The desktop has always been horrible because it's usually covered by windows, obscuring the things it contains. Also, Windows has always been horrible about remembering where you placed icons.
The Metro Start Screen is horrible because it's an infinitely scrolling roll, a full-screen, modal monstrosity, that depends upon things like "The 4 Corners", which are certain to appear in the next edition of "GUI Bloopers". The "live tiles" are worthless because they aren't visible when I'm actually using my computer, and they're too small to convey much useful information anyway. Metro would never have been invented if Microsoft wasn't so desperate over losing the mobile market and so lacking in confidence in their mobile efforts they're trying to leverage their success on the desktop to make mobile happen. I think it's going to backfire in a big way.
The Windows 7 taskbar is brilliant because it combines the original taskbar purpose of helping one locate and activate windows with program launching. By pinning programs, you always know where to look for a program to launch it, activate its window, check on its progress indicator, access its jump list, etc. Programs stay exactly where you pin them, which improves efficiency over time through familiarity and muscle memory. On a relatively small 1680x1050 monitor, it's possible to fit 18 icons on a single row, taking up about 70% of the horizontal area, leaving room for some folder shortcuts and the notification area. The taskbar really comes into its own when you use multiple rows, like I described in this message. I use a lot of different programs, and people who use fewer will easily get by with 1 or 2 rows.
I have been running 8 on my main laptop for a month now and at one time or another I have agreed with every post on this thread. At first I was so frustrated I hated the start screen and the metro ui. I've learned and adapted and now I love it. First, I have the programs (or files) that I use most often pinned to the task bar. I then customized the start screen so that 99% of what I need is either pinned to the task bar, given a shortcut on the desktop or found on the start screen. Now I rarely have to go to the All Apps screen. I find the start screen much faster than the old start menu. I'm glad they forced the change. I went through all the XP years with the start set up as "classic" and if MS didn't force me I'd probably set up 8 like Win7 and never learn the advantages.
You are a brilliant example of people having positive attitude being the one benefited. Take some time to at least get the very basics of the new os.
Can you guess why?
I'll spell it out for you, reduced RAM usage is a worthwhile change.
Like all Metro fans, you assume that people that don't like it, just haven't used it enough.
It's like saying that if you don't like drinking sump oil, you just haven't drunk enough of it.
I think the fact of the matter is to compete in todays market MS needs to make one software that will work with all your devices and I think MS has got it right with the new metro start menu. I think the desktop days are soon to be over. Just think about it, how fast windows will load up once the desktop is gone!
I hope you know the difference between change and improvement. Reduction in RAM usage isn't a "change" its an "improvement". It means the computer is performing faster. Why would anybody complain about that? Metro is something that "changes" the way a user uses his/her computer. So, those who are not willing change, are the ones complaining. Do you think microsoft is paying me or people like me for liking metro? If there was nothing in metro, why would I like it? I am not the only one liking metro.I'll spell it out for you, reduced RAM usage is a worthwhile change.
But yes, I agree that microsoft should give users the option of booting directly into desktop mode.
Last edited by Arpan; 23 Jul 2012 at 04:25.
Actually, I had said that its a bit of a problem for organisations because they have to train thousands of employees to use win8. But microsoft has said it would include a 'Get Started' assistant software with the stable windows 8 release so that, the problem is solved to some extent. And the reply I got was, this change was 'loss of productivity'.
The question is if MS is so confident in the new configuration why not allow a default selection that allows the user to have a CHOICE of the traditional start menu?
Boot times are IMO largely academic especially if you're operating with a SSD. I personally did not experience any improvement with my short time experimenting with Win8 and a few seconds here and there at boot time is really of no significance.