Solved Apps screen too crowded.

[pparks1]

Live tiles that are at-a-glance informational and all in one place? Like active-scrolling unread emails -> various news/sports headlines -> weather in multiple cities -> Star Chart app info -> download notifications via the store -> personal game apps scores, just to name a few for starters. I'm sure more are being written. I think this is all being performed with less resources.

However, on a single screen desktop/laptop moving to the Start Screen from the Classic Desktop means that while viewing all of these live tiles you aren't able to see other items that might be very important to monitor (like new emails coming into Outlook, or an instant message coming in via a corporate Microsoft Lync server, on your help/desk ticketing system which is a standard windows desktop app, etc). Also, the flip side is true. If I setup the Mail app on the Start Screen to monitor my Hotmail/Gmail account, and I'm in the desktop doing corporate stuff (Outlook, CRM, etc) and I turn to talk to a coworkers and a new email comes into Hotmail/Gmail..aside from the 3 second notification that pops up, I have no way of knowing that I have an email unless I switch back to the Start Screen and check the live tile. < This means I am going to miss a ton of stuff, or at least be delayed significantly in my response.

Here's a shot of my desktop. It will disappear soon. Probably by the next OS.

Perhaps it will for you.

For many of us though, we use and will continue to use a ton of standard Windows apps that simply aren't going to have suitable "new UI apps" for quite some time...probably not by the time we have a new OS. And until the point in time comes when "apps" can be truly resized and we can support more than 2 apps per monitor (one getting 320pixels, and the other the rest of the screen), many of us will simply struggle to make do with the current state of applications.

 

[HippsieGypsie]

Exactly my point. Why moan about Metro clutter but, instead, clutter your desktop.- Why not use Metro. We are talking Windows 8 and it's features.

In a very short amount of time, I've found that installing apps on Windows 8 creates tons of tiles. Installing apps on windows 7 creates a bunch of start menu entries (which I don't really have to see so that is no concern to me) and it also creates some desktop items. So, I find that there is far less clutter and less things to clean up on the desktop of Windows 7 than I have to clean up with Metro.

I personally dislike programs that DO NOT create a program group under previous versions of Windows, but simply drop the application on the root of the Programs list. I never seem to be able to find them there. I feel this is exactly what I get with Metro. So instead of working out of the box for me, I have to spend my time organizing, sorting and arranging to make it useful. This is time that I would rather spend doing other things.

Come on, Parks. Is that a legitimate and fair statement/argument? Does it really take more time to set up the Start Screen verses other past OSs? Please refer to my post #36 above.

I'm on my 7 side right now and don't want to switch over, for I'm doing work, so I can't test right now. It just occured to me.....Right after an 8 install, if one groups the tiles immediately, then installs other apps or legacy programs, I wonder where the new tiles appear? Do they appear at the end of the Start screen? If so, then they're in a group to work on to unpin, name group, etc.

 

[pparks1]

Come on, Parks. Is that a legitimate and fair statement/argument? Does it really take more time to set up the Start Screen verses other past OSs? Please refer to my post #36 above.

Yes, I think it's fair. When I install apps on Windows 8 I get more tiles than I get desktop icons in Windows 7. And yes, it takes me more time to remove all of the stuff that I don't want in 8, then it does to pin the few things that I do want in Windows 7.

And on my desktop Windows PC, i tend to use Windows applications and have for years (imagine that). In a single monitor setup, having to be completely whisked away from being able to see everything on my desktop to simply find an application and launch it to me is just pointless.

Does it have a cool look and feel? Yes it does.
Can it be adjusted, sorted, aligned and labeled to make it more useful? Sure can.
Am I excited about using it? Not really.
Does it make me more productive or efficient? Not from what I can see.

 

[FSeal]

Come on, Parks. Is that a legitimate and fair statement/argument? Does it really take more time to set up the Start Screen verses other past OSs? Please refer to my post #36 above.

Yes, I think it's fair. When I install apps on Windows 8 I get more tiles than I get desktop icons in Windows 7. And yes, it takes me more time to remove all of the stuff that I don't want in 8, then it does to pin the few things that I do want in Windows 7.

And on my desktop Windows PC, i tend to use Windows applications and have for years (imagine that). In a single monitor setup, having to be completely whisked away from being able to see everything on my desktop to simply find an application and launch it to me is just pointless.

Does it have a cool look and feel? Yes it does.
Can it be adjusted, sorted, aligned and labeled to make it more useful? Sure can.
Am I excited about using it? Not really.
Does it make me more productive or efficient? Not from what I can see.

This has been my exact experience as well.

I stated some time ago that with the start menu, you only had to organize it if you /wanted/ too. With Metro, you /have/ to organize it no matter what. So yeah, the metro start screen is more work to keep clean than the Windows 7 start menu/desktop. At least currently and possibly for all desktop apps installed from now on.

I'm sure that Metro apps will be better behaved, but since the number of those will pale on most of my machines compared to the traditional workhorse apps I use every day, it is a problem (again) for us desktop users.

 

[HippsieGypsie]

And on my desktop Windows PC, i tend to use Windows applications and have for years (imagine that). In a single monitor setup, having to be completely whisked away from being able to see everything on my desktop to simply find an application and launch it to me is just pointless.

I'm a Pro builder and you're a Pro computer tech. You obviously use a computer far more than I do. I may have a drawing program, Excel open for entering estimating data, a browser for researching, and an building estimating reference book open. That's 4 where as you may have 10 programs going. I may only sit at my desk for 2 to 4 hours whereas you do all day. Lucky you?!

We can argue semantics so far as personal choice until we're blue in the face. I understand that, bottom line, it's about production. Building is similar to computing in that it's about steps taken to achieve a goal. In building it's about taking the least amount of actions to install materials. I have a 12-inch slide compound mitre box saw with a stand that I use for most everything. It's my biggest money-maker. If me or an emplyee sets it up farther away than what is needed, it wastes valuable time, physical energy, and $profit$.

So, we are talking about steps taken here. Let's forget about setting up an OS or continuing moving things around for personal taste, although I know you're the Pro and computing is your livelyhood. You have to set it up to take less steps just as I do with my jobsite saw and tools. I'll give you that it takes longer to set up 8, although I don't agree.

I don't see the difference if I push the windows key for the Start Menu or the Start Screen. Or using the mouse to push the start button or the corner for the Start Screen. Once in either, I can start typing for what I need or I can search for what I need. What is the difference? I'm still continuing to take the same amount of steps, am I not?

"Completely whisked away from being able to see everything on my desktop"? A little dramatic to me, but OK. I don't know about you, but I'm not looking at the desktop at this point. I'm concentrating on what I'm typing or what I'm looking for in the Start Menu....or the task bar....or the Task Manager. Unless one is going for a shortcut on the desktop it makes no difference.

Does it have a cool look and feel? Yes it does.
Can it be adjusted, sorted, aligned and labeled to make it more useful? Sure can.
Am I excited about using it? Not really.
Does it make me more productive or efficient? Not from what I can see.

Oh Parks! I can see your warming up to it!

 

[pparks1]

I'm a Pro builder and you're a Pro computer tech. You obviously use a computer far more than I do. I may have a drawing program, Excel open for entering estimating data, a browser for researching, and an building estimating reference book open. That's 4 where as you may have 10 programs going. I may only sit at my desk for 2 to 4 hours whereas you do all day. Lucky you?!

Yeah, it's good that it pays the bills...but yes I'm stuck at 1 of 3 PC's pretty much all day long. And lots of stuff opening and going on.

I don't see the difference if I push the windows key for the Start Menu or the Start Screen. Or using the mouse to push the start button or the corner for the Start Screen. Once in either, I can start typing for what I need or I can search for what I need. What is the difference? I'm still continuing to take the same amount of steps, am I not?

The difference for me, when on my laptop, with a single screen, is that when I press that Windows key, or hit the Start Corner, or access the Start Screen from the charms bar that I am taken away from my desktop. I lose the visual of my taskbar, any command line windows open that might have been running scripts, any RDP windows that I adjusted to watch the progress of an installation or performance issue being tracked on a server, I lose the view of my corporate instant messenger (Microsoft Lync) which might be something that is important or critical that I have to respond to quickly. I lose the visual of Microsoft Outlook to see if I have any new email that has come in.

There are times in my day, when I get caught up on work. And I'm getting ready to launch an application to play with something, but an email comes in that catches my eye and if it's a production system at work, I need to get cracking on it ASAP. If I happen to hit that Windows Key and get flopped over to an entirely different desktop for a bit, it's entirely possible, probably likely that I will miss that email for at least a period of time while I don't have view of my desktop.

"Completely whisked away from being able to see everything on my desktop"? A little dramatic to me, but OK. I don't know about you, but I'm not looking at the desktop at this point.

Not dramatic for me. As stated above, we use Microsoft Lync as an Instant Messenger in our corporate environment. During the day, if I get up from my desk, or turn to talk to somebody, or access my other computers, I often times miss the toast message that pops up. Unfortunately, after just a few seconds, it fades away and I'm left with just a slightly different icon in my taskbar that is super easy to miss. I've installed a third party application called SuperToast, that if after a period of 2 minutes I haven't responded to an IM, it brings it up dead center on the screen and makes me take notice. You can already imagine my concern with flipping over to the Start Screen and missing things. It's almost like having a KVM where I have switched entirely to a different computer and I'm missing what is going on on the first computer.

We are very different users. You aren't looking at the desktop anymore, and I'm almost exclusively looking at the desktop. These "metro" apps just don't have the functionality or the multi-tasking ability to make them usable to me. During my workday, I almost always have the following apps open (Outlook, Word, Excel, Microsoft Lync, Microsoft Dynamics, Vision App RDP client, Vsphere Client, a couple of ssh logins to Linux hosts, a web browser, media monkey and filezilla). And all of these apps are full blown standard Windows apps that launch and run on the desktop that I am looking at.

 

[HippsieGypsie]

OK. That explains things to me better. I understand the wisking away part now. So it's basically when you're on a single monitor is where the problem lies and 8 just doesn't cut it on multi-monitors.....yet. I think M$ will do good thing for you Pros by OS 9, if I'm correct in my theory that they will eliminate the desktop and have a multi-pane and/or multi-monitor "new-kind-of-window" OS. I know it sounds far fetched, but possible.

Thanks for answering. I learned a lot and continue to do so from you Pros.

 

[pparks1]

The multi-monitor support of Win 8 is pretty good.

I think alot have the same concerns I have who have not used Win8 on multimonitor. Many have tried win8 in a VM (thus single display), or have tried it on an older spare computer and likely only have 1 monitor.

In a dual monitor setup, it's much better as you can keep "a" desktop always in view. Although when you have 2 displays, you often have things opened on both of them...so you still lose something when you switch away.

While my main machine at work does indeed have 2 monitors, it's a laptop that I carry with me home everynight. Obviously I don't carry my second monitor with me, so I spend quite a bit of time on this machine using 1 monitor. My secondary and third machine at work are actually sharing 1 monitor (via a KVM) because my cube is just too small to squeeze in more monitors. It's my 3rd machine that I run Win8 on.

 

[FSeal]

Unless Metro apps get the ability to be resized and placed anywhere across multiple monitors like the desktop, then no, Metro will never replace it. But at that point Metro is just the desktop again...

A bettter way to go with Windows 9 is to make metro apps resizable and placeable on the desktop (or full screen) just like any normal app. Not "trap" them in a barely partionable fullscreen cage.

 

[mdmd]

drifting off topic slightly

To the annoyed:
the desktop environment is here to stay.

It is a necessary User Interface
that you can count on
for years.

It will continue the tradition of Windows.

The 8UI is a departure from layered and resizable Windows.

It is a phone / tablet UI that
cannot have resizable or overlapping "Window Frames"

It is in the code structure of WinRT.
How 8UI apps will be developed is controlled by WinRT.


WinRT - the new Windows

 

[FSeal]

The multi-monitor support of Win 8 is pretty good.

I think alot have the same concerns I have who have not used Win8 on multimonitor. Many have tried win8 in a VM (thus single display), or have tried it on an older spare computer and likely only have 1 monitor.

In a dual monitor setup, it's much better as you can keep "a" desktop always in view. Although when you have 2 displays, you often have things opened on both of them...so you still lose something when you switch away.

While my main machine at work does indeed have 2 monitors, it's a laptop that I carry with me home everynight. Obviously I don't carry my second monitor with me, so I spend quite a bit of time on this machine using 1 monitor. My secondary and third machine at work are actually sharing 1 monitor (via a KVM) because my cube is just too small to squeeze in more monitors. It's my 3rd machine that I run Win8 on.

Well the "pretty good" part of Windows 8 multiple monitor usage seems like nothing more than a happy accident. They just didn't spend the extra work to make Metro itself use multiple monitors because well tablets and phones are not multi-monitor devices so we are left (happily) with a "free" monitor for desktop use in that case.

One thing that might be nice is if Metro could be relegated to the second monitor while leaving the main monitor for the desktop/taskbar/start menu. Then you could have a smaller satellite window for metro live tiles and the occasional screen filling news app or something but the MAIN monitor is left to the free desktop.

Unfortunately that doesn't work from what I've seen...

 

[HippsieGypsie]

drifting off topic slightly

To the annoyed:
the desktop environment is here to stay.

It is a necessary User Interface
that you can count on
for years.

It will continue the tradition of Windows.

The 8UI is a departure from layered and resizable Windows.

It is a phone / tablet UI that
cannot have resizable or overlapping "Window Frames"

It is in the code structure of WinRT.
How 8UI apps will be developed is controlled by WinRT.


WinRT - the new Windows

Thanks, mdmd. Well, I guess that throws my muti-pane theory out the window! :shock:

This is way over my head, for I'm not a writer. A few questions: Because one cannot use these so called Win Forms, one cannot create overlapping windows? It's a whole new animal because it's forced to be full screen? Because it has to work on a phone or tablet?

 

[mdmd]

This is a very controversial topic.

WinRT - the new Windows

Posters have been battling for a year,
since the Developer Preview release in Sept 2011.

It is technical and business.

The article explains some of the highlights about design,
but does not mention the massive backlash,
and disgust of connecting 2 systems,
and forcing users, by default,
to an unwanted area.

I would say, the desktop is needed.

The 8UI should be optional.

MS wants to sell APPS and the software to develop them,
and the training to learn how to use the software to develop the APPS,
and Microsoft PRESS literature, which actually costs more than Windows 8,
so they can get a percentage of every APP sold.


They want to stay with the times...
They want to stay fresh...
make money...

...but they have pissed off an overwhelming
number of preview users.

The WinRT code platform has security and performance
advantages over Win32 (the desktop).

Win32 has advantages over WinRT.

I would say the 8UI is different but not better.

On the other hand,

there are many options that enhance the user experience
and seem to make usability easier.

(opinions vary)

There should be an optional ORB system.

It is possible, some of their decisions,
like the Start ORB and Aero were eliminated,
to reduce the amount of code and some overhead (CPU cycles).

...Or to force users to the 8UI.

I have always used 3rd party addons to enhance Windows.

8UI is considered by MS suits to be a plus.

It seems many think it is a minus.

 

[mdmd]

off topic now...

done with this thread...

moving on...

 

[R0bR]

Really? Do you open 5-10 windows at once on your desktop at all times, needing to monitor several at once wile working on code in others across multiple monitors like millions of coders, website creaters, admins and other content creators do? Can you please tell me how Metro makes /any/ of that easier or how Metro apps would NOT make all of that harder with their incredibly limited screen usage options?

I work in IT managing our datacenter, the average day is more like 20+ windows and I do it all with a 13" laptop plus a 24" LCD Monitor. The Metro Apps are irrelevent, there are no Apps currently that I can use for work. The Start Screen is a replacement for for the Start Menu and I use it as such, I can navigate Windows 8 just as effieciently as I could Windows 7 and at times even more so.

 

[R0bR]

Not dramatic for me. As stated above, we use Microsoft Lync as an Instant Messenger in our corporate environment. During the day, if I get up from my desk, or turn to talk to somebody, or access my other computers, I often times miss the toast message that pops up. Unfortunately, after just a few seconds, it fades away and I'm left with just a slightly different icon in my taskbar that is super easy to miss. I've installed a third party application called SuperToast, that if after a period of 2 minutes I haven't responded to an IM, it brings it up dead center on the screen and makes me take notice. You can already imagine my concern with flipping over to the Start Screen and missing things. It's almost like having a KVM where I have switched entirely to a different computer and I'm missing what is going on on the first computer.

We are very different users. You aren't looking at the desktop anymore, and I'm almost exclusively looking at the desktop. These "metro" apps just don't have the functionality or the multi-tasking ability to make them usable to me. During my workday, I almost always have the following apps open (Outlook, Word, Excel, Microsoft Lync, Microsoft Dynamics, Vision App RDP client, Vsphere Client, a couple of ssh logins to Linux hosts, a web browser, media monkey and filezilla). And all of these apps are full blown standard Windows apps that launch and run on the desktop that I am looking at.

By the sounds of it you and I have similar jobs which I figured early on when I joined reading your posts and it boggles my mind why you struggle so much with it. On my personal computer at home most of what I do is just content centric, read news, personal email, occasional facebook, participate in forums etc and I spend most of my time in Metro. For work I use my 13" laptop with a 24" LCD attached and use much of the same programs, or similar ,that you list above and can have 20+ windows on the go, but I do that exclusively at the desktop on both screens using the Start Screen for navigation. I'm not in the Start Screen long enough or even need to access as much because most of what I use is already running. Perhaps it's because I never found the Start Menu to be very efficient in the first place and have come accustomed to keyboard shortcuts, pinning to the task bar and even using Object Dock instead in Windows 7. For me keyboard short cuts and the Start Menu are even more efficient than how I used Windows 7.

As far as the Metro Apps I don't see what your concern is about their usability at this point in a work specific setting outside of personal use. Until developers start building more productivity or business apps they will be of little use in an enterprise setting. Once the store starts to mature and better apps get added there will be more useful apps available for what we do. You can't deny that a dashboard type monitoring Metro app wouldn't work well for our requirements, there are many existing applications that provide these types of simplified but very useful views of the infrastructure we monitor (eg. SolarWinds).

 

[FSeal]

Really? Do you open 5-10 windows at once on your desktop at all times, needing to monitor several at once wile working on code in others across multiple monitors like millions of coders, website creaters, admins and other content creators do? Can you please tell me how Metro makes /any/ of that easier or how Metro apps would NOT make all of that harder with their incredibly limited screen usage options?

I work in IT managing our datacenter, the average day is more like 20+ windows and I do it all with a 13" laptop plus a 24" LCD Monitor. The Metro Apps are irrelevent, there are no Apps currently that I can use for work. The Start Screen is a replacement for for the Start Menu and I use it as such, I can navigate Windows 8 just as effieciently as I could Windows 7 and at times even more so.

Dubious about the "more so" part as /at best/ one might bea ble to acheive parity of app launching IF you ignore the entire jarring behaviour of it over the start screen. But then one really arent USING metro for anything other than a huge star menu. Truly, if it never existed in 8 would anything be any more difficult? From my usage, it would in fact be easier if it simply weren't there at all. My argument all along is that iut's just useless annoying baggage on a workstation and I simply can't see how it isn't. Even if one does get used to it (as one MUST and I eventually will), there was really no purpose for it being there at all to begin with.

 

[HippsieGypsie]

This is a very controversial topic.

WinRT - the new Windows

Posters have been battling for a year,
since the Developer Preview release in Sept 2011.

It is technical and business.

The article explains some of the highlights about design,
but does not mention the massive backlash,
and disgust of connecting 2 systems,
and forcing users, by default,
to an unwanted area.

I would say, the desktop is needed.

The 8UI should be optional.

MS wants to sell APPS and the software to develop them,
and the training to learn how to use the software to develop the APPS,
and Microsoft PRESS literature, which actually costs more than Windows 8,
so they can get a percentage of every APP sold.


They want to stay with the times...
They want to stay fresh...
make money...

...but they have pissed off an overwhelming
number of preview users.

The WinRT code platform has security and performance
advantages over Win32 (the desktop).

Win32 has advantages over WinRT.

I would say the 8UI is different but not better.

On the other hand,

there are many options that enhance the user experience
and seem to make usability easier.

(opinions vary)

I think that might be a graphics driver issue,
but it should have been made available by MS.

There should be an optional ORB system.

It is possible, some of their decisions,
like the Start ORB and Aero were eliminated,
to reduce the amount of code and some overhead (CPU cycles).

...Or to force users to the 8UI.

I have always used 3rd party addons to enhance Windows.

8UI is considered by MS suits to be a plus.

It seems many think it is a minus.

Thank you, mdmd. I gotta say -> This is the most profound, professional, and honest post I've read on this forum as of yet! A thesis in itself. I'm going to print it out, frame it, and hang it on my wall.

off topic now...

done with this thread...

moving on...

I'm going where you're going.............

 

[pparks1]

By the sounds of it you and I have similar jobs which I figured early on when I joined reading your posts and it boggles my mind why you struggle so much with it.

It's not so much a struggle with it per se. The question I struggle with is whether it's advantageous to upgrade my personal computer to it, or whether it's worthwhile to upgrade our business desktops to it. Technically I know how it works and I understand it. But it really makes my computer run and operate far more closely to my smartphone and my tablet and plain and simple I don't really want my desktop computer to operate in the same manner. I find myself wishing that things were different when I am in Windows 8 (as I use it daily at work now as a test), and I find that I miss some things (like emails that arrive, or notifications in Metro apps), so I am not yet convinced this will really fit well with my personal style of using a computer.

As far as the Metro Apps I don't see what your concern is about their usability at this point in a work specific setting outside of personal use. Until developers start building more productivity or business apps they will be of little use in an enterprise setting.

I agree completely. But they are so in your face out of the box and interesting to play with, so I've spent some time with them. And even on my work computer, just like my work cell phone, it's nice to have something checking my personal email and displaying my families shared calendar so I know what is going on.

 

[R0bR]

Dubious about the "more so" part as /at best/ one might bea ble to acheive parity of app launching IF you ignore the entire jarring behaviour of it over the start screen. But then one really arent USING metro for anything other than a huge star menu. Truly, if it never existed in 8 would anything be any more difficult? From my usage, it would in fact be easier if it simply weren't there at all. My argument all along is that iut's just useless annoying baggage on a workstation and I simply can't see how it isn't. Even if one does get used to it (as one MUST and I eventually will), there was really no purpose for it being there at all to begin with.

Whatever you choose to believe is fine, I don't struggle with it and I don't force myself to like it or get used to it, I am used to the changes and they work for me. I don't find moving between Metro and Desktop to have jarring effects, but that's me and I understand it's an issue for others.