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

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 581757
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[5]: Comment by Nelson
by nt_jerkface on Mon 27th Jan 2014 04:05 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by Nelson"
Member since:

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

RE[6]: Comment by Nelson
by Nelson on Mon 27th Jan 2014 09:20 in reply to "RE[5]: Comment by Nelson"
Nelson Member since:

You almost sound believable when you trot out fake numbers like 99%, but the fact of the matter is that a lot of code, importantly, existing libraries and PCLs, port over just fine.

WinForns, ASP.NET, and WPF were never part of the core framework anyway (two are legacy UI frameworks superseded by XAML and WPF to WinRT XAML isn't an impossible port job, and one is a web stack)

and this js what you complain about. Maybe to the simpletons here you come across as having more than a primitive understanding, but anyone worth their salt can see you're in beyond your depth.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[7]: Comment by Nelson
by nt_jerkface on Mon 27th Jan 2014 23:04 in reply to "RE[6]: Comment by Nelson"
nt_jerkface Member since:

Let's cut to the chase and see if you can answer a question that Sinofsky avoided:

Why does Microsoft get to directly port Office (a Win32 application) to Windows RT when existing .NET and Win32 developers are not allowed to do so?

Reply Parent Score: 3