Same thing with 8. When using, they might feel "alienated". People should be educated as to the simularities, but at the same time the differences. Start Screen verses Start Menu. Tiles verses Icons. Charms verses Menus. I’m sure you get my gist. BTW, this is the main point of the video -> To educate people as to why MS designed 8 as they did.
F1 on the desktop still works the same. There’s a Help tile on the Start Screen. There’s a few “learning 8” apps one can install. All there to educate the user on how to use the OS.
The needs of the traditional user base continues to be supplied via the tradition Win32 desktop. Just because it now a portal and takes second place to the Start Screen does not qualify that it doesn’t. Also, just because the Start Screen replaces the Start Menu does not qualify that it doesn’t. Whatever application one could run in 7, one can run in 8. The Start Menu, now being the Start Screen is in a different place -> It's own screen.An OS, in itself, does nothing. An OS is designed to support and provide an environment where other programs can function. When an OS doesn't provide that environment and support, but imposes its own requirements, it ignores its prime objective. To ignore or belittle the needs of the traditional user base, is fraught with folly.
Who says that an OS can’t stretch beyond “design to support and provide an environment”? To me the Start Screen verses Start Menu is one one the great inovations of 8. It’s simular to Start Menu, gadgets, and icons on the desktop of past Oss. All in different places I might add. A cluttered mess to me. Start Screen combines all. “The house made out of the Internet” was a good quote and explanation. Can one get all that at-a-glance updated information out of a Start Menu? Icons? Gadgets? -> No.
8 is similar, but different would be the positive conotation. 8 is different, but similar would be the negative conotation. I wish more people would see and use the first.
There's so much more, but I won't get into it for time's sake. Too-a-roo for now ......
When you go to drive an electric car, the only functional difference is the lack of a normal gear box. It still also has a steering wheel, accelerator pedal and brake pedal, which all function in the same way. No one should ever use car analogies when describing Microsoft products, unless they start to build cars. Maybe teir next idea is to use Kinect to control cars.
I have never said that the traditional desktop is not available, it's currently essential for Windows 8 to function, but it's been castrated in part, so that you are not totally able to relinquish the Modern interface without resorting to third party software. No one can deny that. The Modern interface is not a portal, it's a repacement for a traditional desktop loaded with icons. It simply looks tidier (but that too can be a matter of taste). What really is the difference between this:
This is not innovation, in fact it's slightly retrograde, in that you can't open multiple programs, in multiple sessions (two appears to be the max given that the system meets the Microsoft specs). If the desktop was completely removed, how would you contemplate doing things that you do now? Everything on one screen, predominantly one program visible at a time.
These are legitimate complaints by many people. Why is it so difficult to accept genuine criticism when it's quite warranted? If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, there's a good chance that it is a duck.
We are not yet, at the stage, where the metro can replace desktop multitasking, maybe in 5 years or so...
IMO, IMHO > If that is your wallpaper - yikes - what a disaster ! - ..... if that is what you like, then O.K.
A program like Stardock Fences would be very helpful perhaps IMO.
Your APPS screen is very nice, clean, efficient IMO, IMHO.
BTW, if you are so inclined, using Decor8, you can set your start screen to have the same wallpaper as your desktop thereby reducing the alleged jarring effect. .... and the start screen can slide your icons (tiles) to provide more available links.
If you do not like the start screen then that is no help, sorry.
From my POV, your desktop is difficult to look at IMO. Somewhat like this.
I prefer this. IMO > preference...
I am guessing you're not a fan of semantic zooming either. Oh well...
The difference is, the All Apps part of the Start Screen is not seen often while the desktop in 7 is seen all the time.
If the Desktop were removed, they wouldn't be stupid enough to allow the limitations Metro has right now.
I've merely pulled examples off the net to illustrate a point, this is my Windows 7 and Windows 8 desktop (without the gadgets):
Quite frankly, for me, it's much easier and more logical to use.
And in the examples that I provided, the only reason that the Windows 8 screen looks tidier, is because it doesn't have the distracting background. That's at least one aesthetic that Microsoft has gotten right. Make the background in the first image a single colour and both would ostensibly look the same.
Last edited by Ray8; 13 Dec 2012 at 18:11.
Touch can be successfully applied to the desktop / laptop using a multitouch pad. Apple has proved this very successfully. Applying a good touchpad to Win8 makes it much more usable on the desktop. I do think eliminating any hierarchical containment in Metro was a huge mistake. I also think the jarring transition between Metro, Desktop and Full Screen Apps is confusing and shows poor UI design.