Microsoft to shake-up Windows 8 Start screen

Microsoft to shake-up Windows 8 Start screen

Microsoft will make changes to the Windows 8 Start screen based on user feedback, according to a company executive.Speaking to PC Pro in London today, the company's general manager of platform strategy, Tim O'Brien, suggested next month's Windows 8 beta will make amendments to the divisive Start screen menu.The Windows 8 Start screen currently defaults to the new, tile-based Metro interface. More controversially, when users click on the Start button in the tradtional Windows desktop, they are immediately thrown back to the Metro screen.[FONT=Georgia, 'Times New Roman', Times, serif][/FONT]
O'Brien said Microsoft will react to the feedback received on the Building Windows 8 blog, which devoted a lengthy post to the Start screen in October last year. "Some of the changes you'll see on the Start screen are based on feedback from developers on that blog," O'Brien explained.

Windows chief Steven Sinofsky admitted on the blog last year that forcing Windows 8 users to run the touchscreen-oriented Metro - irrespective of whether they're using a tablet, laptop or desktop PC - had angered some early testers."We've seen some small amount of visceral feedback focused on 'choice' or 'disable' — a natural reaction to change, but perhaps not the best way to have a dialog leading to a new product," Sinofsky wrote.

Microsoft then spent the rest of the lengthy post justifying the decision to apply Metro by default, but promised modifications such as increasing the number of tiles displayed on larger screens, and a redesigned Apps screen that makes it easier to scan through long lists of installed apps.

O'Brien couldn't confirm what features will be tweaked ahead of the beta, which is due to be released at the end of next month.​

Full article Available here >> ​

Microsoft to shake-up Windows 8 Start screen | News | PC Pro

 

[Vertex]

You do realize that you can just simply hit the Start button and type a search for a file, program or settings if it's not already pinned to the first section of the Start Screen, right? Or am I making superficial judgments?...

That's what I said if you read my last post carefully.

The problem that stems for them is apple again, with one blow, an ipad can effectively get rid of Microsoft's bread and butter: Windows, IE, Office, and the PC. If they don't put themselves back into the mobile field again, Windows will become the way of linux, it could end up being used only by a select faction of users and that's it. I don't want to see that.

I'm not saying they shouldn't put themselves in the mobile field at all. They are dominant on the Desktop right now because more of the apps that people are used to run on Windows and more people are accustomed to Windows than Mac or Linux obviously. How can you even say that iPad can take down Windows if Windows don't enter the mobile/tablet world? Just because there were news they are being demanded on the enterprise level or by some group of people if I remember it right? As far as I'm concerned, I am not that interested with the iPad, the first editions of those did not even have USB ports and act like oversized iPhones whose apps cannot be multitasked, no close button and window controls. I felt I can do more with a Windows 7 notebook. It would take a much greater punch for iPad to take down Windows. And besides, Macs are expensive. I think more hardware are built for Windows. An iPad may be worth twice as much as a netbook. People will go for something that costs less and does more.

PCs, laptops and netbooks will still be dominating for the next few years against the tablet because they are more available, have compatible parts and hardware more available in stores and PC's are more powerful than tablets too. Knowing that they still have like 90+ percent of the market shares right now on personal computers, what MS has to do now is make sure their Desktop PC stays on top by developing it in a way that would not hinder the people's accustomed way of productivity but sadly for MS, that's what many people so far have perceived the major design change on Windows 8 and regardless of the research mumbo jumbo MS came up with, many people are still left unhappy with that design whilst many have little or no effort for this "learning curve". Outside the Metro, there is not enough features in Windows 8's desktop part as of now that would significantly convince people who has Windows 7 to move in.

But anyway, they still have Windows 7 still happily selling licences today so even if Windows 8 does not make it big, there's still something strong that holds their ground.

 

[Coke Robot]

You do realize that you can just simply hit the Start button and type a search for a file, program or settings if it's not already pinned to the first section of the Start Screen, right? Or am I making superficial judgments?...

That's what I said if you read my last post carefully.

The problem that stems for them is apple again, with one blow, an ipad can effectively get rid of Microsoft's bread and butter: Windows, IE, Office, and the PC. If they don't put themselves back into the mobile field again, Windows will become the way of linux, it could end up being used only by a select faction of users and that's it. I don't want to see that.

I'm not saying they shouldn't put themselves in the mobile field at all. They are dominant on the Desktop right now because more of the apps that people are used to run on Windows and more people are accustomed to Windows than Mac or Linux obviously. How can you even say that iPad can take down Windows if Windows don't enter the mobile/tablet world? Just because there were news they are being demanded on the enterprise level or by some group of people if I remember it right? As far as I'm concerned, I am not that interested with the iPad, the first editions of those did not even have USB ports and act like oversized iPhones whose apps cannot be multitasked, no close button and window controls. I felt I can do more with a Windows 7 notebook. It would take a much greater punch for iPad to take down Windows. And besides, Macs are expensive. I think more hardware are built for Windows. An iPad may be worth twice as much as a netbook. People will go for something that costs less and does more.

PCs, laptops and netbooks will still be dominating for the next few years against the tablet because they are more available, have compatible parts and hardware more available in stores and PC's are more powerful than tablets too. Knowing that they still have like 90+ percent of the market shares right now on personal computers, what MS has to do now is make sure their Desktop PC stays on top by developing it in a way that would not hinder the people's accustomed way of productivity but sadly for MS, that's what many people so far have perceived the major design change on Windows 8 and regardless of the research mumbo jumbo MS came up with, many people are still left unhappy with that design whilst many have little or no effort for this "learning curve". Outside the Metro, there is not enough features in Windows 8's desktop part as of now that would significantly convince people who has Windows 7 to move in.

But anyway, they still have Windows 7 still happily selling licences today so even if Windows 8 does not make it big, there's still something strong that holds their ground.

From what you said about search, it sounds like you need to find the Search button in the Charms bar to bring open the flyout. I'm saying that you can open the Start Screen, and just type like normal, and your search result display visually.

How can an ipad take down the desktop? Mostly, people are deluded by apple's faux flair of everything new and the same by making it shiny and thin. Then, there is the fact that for 500 dollars, you get an internet browser, access to a word processor, access to your itunes media (if downloaded) and access to mobility all without using a bit of Microsoft code and all without bloat/crapware along with the fact that malware isn't coded for ipads. If you were to do that with a PC, you'd need a netbook, some time to unistall the superfluous software, Word or Office 2010, and an antivirus if you want to buy it. All said and done, you're left with a small device with a tactile keyboard and a somewhat impotent touchpad and a small screen with a processing that may or may not feel as fast as an ipad. Pricewise, you MIGHT just come under 500 dollars. You could get under 500 dollars if you only have one Office program installed, maybe two. Even then, netbooks are genuinely dying off, and the discussion goes to a laptop instead of a netbook. To do all that, it'd be over 500 dollars. To make matters worse, the next ipad might be 3 to 400 dollars. But to stipulate, we're talking about daily, light usage.

Piled on top of that, the user would need to do maintenance to keep Windows in shape, either that user goes to the internet and tries it themselves or the go the geek squad to do such. Maintenance cost. An ipad unfortunately has an advantage, intenet browsing, document compiling, very mobile, media enabled with itunes, all under 500 dollars all without Microsoft. That to them, is a severe threat.

And to say, I no way shape or form even think an ipad is a PC. A PC isn't a device you have to connect to an external managing device to keep it organized.

The Desktop is still around and being used, but not being sold. Tablet devices made up two thirds of all desktop sales recently. That could show a move to mobile and less towards a desktop. Laptops dominated all. If Microsoft doesn't get Windows into the mobile, tablet field, it could be a day late and a dollar short if they did for Windows 9. Actually, some people think Microsoft IS a day late and a dollar short with Windows 8 in the tablet field....

 

[pezzonovante]

Obviously, I still don't know for sure how Metro apps will be like in real life, because Windows Store hasn't opened yet. But I have a very good feeling that at with live tiles, notifications, search contracts, auto-save states, Windows Live syncing etc. features, I will be able to completely move into the beautiful new Metro world. Only Visual Studio and Qt Creator are two products that will have to remain with the classic UI. For everything else -- browsing, checking emails, chatting, social networking, document editing, number crunching, creating slides etc. -- Metro will be perfect. At least that's my gut feeling.

But the Start Screen is a clear winner ALREADY.

As usual, you do not know what you are talking about. Metro-style apps are not going to be rich programs, they are going to be simplified apps designed for touch use. Now, because of the need for touch in these apps, elements of the menu and the data have to be larger than in current desktop programs. Thus, a Metro version of Excel will present fewer commands and much fewer cells, otherwise it could not be used by touch. Nor can I do detailed Photoshop work in a touch-enabled application, one needs the finer control of the mouse of resistive tablet (that registers pressure).

I think that the existence of Metro fanboys is a disturbing development. I have no problem with simplified apps for tablets and smartphones, but I do have a problem with these apps on the desktop. Especially when the only way of presenting them is full screen (which is laughable for an OS called Windows).

However, you are not in a position to discuss this issue logically. If you want to believe into your great Metro world, be my guest.

Ha ha you are so incredibly ignorant on this issue! For the millionth time: Metro is NOT a touch-only interface. It is NOT a tablet interface. It is equally productive to use with a mouse and keyboard just as it is with touch.

Metro apps are going to be incredibly rich and productive. They will slowly but surely completely replace fugly old classic apps.

It's funny how you guys are always repeating the same thing: "If you love Metro -- so be it. Don't try to convince others." But you are doing the EXACT same thing when it comes to opposing Metro.

As long as there are going to be people who illogically criticize Metro -- I'm going to point out how incredibly productive, beautiful and gorgeous it is. I'm not going anywhere. So get used to hearing about how great Metro is.

 

[Mike Lonewolf]

Coke Robot said:

I think you or another forum member that once posted a YouTube video of an IT admin using Windows 8 and dismissed it right away

That's not what I had said at all. I said, and shown that video as the Linux Camp was scared of Windows 8 new capabilities. Wasn't an attack by myself on Windows 8.

 

[Vertex]

Coke Robot said:

I think you or another forum member that once posted a YouTube video of an IT admin using Windows 8 and dismissed it right away

That's not what I had said at all. I said, and shown that video as the Linux Camp was scared of Windows 8 new capabilities. Wasn't an attack by myself on Windows 8.

Actually, I think it was me who posted a link to an IT admin disliking WDP.

 

[ADRz]

I understand the unix/linux spiel and get how apple's mac os is the biggest scam in the industry.

Is it? How's that?

Hmm, from what I understand, MSDOS came before Windows. Windows was Microsoft's first windowing OS after years of using keyboard commands and black screens with pixelated font. The GUI interface of OSs came from Xerox's GUI prototype, which apple used for their Lisa computer, which Microsoft used and subsequently; apple sued Microsoft for using the look and feel of their OS.
Now, I have never heard of a tiling OS in my life, windowing, yes. A command prompt based, OS, yes.

Now, you understand very little. MS-DOS came just a few years before Windows. Windows 1.0 (that showed up in 1985) did not do "windows". It only did "tiles" on the screen. MS-DOS was quite similar to CP/M, the OS that ruled the 8-bit world of microcomputing. CP/M itself was based very much on Unix conventions. When these operating systems were in their infancy and until the mid-90's, it was minicomputers running versions of Unix that provided the essential iron for corporate computing. Unix was a very capable multitasking OS. In fact, OSX is just a variant of Unix which Steve Jobs developed for NeXT and then sold to Apple.

I maybe making uninformed assumptions, but isn't that what some people are doing when they review a developer preview of Windows 8? I think you or another forum member that once posted a YouTube video of an IT admin using Windows 8 and dismissed it right away. Was that an informed review, or was it just a quicky use and call it inferior? I don't know for sure.

I am not sure what you are referring to.

I would say gestures are not proper for tablets or smartphones. From what I think, a tablet or smartphone's main input is touch. A desktop obviously wouldn't be using a touchscreen for obvious reasons. That's where gesture input comes in. I can sit back at my desktop as normal, and do gesture motions with my hands to interact with my operating system. This is where the Microsoft Kinect comes in, heck, even the Microsoft Touch Mouse can be used.

Well, if you want to gesticulate to your screen, be my guest. I think that would be quite funny. It is a just a gimmick or a good way of interacting with certain games, I guess. But the moment you take your hands off the keyboard to start gesticulating, your work will suffer. Maybe you do not have any work to do, and you just like playing with your computer.

 

[ADRz]

Ha ha you are so incredibly ignorant on this issue! For the millionth time: Metro is NOT a touch-only interface. It is NOT a tablet interface. It is equally productive to use with a mouse and keyboard just as it is with touch.

Metro apps are going to be incredibly rich and productive. They will slowly but surely completely replace fugly old classic apps.

It's funny how you guys are always repeating the same thing: "If you love Metro -- so be it. Don't try to convince others." But you are doing the EXACT same thing when it comes to opposing Metro.

As long as there are going to be people who illogically criticize Metro -- I'm going to point out how incredibly productive, beautiful and gorgeous it is. I'm not going anywhere. So get used to hearing about how great Metro is.

You sound like a little kid that sees somebody wanting to take their toy away.

If Metro apps are more capable than the current desktop apps, then I would buy them. But they are not going to be. These are going to be apps mainly for tablets and smartphones, not for the desktop. The very dynamics of touch make this a necessity. Yes, I realize that Metro does work with the keyboard and mouse but it is "touch first". Do you even understand what this means??? I think that you do not.

"Touch first" means that an application is mainly designed for touch input. There are guidelines posted by MS to developers as to what this means. Elements of menus and selectable elements of text or other data have to be a certain size to be selected. This is a necessity for capacitive touch screens. When this essential guideline is enabled, everything needs to be much more simplified because one cannot include all the elements of a command structure and data in a "touch-first" program that one can include in a "keyboard-mouse" program. Thus, Metro-style apps are going to be these $1.99 -$4.99 apps that are being sold by all current "stores". There is no way of designing a rich Photoshop-type application to be touch-first and retain the capabilities of the "Keyboard -mouse" one. Just see what is possible today in the iPad world and you will get a good idea as to what these apps are going be like. You may, of course, want to believe that the iPad developers are not as good as the "Metro" developers but even you would not make this logical leap.

 

[Coke Robot]

Coke Robot said:

I think you or another forum member that once posted a YouTube video of an IT admin using Windows 8 and dismissed it right away

That's not what I had said at all. I said, and shown that video as the Linux Camp was scared of Windows 8 new capabilities. Wasn't an attack by myself on Windows 8.

Actually, I think it was me who posted a link to an IT admin disliking WDP.

Yeah, I think so too. It was a long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away...

 

[Coke Robot]

I understand the unix/linux spiel and get how apple's mac os is the biggest scam in the industry.

Is it? How's that?

Hmm, from what I understand, MSDOS came before Windows. Windows was Microsoft's first windowing OS after years of using keyboard commands and black screens with pixelated font. The GUI interface of OSs came from Xerox's GUI prototype, which apple used for their Lisa computer, which Microsoft used and subsequently; apple sued Microsoft for using the look and feel of their OS.
Now, I have never heard of a tiling OS in my life, windowing, yes. A command prompt based, OS, yes.

Now, you understand very little. MS-DOS came just a few years before Windows. Windows 1.0 (that showed up in 1985) did not do "windows". It only did "tiles" on the screen. MS-DOS was quite similar to CP/M, the OS that ruled the 8-bit world of microcomputing. CP/M itself was based very much on Unix conventions. When these operating systems were in their infancy and until the mid-90's, it was minicomputers running versions of Unix that provided the essential iron for corporate computing. Unix was a very capable multitasking OS. In fact, OSX is just a variant of Unix which Steve Jobs developed for NeXT and then sold to Apple.



I am not sure what you are referring to.

I would say gestures are not proper for tablets or smartphones. From what I think, a tablet or smartphone's main input is touch. A desktop obviously wouldn't be using a touchscreen for obvious reasons. That's where gesture input comes in. I can sit back at my desktop as normal, and do gesture motions with my hands to interact with my operating system. This is where the Microsoft Kinect comes in, heck, even the Microsoft Touch Mouse can be used.

Well, if you want to gesticulate to your screen, be my guest. I think that would be quite funny. It is a just a gimmick or a good way of interacting with certain games, I guess. But the moment you take your hands off the keyboard to start gesticulating, your work will suffer. Maybe you do not have any work to do, and you just like playing with your computer.

Well, mac os is a scam to me because it's an applefied unix operating system. Unix and linux are traditionally open sourced software. To me, asking someone to pay 2,500 dollars for a top of the line, Intel machine running an OS with a traditionally small foot print and is based off open source software is an outrage.

Windows 1 looked more like, different windows on a screen. Or tiles if you want. But that had different windows open to show different things at once, until later versions.

We figured out who posted that video, it was a while back.

I don't gesturing to my PC would be silly. That would be the same argument to make against the Kinect for Xbox, it's silly to gesture to your TV. I think gesturing could replace use of a mouse most of the time, like for the major navigation and interaction with the OS. But then again, I guess work to you is meticulously pointing the mouse to a string of data and typing away. The use of gestures might become someone else's way of doing work, who knows...

I actually do work on my machine by the way, thank you. I also like to play with my PC if I have the time. I also like tweaking settings of the software and hardware to achieve my machine's max. It's my Personal Computer, personalized the way I like.

 

[Colonel Travis]

It's funny how you guys are always repeating the same thing

This, from someone who wrote the following - just in this thread:

Metro is here to stay -- simply because it is by far the most beautiful and productive UI for DESKTOPS

the new Start Screen is FAR more productive than the classic Start Menu for any kind of task.

I NEVER said you have to say you find Metro beautiful and gorgeous like I do.

why would you want to disable the beautiful and productive Metro UI in the first place?

fugly old classic UI.

If I had my way, there would be NO fugly classic desktop in Windows 8.

I do know that the Metro Start Screen is FAR more productive than the fugly old classic UI.

They will slowly but surely completely replace fugly old classic apps.

As long as there are going to be people who illogically criticize Metro -- I'm going to point out how incredibly productive, beautiful and gorgeous it is. I'm not going anywhere. So get used to hearing about how great Metro is.

 

[Vertex]

The desktop itself is far from perfection but tablets are not as powerful at the moment. Well in my place, tablets are very rare and so are Macs. Its like 1 is to 100 or even 200 or more against PC's. But I do not think that MS making their new OS a tablet-focused one is the answer. I do not find it convinient to use a touchscreen keyboard and more people will not be convinient using Photoshop on touch.This iPad may be alarming for MS but I think this current approad they are up to is the wrong way to go. If iPad works that way, maybe they should make something that you don't get on iPads, maybe multitasking apps with window controls is more logical. Many people who go for these iPads just go for something new, something in the hype rather than general usability along with the array of Apple fanboys. True, iPads do not need as much maintenance as Windows or AV suites for protection but which is easier for more people to use, which can run more programsmw which can do better on office work because of a real keyboard and mouse? Windows got that covered. iPads are just no good in multitasking and not as powerful as serious Windows PC that I could play serious FPS games on. And because of this, why would Windows try to impose the use of tablets on their new OS so they could hit 2 birds with one stone? But apparently, many people are unhappy because something just got in the way. Having a separate button for the Metro and the old Start menu can change so much. Adding window controls to existing Metro apps can also change much so that MS could live up to their name of Windows. But why havent they done so?


Maybe, MS should try perfecting the inside core of their OS. Windows 8 is now faster at bootup and shutdown, kudos for that but what about more? Make System Refresh and System Reset possible even if Metro is disabled and without inserting the installation media. And how about shaping the OS that it needs little maintenance to work well like Macs? Time will tell. I guess things could change this month when consumer preview is released.

 

[Coke Robot]

The desktop itself is far from perfection but tablets are not as powerful at the moment. Well in my place, tablets are very rare and so are Macs. Its like 1 is to 100 or even 200 or more against PC's. But I do not think that MS making their new OS a tablet-focused one is the answer. I do not find it convinient to use a touchscreen keyboard and more people will not be convinient using Photoshop on touch.This iPad may be alarming for MS but I think this current approad they are up to is the wrong way to go. If iPad works that way, maybe they should make something that you don't get on iPads, maybe multitasking apps with window controls is more logical. Many people who go for these iPads just go for something new, something in the hype rather than general usability along with the array of Apple fanboys. True, iPads do not need as much maintenance as Windows or AV suites for protection but which is easier for more people to use, which can run more programsmw which can do better on office work because of a real keyboard and mouse? Windows got that covered. iPads are just no good in multitasking and not as powerful as serious Windows PC that I could play serious FPS games on. And because of this, why would Windows try to impose the use of tablets on their new OS so they could hit 2 birds with one stone? But apparently, many people are unhappy because something just got in the way. Having a separate button for the Metro and the old Start menu can change so much. Adding window controls to existing Metro apps can also change much so that MS could live up to their name of Windows. But why havent they done so?


Maybe, MS should try perfecting the inside core of their OS. Windows 8 is now faster at bootup and shutdown, kudos for that but what about more? Make System Refresh and System Reset possible even if Metro is disabled and without inserting the installation media. And how about shaping the OS that it needs little maintenance to work well like Macs? Time will tell. I guess things could change this month when consumer preview is released.

I completely agree with you that desktops are still great and far more powerful than tablets. But that's catching up at a quick pace. A few years ago, single core smartphones were the thing. Now it's going towards dual core ARM processors, pretty soon, quad core ARM processors. ARM can only do so much, but that's where AMD and Intel come in. AMD is working on low powered APUs and Intel is working on slimming down their Atom processor. They're both working on perfecting their mobile processors to be more efficient for tablets.

I think tablet usage varies from area to area. A year ago, I never saw a person use a tablet. This year, I've seen a few people use one. Though it's not much, that could easily change.

Actually, in the upcoming Consumer Preview build of Windows 8, it will include a couple features to close metro apps without needing window control buttons. Again, it won't be significant for desktop users, but that's why the Desktop is still in Windows 8. It'll let you do this by click and holding the top of the window of the app, and you throw it out. It will work great for tablet and touch users. It will also work great with a mouse.

Hmm, speaking of perfecting Windows' core, I've been reading about Microsoft's completely new OS architecture, called Midori. That might be what will replace the ENTIRE core of Windows. It's craziness, but time will tell.

 

[Vertex]

By the time tablets get much more powerful, I expect that around 4 years as of now and Desktops would be more powerful by then too. I was feeling frustrated that Windows machines need maintenance to keep in good shape. That's the part I feel I'm good with computers, maintenance. To my view, the Registry should, by its own have the ability to rid off obsolete elements in it. If I was a head developer at MS, this is just one of the things I wanna put to Windows 8.

 

[Coke Robot]

By the time tablets get much more powerful, I expect that around 4 years as of now and Desktops would be more powerful by then too. I was feeling frustrated that Windows machines need maintenance to keep in good shape. That's the part I feel I'm good with computers, maintenance. To my view, the Registry should, by its own have the ability to rid off obsolete elements in it. If I was a head developer at MS, this is just one of the things I wanna put to Windows 8.

If I was head of Windows development, I would had put that active registry cleaning a LONG, LONG, LONG time ago...

 

[pezzonovante]

Ha ha you are so incredibly ignorant on this issue! For the millionth time: Metro is NOT a touch-only interface. It is NOT a tablet interface. It is equally productive to use with a mouse and keyboard just as it is with touch.

Metro apps are going to be incredibly rich and productive. They will slowly but surely completely replace fugly old classic apps.

It's funny how you guys are always repeating the same thing: "If you love Metro -- so be it. Don't try to convince others." But you are doing the EXACT same thing when it comes to opposing Metro.

As long as there are going to be people who illogically criticize Metro -- I'm going to point out how incredibly productive, beautiful and gorgeous it is. I'm not going anywhere. So get used to hearing about how great Metro is.

You sound like a little kid that sees somebody wanting to take their toy away.

If Metro apps are more capable than the current desktop apps, then I would buy them. But they are not going to be. These are going to be apps mainly for tablets and smartphones, not for the desktop. The very dynamics of touch make this a necessity. Yes, I realize that Metro does work with the keyboard and mouse but it is "touch first". Do you even understand what this means??? I think that you do not.

"Touch first" means that an application is mainly designed for touch input. There are guidelines posted by MS to developers as to what this means. Elements of menus and selectable elements of text or other data have to be a certain size to be selected. This is a necessity for capacitive touch screens. When this essential guideline is enabled, everything needs to be much more simplified because one cannot include all the elements of a command structure and data in a "touch-first" program that one can include in a "keyboard-mouse" program. Thus, Metro-style apps are going to be these $1.99 -$4.99 apps that are being sold by all current "stores". There is no way of designing a rich Photoshop-type application to be touch-first and retain the capabilities of the "Keyboard -mouse" one. Just see what is possible today in the iPad world and you will get a good idea as to what these apps are going be like. You may, of course, want to believe that the iPad developers are not as good as the "Metro" developers but even you would not make this logical leap.

Touch-first does NOT mean touch-ONLY. As Microsoft said over and over gain keyboard and mouse are going to be first class citizens in Metro world.

And they have PROVED it with Metro Start Screen. The Metro Start Screen is FAR more productive and keyboard and mouse-friendly than the fugly old classic Start Menu. Yes, this is not just a promise -- it's a fact. You STILL have not been able to show ONE evidence how Metro Start Screen is not as friendly to use with a mouse/keyboard compared to the fugly old classic Start Menu. Because -- there is none.

As I said before, the Windows Store has not opened yet. So, there's no way to tell yet how productive Metro APPS are going to be. I found your comparison with iOS laughable -- just like almost every other claim of yours. iOS is a TABLET and PHONE OS. Windows 8 is a DESKTOP and tablet OS. Windows 8's Metro apps are FAR more powerful than those iOS apps -- in fact Windows 8 is at least 5 years ahead of iOS in terms of technological advancement.

But, the discussion of how powerful Metro apps are going to be is still theoretical. We'll know once Windows Store opens. But we ALREADY know -- from 5 months' experience of daily usage -- that the Metro Start Screen is FAR more productive to use with a mouse/keyboard than the fugly old classic Start Menu.

And, oh yes, Metro is here to stay. No amount of whining or moaning will make Microsoft change their minds.

 

[Vertex]

Metro apps are going to be incredibly rich and productive. They will slowly but surely completely replace fugly old classic apps.



As long as there are going to be people who illogically criticize Metro -- I'm going to point out how incredibly productive, beautiful and gorgeous it is. I'm not going anywhere. So get used to hearing about how great Metro is.

You sound like a little kid that sees somebody wanting to take their toy away.

ITouch-first does NOT mean touch-ONLY. As Microsoft said over and over gain keyboard and mouse are going to be first class citizens in Metro world.

And they have PROVED it with Metro Start Screen. The Metro Start Screen is FAR more productive and keyboard and mouse-friendly than the fugly old classic Start Menu. Yes, this is not just a promise -- it's a fact. You STILL have not been able to show ONE evidence how Metro Start Screen is not as friendly to use with a mouse/keyboard compared to the fugly old classic Start Menu. Because -- there is none.

But, the discussion of how powerful Metro apps are going to be is still theoretical. We'll know once Windows Store opens. But we ALREADY know -- from 5 months' experience of daily usage -- that the Metro Start Screen is FAR more productive to use with a mouse/keyboard than the fugly old classic Start Menu.

I do not understand why you always say the quoted underline statements above when you have no support as to why and insist you are correct by repeating the same statements. No offense, its almost as if its trolling. You are the one who keeps repeating it more productive for what logical reason? Metro apps are fullscreen, cannot be windowed, no close button, cannot be multitasked in the way Desktop apps are and there are with little content inside in proportion that full screen thing to compete with a Desktop app that is windowed, with a close button, multitaskable and compact with things to do. How can Metro apps be more productive in this sense on a desktop computer with a huge monitor, able to view just one fullscreen app at a time? People would think that is like drilling a hole into their heads.

 

[pezzonovante]

Metro apps are going to be incredibly rich and productive. They will slowly but surely completely replace fugly old classic apps.



As long as there are going to be people who illogically criticize Metro -- I'm going to point out how incredibly productive, beautiful and gorgeous it is. I'm not going anywhere. So get used to hearing about how great Metro is.

You sound like a little kid that sees somebody wanting to take their toy away.

ITouch-first does NOT mean touch-ONLY. As Microsoft said over and over gain keyboard and mouse are going to be first class citizens in Metro world.

And they have PROVED it with Metro Start Screen. The Metro Start Screen is FAR more productive and keyboard and mouse-friendly than the fugly old classic Start Menu. Yes, this is not just a promise -- it's a fact. You STILL have not been able to show ONE evidence how Metro Start Screen is not as friendly to use with a mouse/keyboard compared to the fugly old classic Start Menu. Because -- there is none.

But, the discussion of how powerful Metro apps are going to be is still theoretical. We'll know once Windows Store opens. But we ALREADY know -- from 5 months' experience of daily usage -- that the Metro Start Screen is FAR more productive to use with a mouse/keyboard than the fugly old classic Start Menu.

I do not understand why you always say the quoted underline statements above when you have no support as to why and insist you are correct by repeating the same statements. No offense, its almost as if its trolling. You are the one who keeps repeating it more productive for what logical reason? Metro apps are fullscreen, cannot be windowed, no close button, cannot be multitasked in the way Desktop apps are and there are with little content inside in proportion that full screen thing to compete with a Desktop app that is windowed, with a close button, multitaskable and compact with things to do. How can Metro apps be more productive in this sense on a desktop computer with a huge monitor, able to view just one fullscreen app at a time? People would think that is like drilling a hole into their heads.

I said Metro Start Screen is more productive than the fugly old classic Start Menu -- as has been proven by Microsof't blog posts and my own usage of almost 5 months.

ONCE again, I challenge you to give me ONE scenario where the Metro Start Screen takes more effort to do a particular job than the fugly old classic Start Menu. PLEASE GIVE ME ONE EXAMPLE. I'M BEGGING FOR IT. COME ON. JUST ONE.

 

[Vertex]

I said Metro Start Screen is more productive than the fugly old classic Start Menu -- as has been proven by Microsof't blog posts and my own usage of almost 5 months.

Your preference does not mean it should be the preference of others and regardless of the research mumbo jumbo that MS did, how come still so many are left unhappy? Is it because we do not accept change? Or is it this change just is not something that most of us see as more "effective" than what we go used to? Mainly because, Metro just takes over the whole screen even if it can display more tiles. We desktop users complain because fullscreen compromises us.

ONCE again, I challenge you to give me ONE scenario where the Metro Start Screen takes more effort to do a particular job than the fugly old classic Start Menu. PLEASE GIVE ME ONE EXAMPLE. I'M BEGGING FOR IT. COME ON. JUST ONE.

I just said reasons why. They are not multitaskable. I could view multiple opened Desktop apps in one monitor at the same time. I could be working on Excel, Word and with web browser plus Windows Media Player listening to music and be able to switch in between them with a single click at the taskbar

while

with Metro apps, I could only view one full screen thing at a time and CANNOT BE WINDOWED so I can't see other opened apps unlike in the Desktop and to leave a Metro app, I need to go to back to the Start Screen by pressing the Windows Logo key, open another Metro app but since Metro apps self-terminate if idle, after I'm done using this app, the app I left before could have self terminated already. Metro apps like Piano still produce sound even if I already went back to the Start Screen and this is annoying! And what's more, Metro apps are too flat, even if they are already fullscreen, they use lots of space to display less data than a resizable Desktop app that can display more and do more. The Metro apps that came with WDP are not better than Chess Titans or Purble Place that came with Windows 7, oh wait, at least those can be windowed. What's more, Metro screen which is fullscreen ruined the old Start Menu that takes only a fraction of the screen and now even the search function on Metro still takes the whole screen.

Take a good look at this screenshot and see that I can view MULTIPLE Desktop apps running at the same time on Windows 7 Desktop and be able to switch in between them with a SINGLE click. Check the screenshot on this link:

http://www.eightforums.com/attachments/f1/f3/2980d1324721770-windows-8-will-largely-irrelevant-traditional-pc-users-idc-multitask-tv.png

By the way, that live TV there on Windows Media Center and it has an option to stay on top of other Windows, meaning I could watch live TV while doing some office work AT THE SAME TIME.

Can you do as much on Metro apps at the same time? Nope you CAN'T. I hope my English is not hard to understand and I hope I do not get the same response especially with the "fugly old" catchphrase line again.

 

[pezzonovante]

I did not talk about Metro APPS because Windows Store has not opened as yet, and those "preview" apps in DP are not made by professionals but interns at Microsoft. Only AFTER professional apps appear on the Windows Store can we talk about them.

I talked about the START SCREEN. How does the Start Screen hamper productivity compared to the Start Menu? For example, does it take more time to launch apps or find apps? NO IT DOES NOT. If you think otherwise -- PROVE IT. Rants like -- "I don't want a full screen full of tiles" is not good enough -- they are just rants. How is a full-screen Start Screen less productive than the Start Menu? The focus is moved away from the app you had been using previously anyway? How is the Start Screen worse. On the contrary -- it displays MUCH more information at a glance -- like number of emails, notifications, weather, scores, messages etc.

Microsoft's research is not "mumbo jumbo" -- well maybe to a very tiny minority of Luddites who know ZERO about scienctific research. MOST consumers LOVE the Metro UI.

And yet again -- you haven't given any SPECIFIC example against the Metro START SCREEN.

 

[ADRz]

Touch-first does NOT mean touch-ONLY. As Microsoft said over and over gain keyboard and mouse are going to be first class citizens in Metro world.

And they have PROVED it with Metro Start Screen. The Metro Start Screen is FAR more productive and keyboard and mouse-friendly than the fugly old classic Start Menu. Yes, this is not just a promise -- it's a fact. You STILL have not been able to show ONE evidence how Metro Start Screen is not as friendly to use with a mouse/keyboard compared to the fugly old classic Start Menu. Because -- there is none.

As I said before, the Windows Store has not opened yet. So, there's no way to tell yet how productive Metro APPS are going to be. I found your comparison with iOS laughable -- just like almost every other claim of yours. iOS is a TABLET and PHONE OS. Windows 8 is a DESKTOP and tablet OS. Windows 8's Metro apps are FAR more powerful than those iOS apps -- in fact Windows 8 is at least 5 years ahead of iOS in terms of technological advancement.

But, the discussion of how powerful Metro apps are going to be is still theoretical. We'll know once Windows Store opens. But we ALREADY know -- from 5 months' experience of daily usage -- that the Metro Start Screen is FAR more productive to use with a mouse/keyboard than the fugly old classic Start Menu.

And, oh yes, Metro is here to stay. No amount of whining or moaning will make Microsoft change their minds.

I really do not want to insult you, but you seem so intent to disregard any arguments to the contrary that you seem to replying to yourself, not to others. I explained to you what the concept of "touch-first" means but it does not seem to register. Let me try again: independent of the fact that you can interact with the application with a mouse, the application is primarily designed for touch. That, by itself, creates specific limitations (mainly of space) to these applications. Do you get it????

Now, your claim that Win8 is a "desktop and tablet OS" while the iPad is a "tablet OS" is laughable. In fact, from what I hear, iPad3 (which will be introduced shortly), will run in a higher resolution and more demanding hardware than currently discussed Intel-based Win8 tablets. Thus, iPad programs would provide you very good indications as to what is possible with Win8 tablets. There is little doubt that developers for the iPad may be interested in porting their products to Win8 tablets. It would be the touch requirement that would dictate the richness and behavior of these products.

The "desktop" is a wash. Desktop applications not designed for touch would work as they always have. They would be virtually inoperable in a tablet. Try running Photoshop in a 10'' inch screen and you would see what I mean.