Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 24th Jan 2014 20:17 UTC
Windows

One more tidbit about Windows 8.1 Update 1 from my aforementioned source: Update 1 may feature some of the work that Microsoft has been doing behind the scenes to reduce further the memory and disk space requirements for Windows. This would allow Windows 8.1 Update 1 to run on cheaper small tablets.

Windows 8.1 Update 1, screen shots of which leaked earlier this week, is expected to allow users to pin Metro-style/Windows Store apps to their desktop task bars. Thumbnail previews of these Metro-style apps will be available from the Desktop task bar, according to additional screen shots. Windows 8.1 Update 1 also is expected to include close boxes for Metro-style apps.

Seems like some welcome changes, but it's going to take a lot more for people to warm up to Metro. The biggest problem to me is that since there aren't any compelling Metro applications, there's simply no reason to put with its idiosyncrasies, especially on desktops. I cannot think of a single Metro application that is better than its desktop counterpart, nor is there any Metro application that is better than similar applications on competing platforms.

Developers need users, and users need developers. Right now - Metro seems to lacks both.

Thread beginning with comment 581737
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Comment by Nelson
by nt_jerkface on Mon 27th Jan 2014 00:32 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by Nelson"
nt_jerkface
Member since:
2009-08-26

Nelson what you're missing is that Windows RT does not contain the full .NET framework*

*like Win32 it is only available for internal Microsoft developers.

Sinofsky in fact deleted our comments when we pointed out that it wasn't possible to run Windows without Win32 or .NET and that blocking .NET from developers made zero sense. There had to be a "secret stash" API or else the entire thing wouldn't run. And of course the "secret stash" turned out to be true and you can find people who hacked Windows RT to run both Win32 and .NET applications. Sinofsky I guess thought we could all be fooled (though he did fool Windows bloggers and non-developers).

So maybe pay attention next time when Windows developers are calling BS on a Microsoft exec, ok?

P.S. The total idiot in charge whose strategies that you have been defending has been fired. I'm not sure if you have noticed.

- Jerkface

(An actual .NET developer who can't wait for Microsoft's period of inanity to be over.)

Edited 2014-01-27 00:46 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[4]: Comment by Nelson
by Nelson on Mon 27th Jan 2014 01:53 in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by Nelson"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

There is very little actually missing from the Windows Store .NET profile. The only big ticket items are WinForns, WPF/SL, and the ASP.NET stacks.

Some APIs have moved into WinRT proper and others have been replaced with newer asynchronous APIs.

This is coming from someone who actually writes Windows Store applications, not an out of touch WinForms developer who's breadth of knowledge doesn't escape a DataGrid.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[5]: Comment by Nelson
by nt_jerkface on Mon 27th Jan 2014 04:05 in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by Nelson"
nt_jerkface Member since:
2009-08-26


This is coming from someone who actually writes Windows Store applications, not an out of touch WinForms developer who's breadth of knowledge doesn't escape a DataGrid.


It's a subset and that is what matters.

99.9% of existing .NET applications can't be directly ported.

That's stupid.

You're still defending the idiocy that I called out ages ago. Remember when I predicted that MS would scuttle Windows RT? Well it's happening.

Remember when I called Sinofsky a rat? Well he's been fired.

Remember when I called Ballmer the biggest threat to Windows? Well he's been fired.

Your inexperience has always shown through. You fell for Sinofsky's blogs and you know it. I can't believe you even post here. You truly have no shame.

Reply Parent Score: 4