Windows 8 and 8.1 Forums


Microsoft to shake-up Windows 8 Start screen

  1. #51


    Posts : 33
    Windows 7 SP1 x64


    Quote Originally Posted by Colonel Travis View Post
    I gave "SPECIFIC evidence" about why Metro hampers me, but since you can't or don't feel like reading, I'll give it again: I have no use for any Metro app on a desktop. Zero. Phones? I love apps. Tablets? I love apps. Desktops? No. I don't want a cute little box for my pictures on my start-up screen. I don't want a weather box. I don't want a @#$%! box for a store begging me to buy even more crap I don't want. No app is as powerful as the programs I use now on a desktop. Metro apps are useless for me <----- Did you get that part? Not you. Me. But that's not the important word. "Useless" is the important word. Everything in Metro is either wasting my time getting to the stuff I use, or just putting it in an order that's aesthetically different from my 7 desktop/start button. Otherwise, there is no real, practical, fundamental change. As much as you and Coke and anyone else can scream there's MAJOR CHANGE GOING ON HERE!, you're refusing to acknowledge how little there really is. Like I said, the start button isn't gone, it's just the size of the entire screen and it's open all day long. You like that? Awesome. It serves no use for me. It does nothing but get in my way. It's like MS is nailing on one OS on top of another OS. There is too little cohesiveness between the two. If they could merge them better, I might really like. Might even love it. I don't know. All I know is the garbage they produced. And I might like the current garbage more if the design didn't look like a 6-year-old put it together. Funny how two different people can think differently about the same thing? Wonder why that is. You may think Metro is beautiful and sophisticated. I think it looks like Fisher-Price. Again, that's just me. Not you. Me. Got it?
    I NEVER said you have to say you find Metro beautiful and gorgeous like I do. I'm well aware of beauty being in the eye of the beholder. Personally I find the iPhone and Android UI fugly, crappy and designed by a brain-damaged retard. But obviously many people think the iPhone UI is the best thing ever. I have no problem with that -- just like I have no problem with your not finding Metro UI beautiful.

    But my REAL point is usability and productivity which can be SCIENTIFICALLY and STATISTICALLY proved. What have you said as reasons behind your claim that Metro is not helpful?

    I have no use for any Metro app on a desktop. Zero. Phones? I love apps. Tablets? I love apps. Desktops? No. I don't want a cute little box for my pictures on my start-up screen. I don't want a weather box. I don't want a @#$%! box for a store begging me to buy even more crap I don't want. No app is as powerful as the programs I use now on a desktop. Metro apps are useless for me


    You said you have no use for Metro. But not ONCE have you said HOW Metro affects your productivity. By that I mean you haven't said how Metro UI makes you use more clicks or more time to achieve the same task.

    You haven't given one example how the Metro Start Screen with big tiles are worse than the tiny desktop icons of Windows 7 -- not ONE example how that hampers your productivity or usability.

    Does Metro make things more complicated for you? I would like to know how. But no one has produced any specific examples.

    If your post was all about the aesthetics, then as I previously said, I have no problem with that view at all. But if you say Metro affects usability, I would expect some solid examples to back that up.

      My System SpecsSystem Spec

  2. #52


    Posts : 11
    Windows 8.1.1

    Say what you believe


    I think the racism quote by coke robot is ugly. He/she implies people don't like someone who is different than themselves. That is the biggest load I've seen on the internet in a while.

    People have a right not to like something. If using Metro bothers a computer user they should be able to say it without being trampled on and a Metro lover should be able to say that he likes it without being ridiculed. I do think good conversations about the pros and cons of Metro is a good thing for people to be able to make a purchasing decision. I personally don't like Metro. I can see a smart phone or tablet user liking it but on a desktop I don't like it. As for sitting at a desk and pushing buttons on a screen, no thanks. Those who like Metro including Microsoft will probably win out and I'll have to find some other way to process my information. It won't be using Metro though. The only reason Microsoft is in business today is because they caught on to the idea of windowing. I think Metro for the desktop is going backwards. I know it's hip to like Metro but I think Vista hate will be multiplied by a hundred for Metro. I also think if Microsoft is stubborn about Metro they will suffer a loss in sales. If they don't sell the OS or convert users to their way of thinking heads will roll. By the end of February Microsoft will show their hand and people can either embrace it or find other methods of computing.
      My System SpecsSystem Spec

  3. #53


    Posts : 228
    Black Label 7x64


    Quote Originally Posted by pezzonovante View Post
    But my REAL point is usability and productivity which can be SCIENTIFICALLY and STATISTICALLY proved.
    Instead of using CAPS indiscriminately, link that evidence to Metro use, specifically. If you already have, I've missed it, sorry. Re-link it because I'd like to read what you're talking about so I can stop talking to you in generalities.

    Quote Originally Posted by pezzonovante View Post
    Does Metro make things more complicated for you?


    In some ways it sure as hell does. Again, do you not read other threads in this place? Are you just coming to this debate right now?

    1.) I suspect they'll change a big annoyance with the new release, nonetheless, when you add a program, you don't just get a cute little box for the executable - you get the uninstall box and every other annoying
    peripheral box associated with the program. PITA to clear that mess out, giant waste of my time.

    1a.) Clearing out every stupid App box in the first place. I don't use any of that junk. It's the latest iteration of bloatware. Again, total waste of my time.

    2.) No real Windows in Windows Metro. Not productive at all.

    3.) Touch screen for desktop applications? You want to argue productivity with someone who works at a real desk at a real job doing real work? Or with someone who does non-work stuff at a real desk? In either case, reaching over the real desk to touch a screen instead of using a real mouse and real keyboard which are closer doesn't make a lot of sense to me. It's the practical Luddite in me, I guess.

    4.) Disabling Metro means what else is disabled in the rest of the OS? Another PITA as things stand now.

    5.) Some (not all) complaints listed here that I'm too lazy to type out because you're too lazy to have even noticed it to begin with.

    6. I don't like my files represented by Fisher-Price boxes. I prefer lists. On Windows 7 I don't use large icons for files, I don't use small icons. I don't use Tiles. I use "Details" because I'm more productive that way. I don't get that option in Metro. In fact, I don't get many options at all. I'm just told - do it this way. Screw you, I'd rather do it my own way, and I wouldn't force anyone else to do it my way. They can pick whatever the hell way they want.

    For some reason you can't grasp any of this. The very type of dumb arguments you can't stand - the ones people like me are not making but you claim we are - are the ones you actually use. Do you even get that? No. You think we're the Luddites, when we're the ones who aren't falling in line for this utilitarian BS Microsoft is throwing at everyone. We're the ones who want to do things our own way and be creative - which is not the Metro way -and you lap that Metro stuff up, not even knowing you have less real control over your system than before. But you like to imagine you do because you can do stuff like change the freaking background color from green to whatever glorious hue you can think of.
      My System SpecsSystem Spec

  4. #54


    Posts : 162
    windows 7


    Quote Originally Posted by Colonel Travis View Post

    For some reason you can't grasp any of this. The very type of dumb arguments you can't stand - the ones people like me are not making but you claim we are - are the ones you actually use. Do you even get that? No. You think we're the Luddites, when we're the ones who aren't falling in line for this utilitarian BS Microsoft is throwing at everyone. We're the ones who want to do things our own way and be creative - which is not the Metro way -and you lap that Metro stuff up, not even knowing you have less real control over your system than before. But you like to imagine you do because you can do stuff like change the freaking background color from green to whatever glorious hue you can think of.
    CT, let me first tell you that I agree with you 100%. I find it very annoying that the fans of Metro have the need to paint those that are opposed to this interface as "Luddites" or "technophobes". This is absolutely not true. In fact, most of the opposition to the Metro Start Menu is from power users, persons who are in the forefront of technology, not from Luddites or technophobes (who probably run Macs, anyway).

    I keep pointing out that Metro is old, it is not new. The first time this interface appeared, it was in "Media Center". This remains the least used part of Windows, with only 0.1% of users ever bothering to use it. Then it appeared in Zune and we all know how well it did there. Then, for the last 2 years, it is in Windows Phone and it has not burned the charts in any way. So, it is silly to claim that it something new that technophobes would avoid.

    The so-called scientific argument was one by Sinofski, the guy who leads the Win8 team, who analyzed telemetry data on the use of the Start Menu. However, this was hardly scientific (although some of the statistics made it look "scientific"). I can point out 10 different things that made this whole analysis totally worthless, but I would not even bother. He did not analyze the rest of the Windows interface (including the use of taskbar, etc). This was a cherry-picked argument.

    I think that we all know why Microsoft is developing Win8 the way it does. Microsoft believes that the whole computing paradigm is going to migrate to a smartphone & tablet paradigm and that non-handhelds (desktops and laptops) would progressively disappear. They saw Apple partially merging iOS and OSX in Lion, and they got scared. In fact, in Lion, Apple simply provided a way to run iOS apps and allowed some customizable items to be used in "the iOS way" based on user preference. The user reception of Lion has been quite tepid. Most actually hated it. I do not think that there is anything wrong in allowing mobile apps to run in the desktop provided that they are windowed. The Apple approach seems about right. In fact, a number of companies would soon offer ways to run Android apps in the Win7 desktop (there is a number of beta programs out there). However, it is totally different to have a mobile OS take over a desktop machine. I find it laughable that now Microsoft is terming all desktop applications as "legacy apps".

    Let's say we go away from desktop applications and develop touch-enabled apps. By the very nature of the touch interface, these are going to be simplified programs. A Metro-style Excel will have a very simplified menu structure and it would display only a quarter of the cells that are displayable at the same resolution in a non-handheld. Is this really the future? I hope not.

    Microsoft has every reason to be concerned. I was in a recent meeting in which sales reps were strongly demanding iPads because using their laptops was "too much of a hassle". Well, this would be true in several occasions and computing will become more and more fragmented. It is unavoidable. Those who do not have a need for rich computing, will migrate to simpler machines. But offering the same OS in every device is not the answer. Microsoft could have offered tablets with Windows Phone 7 a year ago and it could have created a "tablet-oriented" version of Win8. Apple is keeping iOS and OSX separate. This is the correct way to go. Desktop (non-handheld) computing would be with us for ever. It may comprise a smaller part of the overall usage, but it would still be a huge component. I think that MS is doing a tragic mistake that it would cost it dearly. But only the future can tell.
      My System SpecsSystem Spec

  5. #55


    Posts : 228
    Black Label 7x64


    Oh yeah - ADRz, thanks, I should have realized this is what the science argument was. I also had problems with it.
      My System SpecsSystem Spec

  6. #56


    Posts : 33
    Windows 7 SP1 x64


    Quote Originally Posted by Colonel Travis View Post
    Instead of using CAPS indiscriminately, link that evidence to Metro use, specifically. If you already have, I've missed it, sorry. Re-link it because I'd like to read what you're talking about so I can stop talking to you in generalities.
    I would like to hear what problems you have with Microsoft's SCIENTIFIC arguments.

    1.) I suspect they'll change a big annoyance with the new release, nonetheless, when you add a program, you don't just get a cute little box for the executable - you get the uninstall box and every other annoying peripheral box associated with the program. PITA to clear that mess out, giant waste of my time.

    1a.) Clearing out every stupid App box in the first place. I don't use any of that junk. It's the latest iteration of bloatware. Again, total waste of my time.

    First of all, you get the EXACT same thing with the fugly old Start Menu that you love. EVERY little unwanted piece of crap gets added there and bloats up the list. So, there's no way Metro is WORSE. Yes, this may not be IDEAL -- and I'm sure it will change in future builds. But again, it's not WORSE than the fugly old classic UI.
    You think those preview apps and sample games will be there in the final release? Hell no. Only the basic Windows features will be on the Start Screen by default. The rest can be downloaded from the beautiful new Windows Store.
    2.) No real Windows in Windows Metro. Not productive at all.
    Have you used any complex Metro apps yet? How do you know it's not productive? Wait until Windows Store opens and complex apps start to appear. Only then can either you or I say if it's indeed less or more proudctive.
    3.) Touch screen for desktop applications? You want to argue productivity with someone who works at a real desk at a real job doing real work? Or with someone who does non-work stuff at a real desk? In either case, reaching over the real desk to touch a screen instead of using a real mouse and real keyboard which are closer doesn't make a lot of sense to me. It's the practical Luddite in me, I guess.
    NO. Metro is NOT a touch UI. It is just AS productive with the mouse and keyboard as it is with touch. Microsoft has explained in detail how easy it is to navigate Metro with mouse and keyboard -- much more so than the fugly old classic UI.

    4.) Disabling Metro means what else is disabled in the rest of the OS? Another PITA as things stand now.
    Which brings us back to the original point why would you want to disable the beautiful and productive Metro UI in the first place?
    5.) Some (not all) complaints listed here that I'm too lazy to type out because you're too lazy to have even noticed it to begin with.

    Good on you for not typing them out, because there is not ONE logical point in there. For example, the pathetic clown who wrote that article doesn't like the ribbon, but explains no reason why. Just says:
    Many will recall the ire Microsoft stirred up when it implemented its
    ribbon-based UI across its Office suite a few years back. Now the dreaded
    UI-sore has found its way into Windows Explorer, one of the last vestiges of the
    old, familiar way. Like a nasty parasite, I just want to be rid of it.
    Ha ha ha ha ha! What a logical and imaginative argument indeed.

    6. I don't like my files represented by Fisher-Price boxes. I prefer lists. On Windows 7 I don't use large icons for files, I don't use small icons. I don't use Tiles. I use "Details" because I'm more productive that way. I don't get that option in Metro. In fact, I don't get many options at all. I'm just told - do it this way. Screw you, I'd rather do it my own way, and I wouldn't force anyone else to do it my way. They can pick whatever the hell way they want.
    Metro DOES not present files in tiles. It present Apps in tiles. If you want to use Explorer -- that's available to you. So you have options. I personally never use the explorer in Windows 7. I just use the Start Menu search to find any files within a fraction of a second. I can also do the same on Windows 8. That's called CHOICE.

    You think we're the Luddites, when we're the ones who aren't falling in line for this utilitarian BS Microsoft is throwing at everyone. We're the ones who want to do things our own way and be creative - which is not the Metro way -and you lap that Metro stuff up, not even knowing you have less real control over your system than before. But you like to imagine you do because you can do stuff like change the freaking background color from green to whatever glorious hue you can think of.

    You think you know more about productivity and usability than Microsoft? I don't. Plus Microsoft have explained in great detail how they arrived at their design choices. That's why I fully agree with them. Again, doing things YOUR way, even though there is no evidence of that being more productive, does not make you a power user. It does NOT. It makes you a stubborn self-proclaimed geek. I myself am also a Computer Science graduate and I have been programming since I was 10. But I DO NOT like to do things MY way to prove my geekiness. I read Microsoft's arguments, and because I found them compelling, and couldn't find flaws with them, I decided to do things Microsoft way -- and that has made me more productive.
      My System SpecsSystem Spec

  7. #57


    Posts : 5,707
    Windows 8.1 Pro


    Quote Originally Posted by Vertex View Post
    Well we have systems with lots of RAM and really good processors now, Coke and having 20 opened Desktop apps would be of ease without having to suspend the rest and resource usage on some of these apps do lower if that app has been idle for a few minutes. With full screen Metro apps, I don't think most people would pay even 10 dollars for that if a Desktop app or even a desktop gadget which is more accustomed to them would be available for free download anyway. In fact many of the fancy paid apps out there have a free alternative somewhere. Remember we got thousands and thousands of free programs available for download. 100 dollar Desktop apps?? Well don't be exaggerated over there, apps that reach those prices are of professional office software or AV software suites. Microsoft has app developers and of course their company want them to works as team players and cooperate on what the company wants but I believe there are even more developers who don't work for Microsoft and these are the guys who would have mixed opinions and won't have MS force them what to do. In fact, I have not felt any uproar of so many developers rushing in to make Metro apps but time will tell.

    What is it in Metro apps that turns me off? I'm pretty sure you are aware I don't like the Start Menu taking the whole screen, I can't live with full screen apps on a huge monitor that doesn't have window controls and I just can't multitask with it the way I do on Desktop apps. I have said that a number of times.
    Many systems are of good specs, but you need to consider millions of PCs are from the vista era, of single or dual core processors and below four gigs of RAM. Newer PCs do.

    There are apps on phone marketplaces that do things a desktop gadget cannot do, other than a desktop program. But my 1o dollar app, 100 dollar program is a hypothetical situation. Given the choices, a consumer would go with what costs less to them and adapt to that.

    And yeah, I realize a desktop app of that cost is of professional caliber or anti-virus caliber, I already said that. I say that because most people don't go out and buy the latest Office version or an actual decent anti-virus suite because of cost. I mean, take Kaspersky Internet Security 2012. I have a friend who bought it this past December and it was a full year license. There's only enough days in the subscription until May of this year. That license became active months earlier, but was the same cost as if it were a new license. Things like that turn people off. Of course, there are free alternatives, but you get what you get.

    So, when you use Windows 7 and open the start menu, where does your focus go to? Does it stay on some open window or windows, or do you focus on opening something up from it?

    Also, if you don't like full screen apps, then just don't use them. I don't really use desktop gadgets anymore. I don't install them or use because I don't care for them much. It's just like with full screen apps.
      My System SpecsSystem Spec

  8. #58


    Posts : 5,707
    Windows 8.1 Pro


    Quote Originally Posted by Looey View Post
    I think the racism quote by coke robot is ugly. He/she implies people don't like someone who is different than themselves. That is the biggest load I've seen on the internet in a while.

    People have a right not to like something. If using Metro bothers a computer user they should be able to say it without being trampled on and a Metro lover should be able to say that he likes it without being ridiculed. I do think good conversations about the pros and cons of Metro is a good thing for people to be able to make a purchasing decision. I personally don't like Metro. I can see a smart phone or tablet user liking it but on a desktop I don't like it. As for sitting at a desk and pushing buttons on a screen, no thanks. Those who like Metro including Microsoft will probably win out and I'll have to find some other way to process my information. It won't be using Metro though. The only reason Microsoft is in business today is because they caught on to the idea of windowing. I think Metro for the desktop is going backwards. I know it's hip to like Metro but I think Vista hate will be multiplied by a hundred for Metro. I also think if Microsoft is stubborn about Metro they will suffer a loss in sales. If they don't sell the OS or convert users to their way of thinking heads will roll. By the end of February Microsoft will show their hand and people can either embrace it or find other methods of computing.
    As I said, I was going out on a limb...

    Even then, when you see someone who is different from you, MOST people have a tendency not to like them for that and associate with people of their own kind. It's simple psychology.


    And I only defend metro design and Start Screen because all I EVER SEE is random criticisms about the changes in Windows 8 that are probably not based of true, honest opinion that is based of ACTUAL IN DEPTH usage of Windows 8. All I see on this forum are haters of metro design because it apparently hampers productivity or multitasking, again, SOME of those opinions are based off mere hours or days using Windows 8. I've been using it myself since September and I've used it as much as I possibly can. THERE IS NO TANGIBLE IMPEDIMENT TO MULTITASKING OR PRODUCTIVITY. I know some hater of metro will comment on this saying I'm deluded by a tablet OS, ok, fine. If that person wants to continue that course of thinking, I can't stop that. They can continue to refuse to ACTUALLY use said OS in depth and make superficial judgments based off such.

    Gahh.....
      My System SpecsSystem Spec

  9. #59


    Posts : 5,707
    Windows 8.1 Pro


    Quote Originally Posted by ADRz View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Colonel Travis View Post

    For some reason you can't grasp any of this. The very type of dumb arguments you can't stand - the ones people like me are not making but you claim we are - are the ones you actually use. Do you even get that? No. You think we're the Luddites, when we're the ones who aren't falling in line for this utilitarian BS Microsoft is throwing at everyone. We're the ones who want to do things our own way and be creative - which is not the Metro way -and you lap that Metro stuff up, not even knowing you have less real control over your system than before. But you like to imagine you do because you can do stuff like change the freaking background color from green to whatever glorious hue you can think of.
    CT, let me first tell you that I agree with you 100%. I find it very annoying that the fans of Metro have the need to paint those that are opposed to this interface as "Luddites" or "technophobes". This is absolutely not true. In fact, most of the opposition to the Metro Start Menu is from power users, persons who are in the forefront of technology, not from Luddites or technophobes (who probably run Macs, anyway).

    I keep pointing out that Metro is old, it is not new. The first time this interface appeared, it was in "Media Center". This remains the least used part of Windows, with only 0.1% of users ever bothering to use it. Then it appeared in Zune and we all know how well it did there. Then, for the last 2 years, it is in Windows Phone and it has not burned the charts in any way. So, it is silly to claim that it something new that technophobes would avoid.

    The so-called scientific argument was one by Sinofski, the guy who leads the Win8 team, who analyzed telemetry data on the use of the Start Menu. However, this was hardly scientific (although some of the statistics made it look "scientific"). I can point out 10 different things that made this whole analysis totally worthless, but I would not even bother. He did not analyze the rest of the Windows interface (including the use of taskbar, etc). This was a cherry-picked argument.

    I think that we all know why Microsoft is developing Win8 the way it does. Microsoft believes that the whole computing paradigm is going to migrate to a smartphone & tablet paradigm and that non-handhelds (desktops and laptops) would progressively disappear. They saw Apple partially merging iOS and OSX in Lion, and they got scared. In fact, in Lion, Apple simply provided a way to run iOS apps and allowed some customizable items to be used in "the iOS way" based on user preference. The user reception of Lion has been quite tepid. Most actually hated it. I do not think that there is anything wrong in allowing mobile apps to run in the desktop provided that they are windowed. The Apple approach seems about right. In fact, a number of companies would soon offer ways to run Android apps in the Win7 desktop (there is a number of beta programs out there). However, it is totally different to have a mobile OS take over a desktop machine. I find it laughable that now Microsoft is terming all desktop applications as "legacy apps".

    Let's say we go away from desktop applications and develop touch-enabled apps. By the very nature of the touch interface, these are going to be simplified programs. A Metro-style Excel will have a very simplified menu structure and it would display only a quarter of the cells that are displayable at the same resolution in a non-handheld. Is this really the future? I hope not.

    Microsoft has every reason to be concerned. I was in a recent meeting in which sales reps were strongly demanding iPads because using their laptops was "too much of a hassle". Well, this would be true in several occasions and computing will become more and more fragmented. It is unavoidable. Those who do not have a need for rich computing, will migrate to simpler machines. But offering the same OS in every device is not the answer. Microsoft could have offered tablets with Windows Phone 7 a year ago and it could have created a "tablet-oriented" version of Win8. Apple is keeping iOS and OSX separate. This is the correct way to go. Desktop (non-handheld) computing would be with us for ever. It may comprise a smaller part of the overall usage, but it would still be a huge component. I think that MS is doing a tragic mistake that it would cost it dearly. But only the future can tell.
    I would actually want know what you see wrong with the start menu's scientific research.

    Metro is modern retro to me. I know that, and if you look at some design trends, doing something that was once done in the long past again with a modern twist is something new. But again, superficial judgments about metro designed programs, it's not the design that was the issue, it's the lack of marketing. I don't think anyone even uses media center because media player is just fine. Zune isn't used much because of Microsoft's awful attempts at marketing the Zune Player was just a failure and the Windows Phone 7 is barely picking steam now, which uses the Zune Software.

    The reason why Microsoft didn't make a Windows tablet OS based off the Windows Phone was because it's based of the old CE kernel of Windows, and it's not bringing something innovative to the table. We already have tablets running a neutered phone OS with iOS and android, Microsoft doesn't believe in taking that route. People want to use a Windows product that can be touch oriented or desktop oriented.

    Desktopping is facing the reality that it's becoming a power user and content creator's device. For some reason, people buy laptops over desktops even though some people don't even go mobile. Why? Maybe better innovations in mobile technology and design over the desktop.

    From what you say about Windows 8, I'm starting to think you don't fully understand the Start Screen.
      My System SpecsSystem Spec

  10. #60


    Posts : 5,707
    Windows 8.1 Pro


    Quote Originally Posted by pezzonovante View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Colonel Travis View Post
    Instead of using CAPS indiscriminately, link that evidence to Metro use, specifically. If you already have, I've missed it, sorry. Re-link it because I'd like to read what you're talking about so I can stop talking to you in generalities.
    I would like to hear what problems you have with Microsoft's SCIENTIFIC arguments.

    1.) I suspect they'll change a big annoyance with the new release, nonetheless, when you add a program, you don't just get a cute little box for the executable - you get the uninstall box and every other annoying peripheral box associated with the program. PITA to clear that mess out, giant waste of my time.

    1a.) Clearing out every stupid App box in the first place. I don't use any of that junk. It's the latest iteration of bloatware. Again, total waste of my time.

    First of all, you get the EXACT same thing with the fugly old Start Menu that you love. EVERY little unwanted piece of crap gets added there and bloats up the list. So, there's no way Metro is WORSE. Yes, this may not be IDEAL -- and I'm sure it will change in future builds. But again, it's not WORSE than the fugly old classic UI.
    You think those preview apps and sample games will be there in the final release? Hell no. Only the basic Windows features will be on the Start Screen by default. The rest can be downloaded from the beautiful new Windows Store.

    Have you used any complex Metro apps yet? How do you know it's not productive? Wait until Windows Store opens and complex apps start to appear. Only then can either you or I say if it's indeed less or more proudctive.

    NO. Metro is NOT a touch UI. It is just AS productive with the mouse and keyboard as it is with touch. Microsoft has explained in detail how easy it is to navigate Metro with mouse and keyboard -- much more so than the fugly old classic UI.


    Which brings us back to the original point why would you want to disable the beautiful and productive Metro UI in the first place?

    Good on you for not typing them out, because there is not ONE logical point in there. For example, the pathetic clown who wrote that article doesn't like the ribbon, but explains no reason why. Just says:

    Ha ha ha ha ha! What a logical and imaginative argument indeed.

    6. I don't like my files represented by Fisher-Price boxes. I prefer lists. On Windows 7 I don't use large icons for files, I don't use small icons. I don't use Tiles. I use "Details" because I'm more productive that way. I don't get that option in Metro. In fact, I don't get many options at all. I'm just told - do it this way. Screw you, I'd rather do it my own way, and I wouldn't force anyone else to do it my way. They can pick whatever the hell way they want.
    Metro DOES not present files in tiles. It present Apps in tiles. If you want to use Explorer -- that's available to you. So you have options. I personally never use the explorer in Windows 7. I just use the Start Menu search to find any files within a fraction of a second. I can also do the same on Windows 8. That's called CHOICE.

    You think we're the Luddites, when we're the ones who aren't falling in line for this utilitarian BS Microsoft is throwing at everyone. We're the ones who want to do things our own way and be creative - which is not the Metro way -and you lap that Metro stuff up, not even knowing you have less real control over your system than before. But you like to imagine you do because you can do stuff like change the freaking background color from green to whatever glorious hue you can think of.

    You think you know more about productivity and usability than Microsoft? I don't. Plus Microsoft have explained in great detail how they arrived at their design choices. That's why I fully agree with them. Again, doing things YOUR way, even though there is no evidence of that being more productive, does not make you a power user. It does NOT. It makes you a stubborn self-proclaimed geek. I myself am also a Computer Science graduate and I have been programming since I was 10. But I DO NOT like to do things MY way to prove my geekiness. I read Microsoft's arguments, and because I found them compelling, and couldn't find flaws with them, I decided to do things Microsoft way -- and that has made me more productive.
    These quoted "arguments" remind me of a certain political faction...
      My System SpecsSystem Spec

Page 6 of 14 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... LastLast
Microsoft to shake-up Windows 8 Start screen
Related Threads
My first real problem with win 8.1. Problem Defined. I have a shortcut on my desktop. The same shortcut key on my desktop task bar. The shortcut when activated loads the windows 8.1 start screen where my tiles are. The default DPI in this windows 8.1 is 125%. I changed the resolution to...
Read more here: Hidden jokes exposed in Microsoft&#39;s code | Fox News
Read more at: Microsoft to hide Metro start screen with Windows 8.1 Update 1? | ZDNet See also: https://www.eightforums.com/windows-8-news/40043-windows-8-1-update-1-everything-we-know-so-far.html
Set to Show "Start" or "Apps" View when Opening Start Screen in Windows 8.1 The Start screen is a new feature in Windows 8 and Windows RT that replaces the Start Menu from previous Windows. You can pin Store apps, programs, folders, drives, files, contacts, and websites to Start to quickly...
Hi, I have successfully managed to upgrade, add a shutdown tile on the start screen, add a classic start on the desktop screen and get the right tiles on my desktop and remove the initial screen. I have a usable OS on my laptop again and it may sound strange but I like both interfaces and use...
Read more at source: How Windows 8 will shake up the laptop market | Reviews - Laptops - CNET Reviews
Microsoft works to win desktop users over to the Start screen
Eight Forums Android App Eight Forums IOS App Follow us on Facebook