Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 3rd Jun 2012 22:04 UTC
Permalink for comment 520612
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/25/13 0:45 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/24/13 23:59 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/24/13 22:33 UTC
Linked by Howard Fosdick on 05/24/13 21:41 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/24/13 14:44 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 23:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 22:04 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 22:01 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 17:52 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 22:23 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2005-12-04
Taking the hypothetical usage data, if 90% of users single task, they're seeing that white space today. Actually I saw it while reading the article, and I'm sure many others did too. And if 100 million users is a lot, 900 million is a lot too.
Metro is a one-size-fits-all environment. I don't mean to defend it, but if the outcome is forcing the 10% to see what the 90% see every day, it might achieve a lot more than its value as a desktop environment.
Note that websites coded for a relatively fixed width can only be resized within a narrow band - too small, scrollbars emerge; too large, whitespace. If the outcome is thinking freshly about how to render content at different sizes, it won't just be metro users who benefit, but those who like to resize windows to very customized dimensions too.
Yes, the web is the way it is. And yet, the web is popular - so the good news is that while it's ugly, it's no dealbreaker to people viewing OSNews and countless other sites. If that 10% of people who design websites are now having to think freshly about the problem, we all benefit.