the drivers (if available).
Joe User doesn't know how to do that.


People are far more computer literate these days then say, 10+ years ago. I'll agree that Joe User may be a little intimidated by a full install, but he/she likely knows about drivers and can manage to install them. That's my experience with Joe User anyways.

About the laptop... You didn't _have to_ buy one with Vista on it, you chose to. How do I know? Because several manufacturers have laptops available that don't come with an OS.

I still stand by the idea that the consumer decides how he spends his money, not Microsoft.

Reply Score: 1

RE[5]: Comment by ilovebeer
by Anonymous Penguin on Mon 19th Sep 2011 07:18 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by ilovebeer"
Anonymous Penguin Member since:
2005-07-06



People are far more computer literate these days then say, 10+ years ago. I'll agree that Joe User may be a little intimidated by a full install, but he/she likely knows about drivers and can manage to install them. That's my experience with Joe User anyways.

About the laptop... You didn't _have to_ buy one with Vista on it, you chose to. How do I know? Because several manufacturers have laptops available that don't come with an OS.

I still stand by the idea that the consumer decides how he spends his money, not Microsoft.


That laptop was a special offer, 29 Euro a month with 0% APR. At the time I didn't have over a thousand Euro to buy cash.
As to "Joe User", I must know a different kind, because I don't know a single one who would install an OS or upgrade a BIOS. Many of them have been using computers for longer than I have.
Of course I also know "geeks", but that is a different matter.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Comment by ilovebeer
by Alfman on Mon 19th Sep 2011 11:50 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by ilovebeer"
Alfman Member since:
2011-01-28

ilovebeer,

"This may come as a surprise but once Windows has reached the preview point, it's well along the way to being a market-ready product."

You are contradicting what others are saying. For instance BluenoseJake claims that the reason metro exhibits problems today is because it's a preview and it is not market ready. For the sake of everyone involved, I hope he is right and you are wrong.

"If you believe otherwise then you have to accept that Windows is exactly what people have asked for."

You really should know better than that.

"I'm a consumer and Microsoft has never threatened me, shoved anything down my throat, or done anything beyond provide an OS option, among other software, should I choose to use it. I no longer use Windows XP, by my own choice, but if I did and my box died, I would simply reinstall it."

You know damn well microsoft uses it's monopoly position to push products the market often doesn't want, don't play ignorant here.

Edited 2011-09-19 11:51 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Comment by ilovebeer
by ilovebeer on Mon 19th Sep 2011 15:50 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by ilovebeer"
ilovebeer Member since:
2011-08-08

"You are contradicting what others are saying. For instance BluenoseJake claims that the reason metro exhibits problems today is because it's a preview and it is not market ready. For the sake of everyone involved, I hope he is right and you are wrong."

Maybe I didn't make the point clear enough. Windows previews are well along the way to being market-ready -- meaning nearly (if not all) major design decisions have been made and committed to. Microsoft does in fact ask people what they (dis)like long before this point.

"You know damn well microsoft uses it's monopoly position to push products the market often doesn't want, don't play ignorant here."

While some of Microsoft's business practices may be "questionable" in some peoples eyes, the fact stands that they can not force you to spend your money. They can not force you to run Windows. They can not force you to upgrade Windows if you do run it. They can not force you to do ANYTHING. That's just plain & simple, unarguable facts of reality.

Just for laughs, why don't you list out all these supposed unwanted products Microsoft shoves down your throat. If what you claim is true it should be an easy task. If you're going to make wild accusations, you'll be asked to back them up with real world evidence it's more then just your imagination.

Reply Score: 1

RE[5]: Comment by ilovebeer
by Alfman on Mon 19th Sep 2011 19:55 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by ilovebeer"
Alfman Member since:
2011-01-28

ilovebeer,

"While some of Microsoft's business practices may be 'questionable' in some peoples eyes, the fact stands that they can not force you to spend your money. They can not force you to run Windows."

You ignored Anonymous Penguin's observation, where many consumers are in fact forced to buy windows.

Personally I am forced to as well as I have to support clients using windows. In my line of work, I have no choice in the matter. That is what happens when one platform is the defacto standard or monopoly. Many of us are coerced into running what everyone else is using simply because everyone else is using it, not necessarily due to merit. I would expect every last person in IT to understand this phenomenon, microsoft certainly do.


"They can not force you to upgrade Windows if you do run it. They can not force you to do ANYTHING. That's just plain & simple, unarguable facts of reality."


In the case I outlined, they can and do force you to upgrade windows. The WinXP OEM licenses are not transferable, new licenses of XP are not for sale. This amounts to a forced upgrade on most new systems. Those of us lucky enough to have a transferable license are in the minority, and require technical expertise beyond that of ordinary users.

"Just for laughs, why don't you list out all these supposed unwanted products Microsoft shoves down your throat. If what you claim is true it should be an easy task. If you're going to make wild accusations..."

All the products in which microsoft has a monopoly. What rock have you been living under??

Edit: I am not asserting that windows is no good for anyone/anything; I prefer it sometimes even. However why do you deny that a great deal of microsoft's market share came from business tactics rather then the merit of their product?

Edited 2011-09-19 20:15 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[6]: Comment by ilovebeer
by ilovebeer on Mon 19th Sep 2011 23:56 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Comment by ilovebeer"
ilovebeer Member since:
2011-08-08

"You ignored Anonymous Penguin's observation, where many consumers are in fact forced to buy windows.

Personally I am forced to as well as I have to support clients using windows. In my line of work, I have no choice in the matter. That is what happens when one platform is the defacto standard or monopoly. Many of us are coerced into running what everyone else is using simply because everyone else is using it, not necessarily due to merit. I would expect every last person in IT to understand this phenomenon, microsoft certainly do.
"

Anonymous Penguin started by saying he was forced to buy a laptop with Vista. He ended by saying he bought the laptop because it was a good deal for him financially. So no, he was not forced -- and neither is anyone else.

Next, you say you are forced to buy/use Windows because you have to support clients who use it. However, you are not the consumer when you are working providing support for a platform you company chooses to accommodate. So no, again... You, or your employer rather was not forced to buy Windows, they choose to provide support. Not all companies do.

"In the case I outlined, they can and do force you to upgrade windows. The WinXP OEM licenses are not transferable, new licenses of XP are not for sale. This amounts to a forced upgrade on most new systems. Those of us lucky enough to have a transferable license are in the minority, and require technical expertise beyond that of ordinary users."

The fact will always remain that you are not forced. If you want to run Windows XP then you must either own an existing copy, or buy a used one. Joe User doesn't care about the technical details of a software license, he only cares if it will work when he installs it. The answer is yes it will.

It's like you are complaining that VHS recorders aren't made or supported anymore, and you feel forced to buy a DVD or Bluray. Two problems.. First, you have never and never will be forced to do so, and second no product is supported for eternity.

Just for laughs, why don't you list out all these supposed unwanted products Microsoft shoves down your throat. If what you claim is true it should be an easy task. If you're going to make wild accusations...


All the products in which microsoft has a monopoly. What rock have you been living under??


Exactly as I suspected, you decline the request because you can't come up with one without completely putting your foot in your mouth. Hence, your own edit below.

"Edit: I am not asserting that windows is no good for anyone/anything; I prefer it sometimes even. However why do you deny that a great deal of microsoft's market share came from business tactics rather then the merit of their product?"

Because it's simply not true. Windows is a great product and it has transformed the world for the better. The merit of their flagship product is exactly what helped them to the top, not a 30 year run of strong-arming and bullying as you imply. For your you to deny that fact is beyond absurd. What's next on the list, arguing that the Earth is flat?

Come on.

Reply Score: 1

RE[7]: Comment by ilovebeer
by Alfman on Tue 20th Sep 2011 03:53 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Comment by ilovebeer"
Alfman Member since:
2011-01-28

ilovebeer,

"Anonymous Penguin started by saying he was forced to buy a laptop with Vista. He ended by saying he bought the laptop because it was a good deal for him financially. So no, he was not forced -- and neither is anyone else."

More accurately, they are not "forced" to buy a new computer system, but if they do, it is very likely they will be forced to buy a new windows license along with it. Name one major retail store that sells PCs and without an OS license (either to use an old windows license or another OS)? I don't know of any. Even online my favorite vendors won't ship complete systems minus the OS. Most consumers buying new systems will have no choice but to buy new windows licenses every time they buy new computers, even if they wanted to keep their old software.

Hell, even I bought some laptops that came with windows, which was removed. It is a fallacy to claim that new microsoft sales = demand for new microsoft products. Most consumers do not have a choice in the matter.


"The fact will always remain that you are not forced. If you want to run Windows XP then you must either own an existing copy, or buy a used one. Joe User doesn't care about the technical details of a software license, he only cares if it will work when he installs it. The answer is yes it will."

You are trivializing the difficulty of transferring windows OS/licenses between (incompatible) machines.

Even if we ignore the legal issues with non-transferable OEM licenses, Joe needs the expertise to install his old XP OS on his new system, is this realistic? If not, he may need a couple hundred dollars to have technical support do it for him.

Considering all this, I think you'll agree that it's cheaper just to stick with whatever is being bundled EVEN if he would have preferred to stick with XP.

This is not hypothetical, I do know friends who ended up with Vista despite not being very happy with it.


"Exactly as I suspected, you decline the request because you can't come up with one without completely putting your foot in your mouth. Hence, your own edit below."

I did answer the question, I honestly thought you'd understand, but let me answer it in a different way: windows and office.

"Windows is a great product and it has transformed the world for the better. The merit of their flagship product is exactly what helped them to the top, not a 30 year run of strong-arming and bullying as you imply."

This is debatable. Arguably microsoft has spent a great portion of it's existence behind the curve, and simply bought or squashed those who were ahead of it, at least until the government interfered.

"For your you to deny that fact is beyond absurd."

You remind me so much of someone I used to know, did you by any chance go to RIT?

Reply Score: 2

Logo contest opened!
by phoudoin on Mon 19th Sep 2011 09:41 UTC
phoudoin
Member since:
2006-06-09

Urgent: we need a logo for our campaign "Awesome Garden Designer Pro 2003 ready" our our new ARM laptops.
All graphic designers are free to submit their logo up to this year end.
Thanks.

;-)

Reply Score: 2

Definitely...
by fretinator on Mon 19th Sep 2011 18:38 UTC
fretinator
Member since:
2005-07-06

...where all the cool, well-dressed people hang out.

Reply Score: 2

Eventually it will all be Metro!
by BlueofRainbow on Thu 22nd Sep 2011 01:29 UTC
BlueofRainbow
Member since:
2009-01-06

If Microsoft can demonstrate an useable Office on the Metro interface, then this could allow them to break-away from the Win32 legacy.

Unfortunately, severing the Win32 legacy would not be good for ReactOS and WINE. Essentially, these projects would be caught in a race in becoming obsolete before becoming complete/fully useable.

Maybe an open-source WinRT backbone project should be iniated now?

Reply Score: 1