I am a PC, not a tablet

[Coke Robot]

@ Coke Robot + BillWindows,

1. > How many Metro Apps can you open at the same time on the same monitor?
2. > How many Metro Apps can you open at the same time on multiple monitors?

For me with two 1280 by 1024 LCD screens the answer is 1 and 1

3. > How many Desktop Apps can you open at the same time on the same monitor?
4. > How many Desktop Apps can you open at the same time on multiple monitors?

For me I can easily view 2 programs on each monitor at the same time. I can also "easily" cycle though a lot more.

It doesn't really matter how many I have open of what. The question should be, how many things can you keep genuine focus on on the same monitor?

 

[Coke Robot]

@coke robot, I think you and I are the only ones who can see the future of computing on Windows 8.

Well, besides Microsoft that is.

I wouldn't be be too sure about that. Most people seem to be simply complaining about not being able to turn off Metro whilst in desktop mode. They are not talking about getting rid of Metro, it's just a question of choice, the choice to disable Metro if they so wish. The problem MS has is that they let us as testers know it was possible in the Developer Preview. Since taking the choice away many people now seem to have decided that they do want the option to enable/ disable Metro back. Asking for it back does not make them anti-Windows 8.

I, like most, have always stated that what's been done with Windows 8 under the bonnet is very worthwhile. It's fast, responsive and generally works very well. It's not the operating system per se that I have a problem with, it's things like the removal of the choice to switch Metro off and on, the ability to choose how folders and files are displayed [we now have 2 options instead of the 8 we have in Windows 7, multitasking Windows 8: Thrown into a multi-tasking mosh pit ? The Register etc.. Dumbing down the whole UI for those who only use the operating system for checking a few E-mails and play a few games is bizarre.

I don't think you might be using Windows 8 effectively if you only check a few emails and some games. I personally only use a few because the good thing about apps, at least for now, no ads. Other than that, I have over half my Start Screen pinned with items that go to the Desktop, my Libraries, Zune, VMware, and other system tools. I find using the Start Screen to be better than the start menu because I can quickly switch from the Desktop, find the item I need a lot quicker, and go back to the Desktop.

 

[Coke Robot]

I, like most, have always stated that what's been done with Windows 8 under the bonnet is very worthwhile. It's fast, responsive and generally works very well. It's not the operating system per se that I have a problem with, it's things like the removal of the choice to switch Metro off and on, the ability to choose how folders and files are displayed [we now have 2 options instead of the 8 we have in Windows 7, multitasking Windows 8: Thrown into a multi-tasking mosh pit ? The Register etc.. Dumbing down the whole UI for those who only use the operating system for checking a few E-mails and play a few games is bizarre.

While I agree with you, Microsofts problem is, that from an "average consumer" point of view, they can't actually get rid of Metro, or give you an option to turn it off.

Why? Because on the face of things at least, 8 is just 7 with a stupid start menu, you take that away, and what you are left with is Windows 7 minus Aero. Now I, and probably just about everyone else on here, knows that there have been a lot of under the hood tweaks, and it runs beautifully, dare I say it better than 7, but the average consumer won't see that, they will just see Windows 7, and go "WEll why should I pay x amount for that, when I can get 7 for this smaller amount" (as 7 will no longer be the flagship product it will be cheaper). They have almost shot themselves in the foot, in a weird sort of way, 7 was almost too successful.

As for the Vista analogy, I see where you are coming from. There was nothing really wrong with Vista, it just got a bad reputation, I can certainly see 8 going the same way, if Microsoft aren't careful.

Just one thing I must say in 8's defence though, I've been quite vocal in the past about how poor the Desktop interface is, they have taken big steps to alleviate this in the release preview. It no longer feels like I'm playing "Hunt the pixel" which is appreciated.

Just one suggestion though Microsoft... why not let the "touch gestures" be used by a mouse as well, have Windows register holding the left mouse button down and doing the gesture, the same as doing it with your finger. For example swiping in the charms bar.

They could do what we've been telling them (and you) for the last six months or more.

Simply give us the option to turn Metro AND the Start Button/Menu on or off.

How hard can that be to do? OR understand?

Why?

Why not? Microsoft are not Apple. I am a Microsoft customer for a reason... Microsoft have always been pro choice (as long as you don't interfere with their Intellectual Property). That's why I like them, and its why I don't buy Apple.

The same goes to any new version of Windows that is release. From xp to vista, it was some security improves, a few networking improves, aero, and horrid performance. The from vista to 7, that was even more finicky because it was literally vista, but with a bigger taskbar, better networking, Libraries, touch features, and better battery features. 7 was literally called vista 2.0, or it's like vista, but it works. With 7 to 8, yeah, if Microsoft kept it with a start menu, there literally would be NO incentive to upgrade as it would be a waste of time if 7 works fine for you. But they obviously realized that they can't do that in a world where technology and form factors are changing. And as for choice, well, when 95 came out there were obviously the naysayers. I bet there were some that would use 95 as long as you could remove the start menu, or just not even use 95 for that. But we all have seen what developed from that....

 

[alphanumeric]

@ Coke Robot + BillWindows,

1. > How many Metro Apps can you open at the same time on the same monitor?
2. > How many Metro Apps can you open at the same time on multiple monitors?

For me with two 1280 by 1024 LCD screens the answer is 1 and 1

3. > How many Desktop Apps can you open at the same time on the same monitor?
4. > How many Desktop Apps can you open at the same time on multiple monitors?

For me I can easily view 2 programs on each monitor at the same time. I can also "easily" cycle though a lot more.

It doesn't really matter how many I have open of what. The question should be, how many things can you keep genuine focus on on the same monitor?

That's my point, I can only ever look at one Metro app at a time. < IMHO epic fail for a company that's been doing this as long as Microsoft has. That's not my idea of multitasking, or ease of use either?
If I run desktop apps, I can run outlook on my second monitor and see new e-mail when it arrives and I don't have to switch focus to do it. I can also run media player on the same monitor reduced in Now Playing mode and see what's playing and not have to switch focus to do it. All while typing this post in the desktop IE on my main screen. If Metro is so good, and the future of computing, why is it so restrictive?

 

[Coke Robot]

@ Coke Robot + BillWindows,

1. > How many Metro Apps can you open at the same time on the same monitor?
2. > How many Metro Apps can you open at the same time on multiple monitors?

For me with two 1280 by 1024 LCD screens the answer is 1 and 1

3. > How many Desktop Apps can you open at the same time on the same monitor?
4. > How many Desktop Apps can you open at the same time on multiple monitors?

For me I can easily view 2 programs on each monitor at the same time. I can also "easily" cycle though a lot more.

It doesn't really matter how many I have open of what. The question should be, how many things can you keep genuine focus on on the same monitor?

That's my point, I can only ever look at one Metro app at a time. < IMHO epic fail for a company that's been doing this as long as Microsoft has. That's not my idea of multitasking, or ease of use either?
If I run desktop apps, I can run outlook on my second monitor and see new e-mail when it arrives and I don't have to switch focus to do it. I can also run media player on the same monitor reduced in Now Playing mode and see what's playing and not have to switch focus to do it. All while typing this post in the desktop IE on my main screen. If Metro is so good, and the future of computing, why is it so restrictive?

Metro isn't so restrictive you use it right. See, I can the Mail app open to see current new mail. I then can open the Music app and see what's playing or continue what was previously playing. I then can snap the Mail app next the Music app and still see new mail appear without losing focus. And, if I had another monitor, I could use the second the type this in metro IE. Or, with the single monitor I have, I can just use IE in full screen and hit Start and see what the Mail app's live tile looks like to see if I have new mail and look at the Music app's tile to see what's playing, then I can hit Start again and continue typing this. Metro isn't restrictive, it's different. That there is the point.

 

[legacy7955]

Honestly I don't think you give the general public enough credit about at least knowing that Windows 8 has a superior polished code which is more efficient compared to Windows 7, if for no other reason they know because the tech media and even the general media have informed them of these improvements.

If we understand that M$ needs to profit from the Applications part of their business and many of us do NOT want to have the metro UI in our version why doesn't MS
offer an "Enterprise/PowerUser" edition of Windows 8 with the the Desktop UI as default (of course the option to enable Metro if you wish) and charge us more money for it. I am absolutely willing to pay more if need be in lieu of having Metro forced on me.

For the record I will NEVER purchase any OSX from Apple because I despise their corporate philosophy and the legions of morons that seem to line up to be ripped off so they can be called
"hip" by the mindless media.

 

[FSeal]

It doesn't really matter how many I have open of what. The question should be, how many things can you keep genuine focus on on the same monitor?

That's my point, I can only ever look at one Metro app at a time. < IMHO epic fail for a company that's been doing this as long as Microsoft has. That's not my idea of multitasking, or ease of use either?
If I run desktop apps, I can run outlook on my second monitor and see new e-mail when it arrives and I don't have to switch focus to do it. I can also run media player on the same monitor reduced in Now Playing mode and see what's playing and not have to switch focus to do it. All while typing this post in the desktop IE on my main screen. If Metro is so good, and the future of computing, why is it so restrictive?

Metro isn't so restrictive you use it right. See, I can the Mail app open to see current new mail. I then can open the Music app and see what's playing or continue what was previously playing. I then can snap the Mail app next the Music app and still see new mail appear without losing focus. And, if I had another monitor, I could use the second the type this in metro IE. Or, with the single monitor I have, I can just use IE in full screen and hit Start and see what the Mail app's live tile looks like to see if I have new mail and look at the Music app's tile to see what's playing, then I can hit Start again and continue typing this. Metro isn't restrictive, it's different. That there is the point.

That is still /seriously/ limiting the number of things you can have open at once. Between work and home I have anywhere from 5 to about 15 things I am monitoring at once! I NEVER need to alt+tab on the desktop Occasionally I'll have two large fullscreen apps that I need to switch between but of course they are just a click away on the task bar.

There are some neat things about the live tiles and such, MS could have EASILY integrated that directly with the desktop as well as allowed dynamic resize of metro apps on the desktop and made the Windows 8 Desktop truly awesome.

Given my current desktop size I should be able to run 10-20 metro apps at reduced (and proper) sizes (1920x1600 for sudoku?!?). Or run 6-8 of them side by side on the secondary, leaving my main desktop for "real" apps. Which is basically how I work now, but instead of metro apps I have all my monitoring apps, clock, media player, IE, etc on the secondary, each one taking up only a small portion of the screen and always visiable at a glance. Not a alt+tab+tab+tab, glance, alt+tab+tab+tab+tab+tab...

For someone like me (and there are /millions/ of us) Metro is far too restrictive. Unimaginably restrictive, therefore generally unusable, but always there and constantly in the way.

 

[SIW2]

They could do what we've been telling them (and you) for the last six months or more.

Simply give us the option to turn Metro AND the Start Button/Menu on or off.

How hard can that be to do? OR understand?

Why?

I believe that is what is Col Gaddafi said when asked to give his people the vote.

If you recall, he ended up starring in his own snuff movie.

It seems that he too could not understand the simplest of concepts.

 

[alphanumeric]

It doesn't really matter how many I have open of what. The question should be, how many things can you keep genuine focus on on the same monitor?

That's my point, I can only ever look at one Metro app at a time. < IMHO epic fail for a company that's been doing this as long as Microsoft has. That's not my idea of multitasking, or ease of use either?
If I run desktop apps, I can run outlook on my second monitor and see new e-mail when it arrives and I don't have to switch focus to do it. I can also run media player on the same monitor reduced in Now Playing mode and see what's playing and not have to switch focus to do it. All while typing this post in the desktop IE on my main screen. If Metro is so good, and the future of computing, why is it so restrictive?

Metro isn't so restrictive you use it right. See, I can the Mail app open to see current new mail. I then can open the Music app and see what's playing or continue what was previously playing. I then can snap the Mail app next the Music app and still see new mail appear without losing focus. And , if I had another monitor, I could use the second the type this in metroIE. Or, with the single monitor I have, I can just use IE in full screen and hit Start and see what the Mail app's live tile looks like to see if I have new mail and look at the Music app's tile to see what's playing, then I can hit Start again and continue typing this. Metro isn't restrictive, it's different. That there is the point.

So how is it that you can run metro on two monitors at the same time when nobody else can? I'd love to be able to do that and so would a lot of other people.

 

[robinb9]

I think Micrososft has a chance if they (especially in the Pro version) put the Startmenu back in or at least when clicking on the desktop app- put it in there. This way you have a choice which way you want your desktop to look like and it makes it easier for those like myself to choice. I like the startmenu and I would keep the desk app open all the time and look at my apps from there.

If they do not put back the start menu I do not see most busineses adapting to the metro because now they have to spend money in getting in IT people to teach their employees how to use it. The employees from ages 18-40 I do not see a problem adapting but the ages 40+ I definetly see a problem adapting to this new OS. (and i am not talking about those who are experts in computers I am talking about the average "Jo".
robin

 

[Pikey]

@coke robot, I think you and I are the only ones who can see the future of computing on Windows 8.

Well, besides Microsoft that is.

Hey, you forgot me.

... and me!

 

[eeisner]

I find it absolutely hilarious how reliant people are on the start menu, and all this complaining about the whole metro concept itself.

the start menu - yes its gone, but its not really cuz its been turned into metro. metro is essentially a full screen start menu with the ability to run apps. metro has all of your most commonly used programs pinned to it, as were pinned to the left side of the start menu, and with the click of a button, youre viewing all your programs, as you would by going into all programs in the start menu. by typing, you are searching instantly - same thing in the win7 start menu. its honestly nothing more than a full screen start menu that can run apps.

and for those complaining about the constant switching to the desktop from metro - I guarantee that with the full release of win8, there will be metro versions of EVERYTHING standard with windows - control panel, task manager, explorer, office, etc. I am sure that Microsoft is smart enough to make these programs metro compatible, even if they aren't available at launch. and same thing with 3rd party apps - they take time to develop and gain approval, and I guarantee most developers aren't wasting their time even thinking of making apps for an OS that is still in testing.

the one complaint I do agree with is multitasking in metro. could have been done better, as 50/50, 33/33/33, 25/25/25/25, etc. the concept is great, but the 70/30 or whatever it is should not be the only option.

 

[legacy7955]

@eeisner:

Except MS answered a question (with metro) that nobody really asked about in the first place. LOL

 

[BillWindows]

@coke robot, I think you and I are the only ones who can see the future of computing on Windows 8.

Well, besides Microsoft that is.

Hey, you forgot me.

... and me!

I know we're not the only ones, I get around the net quite a bit, and while there are quite a few who don't like it, there's also lots who do. I've even seen people with iMacs and MacBook Pros running it and commenting how good it is, if you can get a Mac person to say its good, it can't be too bad.

 

[Vertex]

I know we're not the only ones, I get around the net quite a bit, and while there are quite a few who don't like it, there's also lots who do. I've even seen people with iMacs and MacBook Pros running it and commenting how good it is, if you can get a Mac person to say its good, it can't be too bad.

Few who don't like it, huh? What a stubborn, close-minded fanboy philosophy. In fact, a lot of negative feedback is coming from the net right now than positive ones ( like this forum) and M$ should really take time reading ALL feedbacks seriously not just from those like you who praise it so much but it looks like they didn't for many months now until we now that we got the RC.

 

[kmint]

lose many loyalists to Linux

To Linux? No. Linux was in the middle ages. Now after brilliant ideas such as Unity or Gnome 3, it is in the pre-romanic times. Microsoft won't lose customers to Linux. Impossible.

and yes even some to freaking Apple OSX.

Not so many either. Too expensive, closed system, less software offer... Not everyone needs a social status to show.

People will just stay with Windows 7, Vista or XP, but many will move to Win8. It is not so bad if you ignore Metro.

 

[Coke Robot]

I know we're not the only ones, I get around the net quite a bit, and while there are quite a few who don't like it, there's also lots who do. I've even seen people with iMacs and MacBook Pros running it and commenting how good it is, if you can get a Mac person to say its good, it can't be too bad.

Few who don't like it, huh? What a stubborn, close-minded fanboy philosophy. In fact, a lot of negative feedback is coming from the net right now than positive ones ( like this forum) and M$ should really take time reading ALL feedbacks seriously not just from those like you who praise it so much but it looks like they didn't for many months now until we now that we got the RC.

How many people do you think that have given Windows 8 bad flack use desktops? Huh? Do they use anything else other than a desktop or cry the mantra that the Desktop should stay as it is and keep it like Windows 7 and the start menu and on and on and on and on and on and on and on?

 

[Vertex]

lose many loyalists to Linux

To Linux? No. Linux was in the middle ages. Now after brilliant ideas such as Unity or Gnome 3, it is in the pre-romanic times. Microsoft won't lose customers to Linux. Impossible.

and yes even some to freaking Apple OSX.

Not so many either. Too expensive, closed system, less software offer... Not everyone needs a social status to show.

People will just stay with Windows 7, Vista or XP, but many will move to Win8. It is not so bad if you ignore Metro.

I think, it will be the power users who are unsatisfied with Windows 8 who will move to Linux, not the average Joe, for the most part. I am personally planning to switch back to Linux Mint after my Windows 8's evaluation period ends.

 

[BillWindows]

I know we're not the only ones, I get around the net quite a bit, and while there are quite a few who don't like it, there's also lots who do. I've even seen people with iMacs and MacBook Pros running it and commenting how good it is, if you can get a Mac person to say its good, it can't be too bad.

Few who don't like it, huh? What a stubborn, close-minded fanboy philosophy. In fact, a lot of negative feedback is coming from the net right now than positive ones ( like this forum) and M$ should really time take reading ALL feedbacks seriously not just from those like you who praise it so much.

Close minded Fanboy, that's funny, don't let my name fool you, and don't think that only people who browse the net and look at pictures, like Windows 8. I own an Android tablet, an Android phone, an iPad2, an iPad3, an Apple ATV3 a few Windows computers a Router and 2 NAS, as a matter of fact that's the funniest thing I've ever heard.
Sure I like Windows, it gives me freedom, even Windows 8 gives me that. All my diverse tablets, phones, iPads, home theatre equipment, everything connects to my NAS.
If I'm a Fanboy of anything it's Tech, you could even call me a Tech nerd, but I also happen to like Windows and Android and IOS, I like anything to do with Tech.
I can control all my home theatre equipment through my iPad, Android tablet or Android phone or even a Netbook.

An OS to me is just a tool, I don't sit there and drool like a schoolboy over Aero or cry over the missing start menu, if the OS let's me do what I want, that's all I need, oh and I use Linux as well.
Do I fit into your category of a power user.

 

[legacy7955]

lose many loyalists to Linux

To Linux? No. Linux was in the middle ages. Now after brilliant ideas such as Unity or Gnome 3, it is in the pre-romanic times. Microsoft won't lose customers to Linux. Impossible.

and yes even some to freaking Apple OSX.

Not so many either. Too expensive, closed system, less software offer... Not everyone needs a social status to show.

People will just stay with Windows 7, Vista or XP, but many will move to Win8. It is not so bad if you ignore Metro.

I think, it will be the power users who are unsatisfied with Windows 8 who will move to Linux, not the average Joe, for the most part. I am personally planning to switch back to Linux Mint after my Windows 8's evaluation period ends.

Good to know that contrary to what Metro fanbois like Coke Robot and billwindows claim I am of the exact same mind as you vertex, as a matter of fact I had just started using Linux Mint just after the first release of Windows 8 was available to the general public, and I must tell you I'm very impressed at how quick and seamless it performs, I think it is a bit faster than Windows 7 and uses slightly less resources as well.

Now of course the support is less effective for Linux OS but compared to about five or seven years ago the number of supported programs, drivers, ect is excellent. I recommend Mint over Ubuntu especially if you want the experience similar to Windows XP or 7.

The unfortunate thing is I actually liked Microsoft and the general corporate philosophy in the past but now I see that they are trying to mould themselves into Apple, part deux. MS is destroying the reason why customers choose to use MS over the robber baron fruit company, it seems they are trying to emulate that clown shoe of a company. Sad to see it happen.