Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 3rd Jun 2012 22:04 UTC
Windows So, I've been using the Windows 8 Release Preview since it came out, almost exclusively (except for work, since I'm obviously not going to rely on unfinished and untested software for that). I already knew I could get into Metro on my 11.6" ZenBook, but on my 24" desktop, things aren't looking as rosy. Here's an illustrated guide of the most pressing issues I run into, and five suggestions to address them. Instead of just complaining, let's get constructive.
Thread beginning with comment 520573
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Comment by gmlongo
by gmlongo on Sun 3rd Jun 2012 22:25 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by gmlongo"
gmlongo
Member since:
2005-07-07

You pointed out the wasted space in the white areas that are only white because OSNews was coded to leave them white. That wasted space, has nothing to do with Metro.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[3]: Comment by gmlongo
by Thom_Holwerda on Sun 3rd Jun 2012 22:27 in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by gmlongo"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

Of course it's Metro's fault. Virtually no website uses that much width because it makes no sense to do so - a simple limitation of the human brain in that reading lines that are too long causes us to lose focus, making reading that much harder. This is basic psychology.

That's why sites tend to not flow beyond a certain width.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[4]: Comment by gmlongo
by gmlongo on Sun 3rd Jun 2012 22:36 in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by gmlongo"
gmlongo Member since:
2005-07-07

That is only because you have a browser in the left pane. That could be any application, many of which make excellent use of the full width.

Yes, I agree, that 80/20 is limiting and additional customizable splits would be beneficial, but that does not change the fact that your graphics with the "wasted space" comments are incorrectly attributing that to Metro. Because, even with other splits, many of them would still have "wasted space" because the website was explicitly coded as such.

In any case, their usage data obviously indicates that most people focus on their main task to the exclusion of other windows. And that aligns with the real world usage patterns I have seen as well.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[4]: Comment by gmlongo
by Yanni Depp on Sun 3rd Jun 2012 22:40 in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by gmlongo"
Yanni Depp Member since:
2010-02-17

Thom's right here. I have a tri-monitor setup: a 27" iMac with two 20" monitors attached. You wouldn't want a site to fill screens that size: they become difficult to read. For maximum readability, lines of text should have a certain length and have certain spacing. Text running all the way across a 27" monitor wouldn't work.*

As a result, I never have windows maximised. I tile them so I can see multiple things at once. This approach is useful for developers, designers and content creators. We're going to have problems with Metro's window management. Well, most will: I won't since I use OS X. Having two sites in an 80/20 split makes little sense for tiling web pages. Having two apps (web browser and text editor, or two web browsers) in a 50/50 split makes a lot of sense.

* of course, you can have multiple columns or blocks taking up the full 1920x1080 (or higher), dynamically moved and positioned using responsive layouts, but that brings its own set of challenges.

Edited 2012-06-03 22:44 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 7

RE[4]: Comment by gmlongo
by moondevil on Mon 4th Jun 2012 06:53 in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by gmlongo"
moondevil Member since:
2005-07-08

Sorry Tom, but this is the same issue on my 21' Monitor running Windows 7/Linux.

Should we blame them as well for the amount of white space?

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Comment by gmlongo
by l3v1 on Mon 4th Jun 2012 06:48 in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by gmlongo"
l3v1 Member since:
2005-07-06

You pointed out the wasted space in the white areas that are only white because OSNews was coded to leave them white. That wasted space, has nothing to do with Metro.


Sorry guys, but that sounds stupid. Who in their right mind reads a web page full screen on 1920x1200 (I'm also on this res for 90% of my day).

I easily understand the suggestions at the end of the article/post, but my suggestion would simply be to make Metro _entirely_ optional on a non-tablet, non-touch computer. Other usability issues I could mostly solve by using Start8, which is still not a real solution, but at least makes using Win8 a bit more bearable.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[4]: Comment by gmlongo
by zima on Mon 4th Jun 2012 07:58 in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by gmlongo"
zima Member since:
2005-07-06

What is the difference if it's full screen or not, when you focus on a webpage? It's a "wasted" space either way (and actually, when the browser window width fits to such "narrow" content it might introduce unnecessary clutter outside of it - most of the time I prefer to have blank space there, instead of icons or another app that's in the background)

Edited 2012-06-04 07:59 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[4]: Comment by gmlongo
by WereCatf on Mon 4th Jun 2012 10:03 in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by gmlongo"
WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

Sorry guys, but that sounds stupid. Who in their right mind reads a web page full screen on 1920x1200 (I'm also on this res for 90% of my day).


I guess I'm the odd one out here, seeing as I haven't so far noticed a single comment about someone doing this, but.. well, I *do* have Firefox maximized at all times.

Reply Parent Score: 3