Let's have a massive discussion about Windows 8

[Coke Robot]

I want to rehash something that is going to be rehashed as the Release Preview of Windows 8 comes out probably tomorrow: the Start Menu.

Ok, from a good chunk of people here and some critics, the lack of a start menu is a big deal and to some, believe it's a catastrophe. I personally would like to know why. Maybe it's that I've been rocking Windows 8 since the Developer Preview last fall and have gotten acquainted very well it doesn't bother me. Honestly, I think to desktop power users, it's a big deal because that's what has been used for a decade and some. But really, think about the common consumer of a Windows device. Many people I've come across don't really care for the start menu. A few people have told me that they honestly don't ever use it since all their main items are pinned to the Taskbar (that sucked to find out because I organized the crap out of their start menu). A few have told me that they think Windows vista, even 7, just feels old. And the large rest I've seen use Windows, have installed Windows on their PCs; I feel like I can gather that the lack of a start menu won't be a huge loss to them. As long as something is accessible, it's fine. And yes, the Start Screen is accessible, you just configure it to do so.

Then there's the Desktop UI issue. Some say it's an abortion of the UI, and without the Start Screen Windows 8 is just a faster 7 with a Ribbon UI. This may be true, but what did people say about Windows 7 when it came out, or vista for that matter? People said that 7 was like vista, but it worked. People said vista was just a warmed over version of xp with performance issues. To wrap this thought up, the Desktop is still there and works as it should with a new interface to navigate around files and programs.

And then there's the metro concept people don't like or understand. The concept of metro design is minimalism, it's about content and not UI. Sure, some think it doesn't look nice, but that's because in the year of 2006,7ish when vista came out, Microsoft took a different road with the UI and made it the centerpiece when theoretically it wasn't supposed to be. Shucks! If you look at the Windows Longhorn concept from 2002, it looks more like the new Desktop UI of Windows 8! A transparent Taskbar with solid windows and a true chromeless approach. This was 2002 design here. Things would had been much different if that was the road we took if things panned out right. Metro design takes a bit to get used to because we're so used to UI fluff, it's ridiculous. We have gotten to the point where smartphones have more visual fluff than our desktop operating systems! Really?!

And then there is the touch aspect of Windows 8 people don't care to recognize. Again, touch is the future, just like the mouse was the future years ago. Microsoft pioneered in the use of the mouse, and the rest followed into history. Now, they are going to pioneer in touch and the New User Interface of the Kinect. And as history has shown, the rest will follow because unlike apple, Microsoft has more clout about changing tech standards. apple may have wanted Flash to die and use HTML5, but the HTML5 talk didn't seem to happen until IE9 came into being, maybe google chrome had some impact as well.

All in all, Windows 8 has changed a lot about how we use a User Interface, and will soon change how we interact with a PC.

Now, let's have a huge discussion!

 

[aerandir92]

the lack of a start menu is a big deal and to some, believe it's a catastrophe.

There is no lack of a start menu
It's right there, but with a new design, called Metro

I personally would like to know why.

Me too, I haven't seen any problems with the new start menu at all. I use it in the same way as with the old start menu for the most of the time, the rest of the time it is very usefull to have a such easy to use start menu, nice big icons, easy to fin what you want and not have to find your why in tiny folders.



All in all, I totally agree with everything you have written

 

[DooRules]

Touch is not the future for desktops. For mobile sure, but I don't give a hoot about mobile. Touch on a desktop, cmon.

I could easily do without the start button, but I would much prefer to do without that silly metro screen. kids stuff, nothing more.

 

[lehnerus2000]

As long as the future doesn't include ...

Ok, from a good chunk of people here and some critics, the lack of a start menu is a big deal and to some, believe it's a catastrophe. I personally would like to know why.

You don't want to "know why".

It's been explained to you (by dozens of people on multiple threads) and you simply ignore what they have said and then say that you don't understand.

Again, touch is the future, just like the mouse was the future years ago.

Touch is the future, as long as the future doesn't include:

• Creating spreadsheets.
• Creating databases.
• CAD programs.
• Typing up giant reports, novels, etc..
• VMs.
• Editing audio, images and video.
• etc.
  

Microsoft pioneered in the use of the mouse, and the rest followed into history.

Apple was responsible for exposing large numbers of consumers to the mouse.
"However, the mouse remained relatively obscure until the 1984 appearance of the Apple Macintosh, which included an updated version of the original Lisa Mouse."

 

[SIW2]

Many people I've come across don't really care for the start menu. A few people have told me that they honestly don't ever use it since all their main items are pinned to the Taskbar (that sucked to find out because I organized the crap out of their start menu). A few have told me that they think Windows vista, even 7, just feels old. And the large rest I've seen use Windows, have installed Windows on their PCs; I feel like I can gather that the lack of a start menu won't be a huge loss to them.

Really?

The answers you get depend on how you ask the question.


My experience is the exact opposite.

I do not personally know a single person who says anything in that paragraph.


I have to agree with Lehnerus, there is no point in trying to explain anything to you - you just ignore it.

You have made up your mind and nothing will make any difference.

That's fine - you are entitled to think what you want.

There is no point in continuing to try and persuade everyone else that they are wrong.

 

[Vertex]

And then there's the metro concept people don't like or understand. The concept of metro design is minimalism, it's about content and not UI. Sure, some think it doesn't look nice, but that's because in the year of 2006,7ish when vista came out, Microsoft took a different road with the UI and made it the centerpiece when theoretically it wasn't supposed to be. Shucks! If you look at the Windows Longhorn concept from 2002, it looks more like the new Desktop UI of Windows 8! A transparent Taskbar with solid windows and a true chromeless approach. This was 2002 design here. Things would had been much different if that was the road we took if things panned out right. Metro design takes a bit to get used to because we're so used to UI fluff, it's ridiculous. We have gotten to the point where smartphones have more visual fluff than our desktop operating systems! Really?!

I and many other people don't really like how Microsoft approached "minimalism" on the Metro because it basically minimized a program's usability such as the fact that it reduced easy navigation if you are using mice and keyboards and look at these Metro apps, they are flat, have less to display inside than legacy apps, without window controls, cannot be resized, always fullscreen that's not really convenient to use on a Desktop and I keep saying that on multiple discussions along with the many other reasons that I would protest against the design of Windows 8. And with these Metro apps which are cloud based, M$ wants to mine more cash from users. I don't really like the cloud and I'd rather hold the data on my own machine so a cloud based OS that's constantly mining for subscription fees seems like a nightmare.

How can smartphones have more visual fluff than a desktop with a screen 20 times bigger than that of a smartphone? You could cram more of it on a Desktop with a much larger screen that has more powerful hardware that you can not fit on a smartphone or tablet and what's more, on a Desktop you can have several of these visual fluff running side by side or you could just switch between them through the Taskbar. You would argue that smartphones and tablets are getting more powerful hardware but their screen don't become much bigger. Desktops become more and more powerful too.

 

[Hopachi]

Touch is the future, as long as the future doesn't include:

• Creating spreadsheets.
• Creating databases.
• CAD programs.
• Typing up giant reports, novels, etc..
• VMs.
• Editing audio, images and video.
• etc.

Yes indeed.

I and many other people don't really like how Microsoft approached "minimalism" on the Metro because it basically minimized a program's usability such as the fact that it reduced easy navigation if you are using mice and keyboards and look at these Metro apps, they are flat, have less to display inside than legacy apps, without window controls, cannot be resized, always fullscreen that's not really convenient to use on a Desktop and I keep saying that on multiple discussions along with the many other reasons that I would protest against the design of Windows 8. And with these Metro apps which are cloud based, M$ wants to mine more cash from users. I don't really like the cloud and I'd rather hold the data on my own machine so a cloud based OS that's constantly mining for subscription fees seems like a nightmare.

How can smartphones have more visual fluff than a desktop with a screen 20 times bigger than that of a smartphone? You could cram more of it on a Desktop with a much larger screen that has more powerful hardware that you can not fit on a smartphone or tablet and what's more, on a Desktop you can have several of these visual fluff running side by side or you could just switch between them through the Taskbar. You would argue that smartphones and tablets are getting more powerful hardware but their screen don't become much bigger. Desktops become more and more powerful too.

Yes. To replace the mouse is unthinkable for desktops: if it will happen, it will probably take a few decades.

Screen size of a desktop matters, of course. The Metro UI feels odd on desktop monitors, most of them are no touchscreens (touch ui is useless here).

The mouse has been around for decades and was improved many times. Program interfaces were changed along to match a good workflow. The touch screen or UI has a long way to go:
we would need CAD and spreadsheet programs that need, let's say, unthinkable interfaces for the moment.

So I also keep my keyboard and mouse as they are practically unbeatable.

 

[samgabbay]

WOAHHH what a new update but when is it coming and what are we getting

 

[brummyfan]

What I like about Win8 is the availability of choice, users who prefer Metro can use it in their mobiles, for the rest the normal desktop is just a click away.

 

[Digital Analogy]

After reading all the doom and gloom over the past few months regarding Windows 8 I decided to see what all the fuss was about and downloaded the CP 2 days ago and installed it on seperate SSD I had lying around. At first I agreed with the nay sayers. My opinion quickly changed, however. Here is my experience:


Day 1 Evening

1. 
   [*=1]Installation went smooth and fast.
   [*=1]Upon first boot I went through the personalization proccess. Didn't care for the obvious "mobile" appearance of the screens but kept an open mind.
   [*=1]First time logging into the PC after the initial set up was a bit confusing. I didn't like it. I was beginning to agree with all of the nay sayers. It was getting late so I shut it down and went to bed. The shutdown proccess needs some work. Took me a while to finally find out how.

Day 2

1. 
   [*=1]I booted up the PC and went to the desktop. Started exploring.
   [*=1]I learned within a few minutes that although the start button itself was graphically removed, its function still exists in the lower left corner of the screen. However, instead of a small pop-up menu that needs to be expanded level by level as you navigate for an item, you get a full screen menu with a more interactive GUI. This was the key realization that started to change my mind.
   [*=1]I learned within the next few minutes that the upper left corner of the screen resulted in a list of all open applications. Basically an alt-tab without having to actually press alt-tab.
   [*=1]I decided to stick with it for a few weeks began downloading and installing my standard applications to see what will run and what won't.

I am now on day 3 and actually liking Windows 8. I am navigating much faster than I ever did in previous versions of Windows now that I've changed the way I look at the metro screen (an enhanced start menu). There are some bugs but that is expected when installing any beta software. As others have mentioned in various threads in various forums, there will be a learning curve. You will have to re-learn alot of stuff. Afterall, change is rarely easy. It is usually hard and frustrating but neccesary in an ever evolving technological world.

I have come to the realization that the vast majority of the complaints/concerns regarding Windows 8 I have seen across the web have one thing in common at the core. The fear of change. It's as simple as that. You can rationalize it any way you want but at the end of the day it is simply the fear of change.

The biggest problem I see right now is there is little to nothing explaining the changes to the end user. I had to figure out the basics of navigating via the "poke and hope" process. Miscrosoft will NEED to do something to provide thorough explanation to the end user once Windows 8 is released.

 

[Dave76]

Welcome to Eight Forums Digital Analogy.

Agree, it just takes a little time to learn how to use it.
So far, for me, the advantages out weigh the learning curve.

 

[legacy7955]

"Fear of change" =M$ talking point to ANY dislike of Window 8.

Reality = Touch UI is completely impractical for the desktop environment for the forseeable future.

What I see is many users making completely reasonable and logical complaints about Metro and Touch UI for the desktop and even laptop environment.

Unless M$ thinks humans are going to grow two extra sets of arms, or hell use some kind of
"thought" UI for desktops in the next 50 years is to be seen, but for the time being touch is just not possible. The mouse and keyboard will continue to rule, not because of some nonsense M$ is peddling aobut "fear of change" but instead of completely practical and reasonable limitations for the human use.

Most importantly nobody, INCLUDING myself is saying not to allow Metro or touch UI in desktops, what folks like myself are suggesting is to offer the user the CHOICE of which default UI to use when initially setting up their new Windows 8 OS.

It seems to me that M$ has a fear of giving the customer a choice.

 

[Digital Analogy]

Just to get it out of the way, I haven't ready any statements by Microsoft quoting "fear of change". I'm not saying they don't exist, I'm sure they do, I just haven't noticed them. It was truly my own conclusion based on my observations. Any similarity to MS responses is coincidental. Implying that I was repeating something already said by MS is inaccurate.

Now that that's out of the way, I agree that a 100% touch UI is impractical, but a hybrid interface that utilizes both touch and mouse/keyboard would actually increase efficiency. This is what we have with Windows 8. The first steps in the right direction in my opinion. Yea, it needs some polish and tweaking but it's not as bad as many claim it to be.

The vast majority of the complaints I have seen all center around the "Touch UI" aspect of Metro. Many claim it doesn't work smoothly with a mouse and keyboard. This is absolutely absurd. I am finding it works fine with a mouse and keyboard. The tiles are nothing more than big buttons. We've been clicking button with our mice for decades. Granted, if you don't have a wheel mouse then scrolling left and right can be a bit clunky but the vast majority of PC's sold in the past 10 years have come with wheel mice so that point is virtually moot.

 

[BFG]

I like that windows 8 seems faster out of the box than my tweaked windows 7.

The windows live account for logging in is nice

The file management and explorer ribbon is nice too

I like the metro start screen and apps if it itself was only an application and not a replacement for the start menu.

I have a large monitor so I never run anything maximized or full screen. I like windows. That's what it's called after all.

Things I'm missing from windows 7 is it was easy to search from the start menu. I liked having all the recent items for each program and as well as the recent items list you could add to the start menu

I tried adding recent items as a toolbar in windows 8 but it couldn't be done

 

[Coke Robot]

After reading all the doom and gloom over the past few months regarding Windows 8 I decided to see what all the fuss was about and downloaded the CP 2 days ago and installed it on seperate SSD I had lying around. At first I agreed with the nay sayers. My opinion quickly changed, however. Here is my experience:


Day 1 Evening

1. 
   [*=1]Installation went smooth and fast.
   [*=1]Upon first boot I went through the personalization proccess. Didn't care for the obvious "mobile" appearance of the screens but kept an open mind.
   [*=1]First time logging into the PC after the initial set up was a bit confusing. I didn't like it. I was beginning to agree with all of the nay sayers. It was getting late so I shut it down and went to bed. The shutdown proccess needs some work. Took me a while to finally find out how.

Day 2

1. 
   [*=1]I booted up the PC and went to the desktop. Started exploring.
   [*=1]I learned within a few minutes that although the start button itself was graphically removed, its function still exists in the lower left corner of the screen. However, instead of a small pop-up menu that needs to be expanded level by level as you navigate for an item, you get a full screen menu with a more interactive GUI. This was the key realization that started to change my mind.
   [*=1]I learned within the next few monutes that the upper left corner of the screen resulted in a list of all open applications. Basically an alt-tab without having to actually press alt-tab.
   [*=1]I decided to stick with it for a few weeks began downloading and installing my standard applications to see what will run and what won't.

I am now on day 3 and actually liking Windows 8. I am navigating much faster than I ever did in previous versions of Windows now that I've changed the way I look at the metro screen (an enhanced start menu). There are some bugs but that is expected when installing any beta software. As others have mentioned in various threads in various forums, there will be a learning curve. You will have to re-learn alot of stuff. Afterall, change is rarely easy. It is usually hard and frustrating but neccesary in an ever evolving technological world.

I have come to the realization that the vast majority of the complaints/concerns regarding Windows 8 I have seen across the web have one thing in common at the core. The fear of change. It's as simple as that. You can rationalize it any way you want but at the end of the day it is simply the fear of change.

The biggest problem I see right now is there is little to nothing explaining the changes to the end user. I had to figure out the basics of navigating via the "poke and hope" process. Miscrosoft will NEED to do something to provide thorough explanation to the end user once Windows 8 is released.

I agree. I see it's more a fear of change than anything. I just skimmed through a brief article citing what Microsoft has robbed from Windows 8, and it sounds like some people would rather use a nitty gritty version of linux than 8. And yes, there is a learning curve, just as there was from xp to vista, and a bit from vista to 7. New operating systems ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS have some kind of learning curve, but the advantages are there to be exploited. I remember my first few days with the Developer Preview and I was logging off to shut down, then I realized the Charms bar had that right there.

 

[Coke Robot]

"Fear of change" =M$ talking point to ANY dislike of Window 8.

Reality = Touch UI is completely impractical for the desktop environment for the forseeable future.

What I see is many users making completely reasonable and logical complaints about Metro and Touch UI for the desktop and even laptop environment.

Unless M$ thinks humans are going to grow two extra sets of arms, or hell use some kind of
"thought" UI for desktops in the next 50 years is to be seen, but for the time being touch is just not possible. The mouse and keyboard will continue to rule, not because of some nonsense M$ is peddling aobut "fear of change" but instead of completely practical and reasonable limitations for the human use.

Most importantly nobody, INCLUDING myself is saying not to allow Metro or touch UI in desktops, what folks like myself are suggesting is to offer the user the CHOICE of which default UI to use when initially setting up their new Windows 8 OS.

It seems to me that M$ has a fear of giving the customer a choice.

In 50 years, the desktop form factor will truly be dead....

 

[z3r010]

In 50 years we will all (if still living) will have direct internet implants

 

[windude99]

I have been using the Release preview on my desktop and it is great! And yes, I do use Metro a lot. The whole operating system Is better than the Consumer Preview was.

 

[Digital Analogy]

I'm downloading the RP now and will be re-installing tonight or tomorrow depending on what time the download completes. (my internet speed blows)

 

[legacy7955]

In 50 years, the desktop form factor will truly be dead....

Maybe so, BUT that doesn't negate the practical reasons to cater to those that MUST and many of whom prefer to use it.

Failing to accept the current reality at face value is a efficient way to destroy a business.

Scoffing at tens (hundreds?) of millions of users who actually buy the product is very dangerous to ones bottom line.

You can desire to "will" the future as you see fit but reality will slap you down every time, I promise.