Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 9th Aug 2012 21:38 UTC
Windows "Here's the official guidance, my sources say: Anything currently/formerly known as a 'Metro-Style application' (with or without a hyphen) will now be known officially as a 'Windows 8 application'. References to the 'Metro user interface' will now be replaced by "Windows 8 user interface." And instead of saying 'Metro design', the Softies and those adhering to their official guidelines will be using the words 'Windows 8 design'." Microsoft not being allowed to use the Metro name here is just as ridiculous as Apple trolling Samsung. All ridiculous exponents of the western world's IP fetish.
Order by: Score:
wow
by Nelson on Thu 9th Aug 2012 21:49 UTC
Nelson
Member since:
2005-11-29

What a stupid replacement name.

Reply Score: 7

RE: wow
by bassbeast on Fri 10th Aug 2012 18:36 UTC in reply to "wow"
bassbeast Member since:
2007-11-11

Its not only stupid, its just gonna make things messier than ever! Does your windows 8 app require the windows 8 UI or the Windows 8 UI...see the problem? The "Metro" apps are limited like cell phone apps, the desktop apps more like traditional programs...so which does your program support? win 8 UI or Win 8 UI?

Just one more reason for everyone to avoid win 8 like the plague. From the looks of it its Vista's mistakes turned up to 11, change for the sake of change, bad design choices everywhere, and now this just added some confusion icing to a giant fail cake.

I'm just glad I've moved my customers and family over to Win 7, let MSFT flail around with their failwhale, I have a feeling the only "work" I'll be required to do on Win 8 is the same as with Vista...wiping it for the previous OS.

Reply Score: 1

Comment by M.Onty
by M.Onty on Thu 9th Aug 2012 22:02 UTC
M.Onty
Member since:
2009-10-23

Bet it took them a while to come up with that one.

Reply Score: 12

RE: Comment by M.Onty
by WorknMan on Fri 10th Aug 2012 03:29 UTC in reply to "Comment by M.Onty"
WorknMan Member since:
2005-11-13

Bet it took them a while to come up with that one.


Yeah, and the marketing schmuck who came up with it probably makes a six-figured salary too. I'm sure it's gonna sound good when Windows 9 comes out ;) It's even more perplexing than processor names, which I have actually stayed awake at night trying to figure out how they could take something that's so simple and f**k it up so badly, and to pay people who do it a lot of money. (i3/i5/i7 ... WTF does that even mean? It's not even like 'i7 is better than i5', because that isn't always the case.) It reminds me of a CEO who ran a company into the ground, and got $8 million on his way out as a severance package. Hell, if you wanted to destroy your company, you should've hired me... I would've done it for half that amount.

Edited 2012-08-10 03:32 UTC

Reply Score: 6

RE[2]: Comment by M.Onty
by UltraZelda64 on Fri 10th Aug 2012 05:19 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by M.Onty"
UltraZelda64 Member since:
2006-12-05

Yeah, and the marketing schmuck who came up with it probably makes a six-figured salary too. I'm sure it's gonna sound good when Windows 9 comes out ;)

Now that's funny, and it's something I haven't thought about... very good point.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Comment by M.Onty
by Lennie on Fri 10th Aug 2012 09:13 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by M.Onty"
Lennie Member since:
2007-09-22

They probably will give it some different colours and call the old colours: Classic

Like they did on Windows XP with the Windows 2000/Windows 9x style.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Comment by M.Onty
by zima on Tue 14th Aug 2012 05:17 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by M.Onty"
zima Member since:
2005-07-06

It's even more perplexing than processor names, which I have actually stayed awake at night trying to figure out how they could take something that's so simple and f**k it up so badly, and to pay people who do it a lot of money. (i3/i5/i7 ... WTF does that even mean? It's not even like 'i7 is better than i5', because that isn't always the case.)

i stands for imaginary - also, notably, i^2 = -1

(but stayed awake, seriously?...)

Reply Score: 2

Comment by ptmb
by ptmb on Thu 9th Aug 2012 23:03 UTC
ptmb
Member since:
2010-05-21

I honestly don't know why they didn't go with RT to replace Metro. Their new API is called RT, the ARM version is called RT, why not RT UI and RT Application? Unless they fear more IP problems and decided to go on their old and safe WindowsTM brand.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Comment by ptmb
by Lennie on Fri 10th Aug 2012 09:19 UTC in reply to "Comment by ptmb"
Lennie Member since:
2007-09-22

Isn't that obvious ? Because the non-ARM x86/amd64 desktop version is not RT.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Comment by ptmb
by darknexus on Fri 10th Aug 2012 13:25 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by ptmb"
darknexus Member since:
2008-07-15

Isn't that obvious ? Because the non-ARM x86/amd64 desktop version is not RT.

However, their new API is called WinRT. Yet more name confusion. Windows RT vs WinRT: two different yet somewhat related items. Now, on top of that, this new name change. And I thought keeping track of idiotic patents was difficult… If Microsoft wants to continue calling themselves developer-friendly, they need to keep the marketing team away from their Windows internals division.

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: Comment by ptmb
by Lennie on Fri 10th Aug 2012 15:15 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by ptmb"
Lennie Member since:
2007-09-22

I think I also heared that applications for ARM aren't source compatible with x86/amd64 and vice versa. If that is true that would be really stupid.

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: Comment by ptmb
by Delgarde on Mon 13th Aug 2012 03:39 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by ptmb"
Delgarde Member since:
2008-08-19

I think I also heared that applications for ARM aren't source compatible with x86/amd64 and vice versa. If that is true that would be really stupid.


Partly true. The short version is that for ARM, they've ditched various legacy APIs. So if an app is coded as a Metro app, it'll run on everything - but if it's coded in the classic Windows APIs, it's not going to work on ARM.

Reply Score: 2

Just why?
by AnXa on Thu 9th Aug 2012 23:33 UTC
AnXa
Member since:
2008-02-10

Why the common sense didn't play a role here? Is it really such a difficult task to find out alternative name to replace "Metro" with for example "Subway", "Underground", "Tube", etc...

oh shit, I already violated three IPs by just listing alternatives... I guess it really is that hard. I mean somebody probably owns the word "News" and could sue OSNews for their name too.

This madness has got to come to an end sooner or later...

Reply Score: 3

Comment by hoak
by hoak on Fri 10th Aug 2012 01:12 UTC
hoak
Member since:
2007-12-17

"METRO IS OUR DESIGN LANGUAGE. WE CALL IT METRO BECAUSE IT'S MODERN AND CLEAN. IT'S FAST AND IN MOTION. IT'S ABOUT CONTENT AND TYPOGRAPHY. AND IT'S ENTIRELY AUTHENTIC."

You have GOT to be kidding me; I just vomited in my mouth... That's as bad, and less accurate than:

"ASS REEK, IT'S THE NEW PERFUME! IT'S PUNGENT & DISTRACTING! AND IT'S ENTIRELY AUTHENTIC."

Edited 2012-08-10 01:21 UTC

Reply Score: 5

RE: Comment by hoak
by AnXa on Fri 10th Aug 2012 21:14 UTC in reply to "Comment by hoak"
AnXa Member since:
2008-02-10

Didn't you mean...

"WINDOWS 8 IS OUR DESIGN LANGUAGE. WE CALL IT WINDOWS 8 BECAUSE IT'S MODERN AND CLEAN. IT'S FAST AND IN MOTION. IT'S ABOUT CONTENT AND TYPOGRAPHY. AND IT'S ENTIRELY AUTHENTIC."

...Sorry, I just had to.

Reply Score: 1

this sounds messy
by Lion on Fri 10th Aug 2012 01:33 UTC
Lion
Member since:
2007-03-22

This sounds like a recipe for confusion...

Metro as distinct from desktop apps made sense.
A Metro application was one that ran full screen and used Metro-style widgets.
As opposed to a desktop application which might have metro styling influences (eg: Office 2013) and be primarily intended to run on Windows 8.

With the new descriptors there's no clear distinction between a fullscreen touch-ui type app and a desktop app. This may be desirable from the MS point of view but it's terribly confusing for discussion purposes.

Reply Score: 2

v Last hurrah?
by quackalist on Fri 10th Aug 2012 02:24 UTC
RE: Last hurrah?
by Gone fishing on Fri 10th Aug 2012 06:32 UTC in reply to "Last hurrah? "
Gone fishing Member since:
2006-02-22

Perhaps it means the "formally known as Metro" interface wont be making it to Windows 9?


I think the reverse - Windows 8 interface is a statement of intent; this is the Windows of the future. The Windows 9 interface will be the Windows 8 interface enhanced.

Reply Score: 5

Windows Phone 7
by auouymous on Fri 10th Aug 2012 02:26 UTC
auouymous
Member since:
2011-09-23

But what about Windows Phone 7 which was released two or more years before Windows 8??? I'm absolutely positive Microsoft was not designing Metro for use with Windows 8. It was merely a new phone/tablet UI that never caught on, so they forced it upon all Windows 8 users to get developers to adopt it.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Windows Phone 7
by ze_jerkface on Fri 10th Aug 2012 03:30 UTC in reply to "Windows Phone 7"
ze_jerkface Member since:
2012-06-22

Here is what happened:

User feedback on Metro in WP7 was overwhelmingly positive.

Ballmer hands keys to Sinofsky for reasons not entirely clear. Ballmer's judgement ever since the iphone has been highly questionable to say the least.

Sinofsky sez: I HAVE SUPER AWESOME IDEA. WE SHOULD MAKE ONE UI FOR ALL DEVICES.

People sez: Why?

User feedback on Metro in Windows 8 preview is overwhelmingly negative.

Sinofsky being the little egomaniac that he is decided that his idea is actually good and the reviewers are wrong. He also changes his mind on allowing users to bypass metro. His idea is SO SUPER AWESOME that it requires forcing it on users without even leaving a registry disable. Now that sounds like a hot seller!

So now we have to wait for the market to regret this POS so the shareholders can wake up to realize that Ballmer is a madman and Sinofsky is a clueless Jobs wannabe.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Windows Phone 7
by cyrilleberger on Fri 10th Aug 2012 09:15 UTC in reply to "RE: Windows Phone 7"
cyrilleberger Member since:
2006-02-01

User feedback on Metro in WP7 was overwhelmingly positive.

As shown by the rush to buy WP7 phones. And the exploding sales of those phones. At least, we know that W8 will be a commercial success.

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: Windows Phone 7
by ze_jerkface on Fri 10th Aug 2012 17:29 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Windows Phone 7"
ze_jerkface Member since:
2012-06-22

You can have low sales and positive user feedback.

There are endless products that were highly rated by their owners but never gain mass popularity.

Windows 8 however has negative user feedback and will have low sales relative to previous editions.

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Windows Phone 7
by bassbeast on Fri 10th Aug 2012 19:32 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Windows Phone 7"
bassbeast Member since:
2007-11-11

Yeah I can think of another one...the Zune.

You will ALWAYS find somebody to like something, after all there is AMC Pacer and Gremlin car clubs where they just gush about those cars but i think we can all agree the Pacer and the Gremlin were crap cars put out by a dying company.

If a product bombs, no matter how much money you throw at it? Then there is something WRONG with the product, end of story. Either the public thinks the price is too high, the competition's product is better, or in the case of the Metro UI its just a fugly design, but when you throw buckets and buckets of money at marketing and can't get anybody to take it then its time to go back to the drawing board.

Sadly what we see instead is Sinofsky is so damned arrogant he truly believes he can force the market to take something the public doesn't want. Anybody catch one of his Win 8 talks? Count how many times the man says 'touchscreens' when talking about Win 8 on X86. He honestly believes, in a dead economy where both Intel and AMD are reporting horrible numbers and are having sales left and right just to move chips that raising the prices by 40%+ to include touchscreens, which people don't want because poking a vertical screen all day is painful, will INCREASE sales!

I'm sorry but if I didn't know better i'd swear it was an Onion parody, the amount of disconnect between reality and the heads of MSFT is just unreal.

Reply Score: 2

v Why do you care?
by codebuk on Fri 10th Aug 2012 12:27 UTC
RE: Why do you care?
by spudley99 on Fri 10th Aug 2012 12:57 UTC in reply to "Why do you care?"
spudley99 Member since:
2009-03-25

Thom, IMO this is not OS News nor something to gripe about.


In fact, this *is* OS News. Unless you consider Windows to not be an OS. Your comment may apply to other articles here about IP, but this one really is about an OS.

But I digress.

For me, this isn't going to change my life. I'm not likely to use Windows 8 any time soon anyway, so this isn't going to affect me, except to enjoy the irony of Microsoft being forced to drop a generic word from a product name.

To be frank, this is karma catching up on MS for their abuse of the words "Windows", "Word" and "Office" back in the day. Let them eat the cake they baked.

Reply Score: 6

Respond
by Tony Swash on Fri 10th Aug 2012 14:40 UTC
Tony Swash
Member since:
2009-08-22

Thom - whilst on the subject of Apple's legal battle with Samsung (you brought this up not I) any chance of clarifying your position on the leaked Samsung document covered by this OS News item:

http://www.osnews.com/comments/26256

In the comment thread of that debate you mentioned a couple of times the possibility of the translation being wrong, a bit odd as Samsung itself had never raised that defence, and I am now assuming that you accept the validity of the translation.

Accepting the accuracy of the translation of the Samsung document at face value for the sake of debate - what is your view on the contents of this document?

Does the Samsung approach to product design it reveals appear acceptable to you and how in your opinion does such an approach enhance innovation in the tech industry?

Reply Score: 2

RE: Respond
by Thom_Holwerda on Fri 10th Aug 2012 14:53 UTC in reply to "Respond"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

My response is on the frontpage. Where I linked to the document.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Respond
by MOS6510 on Fri 10th Aug 2012 15:14 UTC in reply to "RE: Respond"
MOS6510 Member since:
2011-05-12

Yes... but on the front page is also:

"Microsoft not being allowed to use the Metro name here is just as ridiculous as Apple trolling Samsung."

If Samsung indeed copied the iPhone, like Apple claims and their own document kind of proves, how can Apple's actions still be described as ridiculous and trolling?

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Respond
by Tony Swash on Fri 10th Aug 2012 19:41 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Respond"
Tony Swash Member since:
2009-08-22

Yes... but on the front page is also:

"Microsoft not being allowed to use the Metro name here is just as ridiculous as Apple trolling Samsung."

If Samsung indeed copied the iPhone, like Apple claims and their own document kind of proves, how can Apple's actions still be described as ridiculous and trolling?



Quite.

Thom says he said what he had to say about the Samsung document in the original article. He said

the document evaluates everything from the home screen to the browser to the built in apps on both devices. In each case, it comes up with a recommendation on what Samsung should do going forward and in most cases its answer is simple: Make it work more like the iPhone." Pretty damning.

He then of course back tracks and starts adding qualifications to that statement.

how many of these were actually implemented? How common are these types of comparisons (i.e., does Apple have them)? Are these protected by patents and the like? And, but that's largely irrelevant and mostly of interest to me because I'm a translator myself, who translated the document, and how well has he or she done the job?

Leaving aside the desperate and irrelevant red herring about translation what does this all add up to? Are you saying if indeed Samsung did use Apple's designs to design it's own kit then it was wrong? If so should Samsung be punished? Should such activity ever be condoned? Given the volumes you have written attacking Apple on this issue a few more detailed paragraphs laying out your take on the Samsung document and what it says about how Samsung behaved is the least you can do.

And still you call Apple a troll. Have you no shame?

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Respond
by MOS6510 on Fri 10th Aug 2012 22:26 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Respond"
MOS6510 Member since:
2011-05-12

Well, in a way Thom asked correct questions.

However when Apple appears to be in the wrong, even when it's a suggested rumor with no merit but someone's imagination, he condemns Apple without any reserve, doubt or question. A few times already he got it wrong, but never did he publish a correction.

When it's Samsung, one of the good guys, everything is doubted and questioned. Even the translator is under suspicion.

We now know what happens after the verdict. If Apple wins the system is evil, the judge a fool and the jury a bunch bribed idiots. If Samsung wins the judge 'n' jury are sensible people.

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: Respond
by henderson101 on Sat 11th Aug 2012 08:39 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Respond"
henderson101 Member since:
2006-05-30

Without getting in to the same tired arguments on another unrelated story -Thom has already drawn the battle lines and admitted that he can't be objective. It's sad, but until he appoints a new Apple/Samsung news reported with a neutral perspective, you'll get this slanted view. I state again - neither party is clean, they are both corrupt, neither deserve to win.....

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Respond
by Fergy on Fri 10th Aug 2012 20:48 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Respond"
Fergy Member since:
2006-04-10

If Samsung indeed copied the iPhone, like Apple claims and their own document kind of proves, how can Apple's actions still be described as ridiculous and trolling?

Nobody bought a Samsung phone thinking it was an iPhone. Apple is ridiculous and trolling.

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Respond
by Tony Swash on Fri 10th Aug 2012 21:38 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Respond"
Tony Swash Member since:
2009-08-22

Nobody bought a Samsung phone thinking it was an iPhone. Apple is ridiculous and trolling.


You mean like this?

http://ilyabirman.net/meanwhile/all/an-iphone-samsung-has-been-foun...

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Respond
by MOS6510 on Fri 10th Aug 2012 22:16 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Respond"
MOS6510 Member since:
2011-05-12

I don't know about iPhones, but a large percentage of Samsung tablets were returned by customers who came home thinking they had bought an iPad.

Reply Score: 1

RE[5]: Respond
by Johann Chua on Mon 13th Aug 2012 10:11 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Respond"
Johann Chua Member since:
2005-07-22

Did the presence of the Samsung logo, and absence of the Apple logo, not clue them in?

Reply Score: 2

I think old unix
by jefro on Fri 10th Aug 2012 15:17 UTC
jefro
Member since:
2007-04-13

Wasn't Metro some font or windows deal in unix a long time ago?

Reply Score: 1

Not so ridiculous
by ins0mniac on Fri 10th Aug 2012 17:03 UTC
ins0mniac
Member since:
2008-10-01

Metro AG owns the trademark for Metro. It's theirs and they don't want anybody else to use it, that's the point of trademarks, isn't it? And I do think they are entirely appropriate to consider that there would be confusion. Try explaining to a small shop owner that uses Metro AG as his supplier that the new computer/tablet/phone that he just bought has nothing to do with Metro AG, but rather with the typical american ignorance of the obscure place called 'the rest of the world'.
You can't just use a trademark belonging to one of your important partners and forget to ask them if that's ok.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Not so ridiculous
by Fergy on Fri 10th Aug 2012 20:51 UTC in reply to "Not so ridiculous"
Fergy Member since:
2006-04-10

You can't just use a trademark belonging to one of your important partners and forget to ask them if that's ok.

It is one word in the dictionary. Did MS try to trademark it? If not why can't they use that word to refer to something? If MS would have called it awesome would you think it fair they would trademark the word awesome?

Edited 2012-08-10 20:51 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Not so ridiculous
by ins0mniac on Fri 10th Aug 2012 20:58 UTC in reply to "RE: Not so ridiculous"
ins0mniac Member since:
2008-10-01

Exactly as Windows™ is one word in the dictionary. But I don't think Microsoft takes it lightly when somebody tries to use on a product. For example Windows Commander wich had to be renamed Total Commander.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Not so ridiculous
by ricegf on Sat 11th Aug 2012 04:43 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Not so ridiculous"
ricegf Member since:
2007-04-25

Remember the web of international lawsuits spawned by Lindows?

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Not so ridiculous
by zima on Thu 16th Aug 2012 23:59 UTC in reply to "RE: Not so ridiculous"
zima Member since:
2005-07-06

> You can't just use a trademark belonging to one of your important partners and forget to ask them if that's ok.

It is one word in the dictionary. Did MS try to trademark it? If not why can't they use that word to refer to something?

So you really don't get what parent poster wrote, or how the world works in general... it's about MS pleasing their important partner, one of the largest retailers of Windows PCs in several of more affluent markets, to be on as good terms with them as possible.

Edited 2012-08-17 00:03 UTC

Reply Score: 2

What comes around goes around...
by votre on Sat 11th Aug 2012 12:51 UTC
votre
Member since:
2012-08-11

Well...Microsoft and all the other big players have been playing the IP (patent/copyright/trademark) 'cease & desist' game for years. Usually against small companies and start-ups that didn't have the financial resources to fight back. It was only a matter of time before one of them got hoisted on their own petard.

All I can say is: "How's it feel now?"
:-))

Reply Score: 1