I'm directly copying this from a comment I left on an article that was discussing Windows 8; but as the title implies, this will probably be the last thread I start on here, because frankly, it seems that no matter what, Win8 haters are going to hate, regardless of whether they give the OS an objective chance or not (I can tell you one thing, some of the criticisms I read on here make it obvious the author hasn't even booted Windows 8). But yeah, here is what I'm leaving you all with.
The original article can be found here: Does Apple Love PCs More Than Microsoft? | TechPinions
First, before I get started, I must point out the most obvious thing in Windows 8, yet what most people seem to completely ignore, the desktop is still there. It's the same desktop that is found on beloved Windows 7, and better. Every function you could perform on Windows 7 (desktop) you can still do on Windows 8, but at a lesser cost, since Windows 8 is FAR less resource hungry. You can still multitask brilliantly, use snap, peek, gadgets, etc. The only difference is the Start menu is gone. That's it. Now, you're thinking "but that's the biggest omission they could've done," but not quite.
Now, I will layout for you some reasons why the Start screen is better than the Start menu. First, let's be honest with ourselves, the Start menu has become far less important since Windows 7, thanks to the Taskbar. The Taskbar offers far more convenience & functionality for the items you use most on your PC than the Start menu ever could, and yes, you can still pin things to your Taskbar in Windows 8; however, I do understand that the Start menu has its purposes.
One of the main purposes for the Start menu was quick access to system controls, i.e. control panel, explorer, run, etc. You know, things you wouldn't necessarily want to pin to your Taskbar. Did you know that if you right-click where the Start menu used to be, you can a quick jump list to all of these commonly used programs?
Another awesome feature of the old Start menu was the ability to simply hit the Start button, then start typing the name of the application, file, etc. that you're looking for and it would appear in the list for you; did you know that this still works with the new Start menu? Just type!
It's no secret that these functions, that still work in Windows 8, were 90% (if not more) of the functions of the Start menu. For the other 10%, that's where "Pin to Start" comes into play. Personally, there's nothing more painful that having to go through a list of program names just to find the one I'm looking for, which was the case on the Start menu. Now, that's no more. You can literally pin anything in the OS to start (yes, even desktop applications), and instead of just being small text that could take a bit to find, it shows up as a big, nice tile, which is very easy to find and click. Heck, I've seen Start screens that have been filled up with Desktop tiles. You make your Start screen yours.
Now, let's talk about Metro apps. The first thing I want to discuss is your complaint over how the apps are full screen. I'm pretty sure I seen a poll one time (not sure what site) that asked about PC usage, specifically how many windows were open, on screen, at the same time. The resounding majority said they, most of the time, they only have one screen open, working with one program, in full screen.
My second point about Metro apps is the second word in that phrase, apps. People love apps. Nowadays, especially with the general public, the question about a consumer electronic is "does it have/how are the/how many: apps." There's an app craze. People don't even realize that it's short for application, they just know that app = cool/fun. That's where Windows 8 will attract, because it has an app store.
Let's now talk about Windows 8 on the upcoming machines. With the coming of Windows 8, there are going to be mainly three different ways to experience the OS: an ARM tablet, an x86 tablet, and a traditional PC form (desktop, laptop, etc.). You've already stated that you believe that Windows 8 will be fantastic on a tablet, and I couldn't agree more. It has features that destroy the competition, and it's no secret that Metro is an aesthetically attractive interface. So, let's go ahead and say the ARM tablet will be great with Windows 8. Now, let's look at the group of consumers who want a tablet that can completely eliminate their need for a separate computer. An iOS or Android tablet certainly isn't going to do the trick, and that's where x86 tablets come into play. With an x86 tablet, you get the best of both worlds. It's an amazing tablet OS with full computer capabilities; there's really no compromise. So, let's go ahead and say that x86 tablets will be a hit too.
Two out of three down; let's look at traditional PCs.
Let's get right down to it, traditional PCs are controlled with mouse/trackpad and keyboard, for the most part. I could go on and on about how I think Windows 8 works very well with this type of control, because I do, as I've ran the developer preview, consumer preview, and now release preview since day one. Sure, there's a learning curve, but wasn't there also a learning curve from Windows 3.1 to Windows 95? Did people (like you) complain then, too? Of course! But, I'm going to discuss what, again, people seem to ignore - the future. Have you seen some of the amazing form factors of upcoming Windows 8 laptops, like the Lenovo IdeaPad Yoga? It's insane! And in a good way. Microsoft has developed an OS that is pioneering, because it's encouraging hardware manufacturers to create unique form factors that have the potential to be the "next big thing." Then, I hear the complaint "forcing hardware manufacturers to put touch screens on their PCs will drive up costs substantially." I'm not denying this claim, but there was a time when the common computer had only 1-4mb of memory, and 8mb of memory cost $400; by the logic of what I hear today, Microsoft should've never made an OS that required/ran better on 8mb of memory.
I hope I've made some sense here. You must look at the big picture when talking about things like this. Microsoft is risking and betting big on this OS, and just like before, they're getting bashed for doing just that. With the huge UI change from Windows 3.1 to Windows 95, and now from Windows 7 to Windows 8, people will be frightened, but in the end, it will be successful, and pave the way for future technology.
I hope I've made sense here, I really do.