locked
Poll - Metro on the Desktop

    General discussion

  • Now that people have had some time to use the Windows Developer Preview and more fully appreciate the direction Microsoft is trying to go with the OS, I am trying to get a sense of people's opinion is of having the Metro "experience" be part of their desktop OS.

    To that end, do you:

     

    1) Like It

    or

    2) Dislike It

    Friday, September 16, 2011 11:27 PM

All replies

  • I like it for laptop use, but I prefer to not use it when I'm on my desktop. I'm glad they gave us the option to use the regular desktop.
    Friday, September 16, 2011 11:33 PM
  • Dislike It

     

    I think this is a major blunder for Microsoft to force a touch-centric UI on desktop users. It is unintuative, clunky, and creates a jarring and fragmented experience for those that truly *work* in Windows.

    I think the Metro interface and applications have great potential for touch-centric devices like tablets, but are clearly not the right choice for a desktop or laptop.



    Friday, September 16, 2011 11:34 PM
  • Can I say both? I think there is a potential and I'm toying with the idea of having a touch-screen as a (secondary?) keyboard - might work with this in some mysterious way ... I just doubt that it can replace a keyboard properly - there's just something about buttons... What I'm thinking when looking at Win 8 is that maybe we need to rethink human interface devices - is there a better way to do it..? We are all used to having a good old keyboard beneath our fingers and a mouse in our hands and we are getting used to working with a touch-screen (though the functionality of a touch-screen still isn't exactly at a maximum) but can we think of a better way to do it? Since the Windows Developer Preview would work best with all three interface devices it might be time to merge some of it..? Anyway - just a thought...

    Hmm ... also: it feels like it should be on a tablet and not a desktop or laptop (without touch-screen) ... I just don't see it as a regular desktop OS ... but it is quite possible that that can change... Let's see what MS is going to do with it :)

    Saturday, September 17, 2011 1:00 AM
  • 1) Like it! 

    I've gotten more and more used to it as I've integrated the keyboard shortcuts into my computing. It is actually much quicker to launch an app by pressing winkey and then typing the app name once I hit the start screen then searching for it in my Windows 7 start menu. And that's just one example. Can't wait for the store to launch!

    Saturday, September 17, 2011 1:08 AM
  • I like it.  My initial response matched the majority, "Metro feels clunky and out of place on the desktop".  However, after a few days of use I'm really starting to love it. 
    Saturday, September 17, 2011 4:41 AM
  • I like it.  My initial response matched the majority, "Metro feels clunky and out of place on the desktop".  However, after a few days of use I'm really starting to love it. 

    I like it a lot. Same here, after just 1 day.
    Saturday, September 17, 2011 5:01 AM
  • What changed that made you start to like it? How are you able to cope with the jarring transition from Metro UI to the desktop (where most real work will happen)?
    Saturday, September 17, 2011 5:03 AM
  • But that is exactly how Windows 7 works... you press the Windows key, start typing the app name and press enter and it launches you don't have to "search" for anything. What is the difference from your point of view?

    Saturday, September 17, 2011 5:05 AM
  • I Like it 

     

    But it needs Work. And what happened to the jump-lists on the start menu they were very useful. I hear MS is planning a few tweaks to the experience ; like the ability to scroll the start screen using the mouse wheel and semantic zoom that'll make the experience better .we'll see

    Saturday, September 17, 2011 6:26 AM
  • 2) I dislike it

     

    - the UI looks flat, dull, soulless

    - it is NOT an OS for desktops, laptops and netbooks

    Saturday, September 17, 2011 7:49 AM
  • I like it


    I see it as having great potential as the OS develops and apps are developed to really take advantage of it. If Microsoft can pull it off well, I'd be happy to stay immersed in Metro-World. There are a few niggly features at the moment for me though - tabbed browsing in Metro IE feels clunky and the file management seems not existent. Also, I find that once I'm on the classic desktop, I don't usually navigate back to Metro, but that is probably due to the lack of Metro apps at the moment - the Live essentials apps that were demoed might change that.

    If I could change one thing - it would be to move the settings pane to the left-hand side. Using a laptop, it doesn't make sense to me to navigate to the bottom left hand corner to hit Settings, only to have the Settings pane pop up on the far right.

    If you could change a single feature of the Metro design, what would it be?

    Saturday, September 17, 2011 8:25 AM
  • I Like It
    Robert MacLean - www.sadev.co.za
    Saturday, September 17, 2011 8:30 AM
  • 3. Ambivalent

    In its current state, the Metro UI causes more problems than it solves. For example, why do I suddenly need to switch back and forth between two separate interfaces? Why are functions that have worked since the days of Windows 3.1 no longer working? Why is there absolutely no integration between Metro apps and desktop apps? How will desktop and Metro apps work side by side? What if I need to quickly do something on the desktop while working in the Metro UI? Why can't I close programs that are interrupting my work without using the Task Manager? Metro and the Start Screen have some good ideas, but I don't think it will work in its current state. In another thread, titled "Backported to the Desktop," I suggested an idea for a redesign of the Metro UI on desktops and laptops, but not on tablets.

    Saturday, September 17, 2011 11:54 AM
  • I like it – it unifies the interface experience, it provides a “life hub” while supporting ~real~ applications, as a keyboard junkie – the Mouse and shortcut keys makes it nimble.  My favorite part of the windows phone is a good Metro application and look forward to seeing what our talented developers can do with a big screen.

    Saturday, September 17, 2011 12:08 PM
  • Just wondering, how does Metro "unify the interface experience?" As far as I can tell, it cuts Windows in half; Windows 8 has a Desktop half and a Metro half, with poor integration between the two halves. I really, really, hope that Microsoft will be willing to change this. If they don't, it may be the first time I decide that a new version of Windows is not even remotely good. Microsoft already made a few mistakes with Windows 7 vs. Windows Vista. I actually think Vista is better. That is why I joined the forum. I hoped I might have some small part in influencing Microsoft's decisions (though that is unlikely).
    Saturday, September 17, 2011 12:19 PM
  • I don't like it. I have decided to try it as an Operating System instead of a features playground and my impressions will probably coincide with some already told and can be resumed to one thing: It will not work. The whole point around this critic is that Windows broke the concept they built for decades to force us a bad UI decision that clearly didn't work on mobiles.

     

    - Native ISO mounting is perfect, please put a native PDF reader also, i hate Adobe bloatware and the interface of the "free" stuff is awful.

     

    - Everything goes to Metro Start, if it is the new Core of the OS and the search works so well I rather prefer to ADD what I want instead of REMOVE what I don't.

     

    - I'm looking for the best way to write my impression about Metro Apps, and i really can't because it's just a bad idea from the scratch. You have killed the concept of windows, you have taken away the idea of control we had over the interface organization. And the interface (like it was told) is flat, soulless, boring, and above all, too much different from the Explorer.

    Seriously you need a better excuse than just "keep things simpler" because it doesn't. I can't minimize, i can't side-by-side, i can't close it, i can't resize it, i can't restore it by just clicking on a taskbar, i can't see the time, go to a calendar and get back with 2 clicks, i can't see the progress of an operation (The best innovation in Seven is the progress bar built in the taskbar).

    They keep hiding information from me, there's hidden menu on the top, on the bottom, on the left, on the right, if i click somewhere something unexpected happens. Metro Apps are monolithic blocks of interface that traps the users and force the developers and Microsoft to build a complex, unnecessary and non intuitive integration UI just to do the basics. Words can't describe how unpractical they are.

     

    - The Metro styled artifacts popping up in the desktop are just annoying. Were's the Aero? The cool glass effect? The best looking UI style defeated by a solid color?

     

    - The Metro Start hides the desktop, don't do that, please, blur the background, built the metro over it, whatever, just don't hide it completely, it's a personal thing, uncomfortable... i love my desktop, my wallpaper, not that ugly slime-green background.

     

    - Pin the apps to Desktop, because i will not open the Metro Start just to see the weather, and trust me, i will not live there, i will live where i can work: the explorer.

     

    - Finally, Windows still lacks of organization concepts that other OS adopted long ago, like switching to multiple desktops. I'd love to Alt-Tab from my Visual Studio with a debugger running to my Socials desktop with all my Metro Tiles showing my mail, friends and such instead of jump to Start. The current model just make me feel that Windows is hiding things from me.

     

    I'm seriously thinking about skipping this generation like i did with Windows ME (yes, i'm putting both on the same level of user un-interaction)



    • Edited by Caian Saturday, September 17, 2011 12:22 PM
    Saturday, September 17, 2011 12:21 PM
  • Dislike It

     

    There's should be option to completely disable Metro Start screen.


    • Edited by adam664 Saturday, September 17, 2011 12:28 PM
    Saturday, September 17, 2011 12:27 PM
  • Highly dislike it.

     

    By the way, to those that say its the same, please let me know how you can find a program you installed, that happened to put other items on the start group, and of which you dont know the names. How do you find those? The new start screen, when searching, is order alphabetically, but -assumes- you already know what you are looking for. Using 7's start menu, you would simply browse to the program group and the other apps would be right there. Think Visual Studio, for example, or any major app.

    Saturday, September 17, 2011 12:57 PM
  • Dislike It

     

    There's should be option to completely disable Metro Start screen.


    +1

    Metro breaks fundamental design of "window" applications. If i want to reduce my user experience to data display only, i'd turn on my ipad or galaxy s. If i have to do my work i want be able to start feature rich applications without switching between virtual start screens.

    Usually i have one or more browser instances, skype, and my dev tools open and running, need to copy between applications and quickly pull up calc or notepad e.g.. There is no place for metro in my virtual world...

    Metro and Windows just dont go together, btw guys voted for "Like it" in this thread should ask themselves how often they used gadgets or sidebar in vista/win 7.

    Beside that i really appreciate technical stuff win 8 will deliver, especially hyer-v and azure. But Metro is just fail.

    Saturday, September 17, 2011 1:23 PM
  • I like it for a tablet device, but on my desktop I'm not sure it fits in. In many respects, the interface feels schizophrenic and it feels like I'm constantly switching between two different computers.

    Honestly, I would bifurcate the Metro and Windows desktop experiences. If you're running in Metro "mode" (likely on a tablet or other portable device) it can't get you to the desktop. When you're running in desktop mode, it should behave like a typical Windows desktop with the Start menu and all of your standard program icons.

    Saturday, September 17, 2011 1:26 PM
  • i like it, was extremely confusing at first, but after spending some time with it and learning how it all works i fell in love with it... im tired of the same old boring crap. its time for a change and i think microsoft did an outstanding job developing win8. i love win8/dev preview so much i formatted my HD and it is now my daily driver :) i have have very few issues and every app/program works. after those 5 updates we got yesterday i havent experienced a single hiccup. 
    Saturday, September 17, 2011 2:29 PM
  • Well its clear to me that Microsoft is going to do at least 3 things.

    1) Include a Quick Start guide in the Windows 8 box, not just 2 DVD's and a product key.

    2) This is a "Touch" centric version of Windows which may be greate for those who have a touch pad device or screen. For the legacy users who have laptops or desktop computer there should a clasic Windows 7 mode option and settings you choose during the install or in the Control Panel.

    3) Office 2012: Upgraded to take advantage of what Windows 8 offers.

     

    Missing in action: A faster means of inputing data. Keyboard or on screen keyboard is your father's Oldsmobile. Be using both since 1983.

     

    J W Stuart: http://www.pagestart.com


    Never be afraid to ask. This forum has some of the best people in the world available to help.
    Saturday, September 17, 2011 2:59 PM
  • Once getting used to it Metro can be a cool thing, however i want the classic start menu back, so here's my idea. Leave the tiles , metro stuff in, but when i switch to the desktop, give back the classic start menu and provide an easy way to switch between classic and tile / metro mode.

     

     


    Alsx Verboon www.verboon.info
    Saturday, September 17, 2011 3:09 PM
  • That would almost be worse than what is already present. Windows 8 already feels like it has been cut into two separate operating systems. This suggestion makes it worse, and at this point, Metro might as well not exist at all.
    Saturday, September 17, 2011 3:12 PM
  • I have just started to hear rumblings that it might be possible to add a touch-screen monitor to one's desktop system to be used for just the Metro stuff.

     

    If that's the case, and I can conceivably have my current dual monitor Aero desktop and ALSO have Metro with touch capability on a 3rd new monitor all at the same time, I'd buy a new touch screen monitor in a heartbeat and I could grow to love Metro.

     

    If it insists on REPLACING my desktop with Metro every few mouse clicks, even on only one of my monitors, I would hate it.

     

    -Noel

    Saturday, September 17, 2011 3:13 PM
  • I don't like it so far.  More realistically, I'm just not sure.  I haven't said "wow" yet in a few days of using it on my HP TouchSmart TM2 tablet with touch and stylus support.  Performance is not very good but maybe that would change with the right hardware.  The whole Metro interface seems like a bolt on and the traditional Windows desktop seems only marginally different than Windows 7.  The same issues I have had with Windows not being able to preview complex fonts is still there which leads me to believe that this Windows 8 is just Windows 7 with some bolted on elements. 

    In the end, I'm not sure how this is going to benefit me.  The metro interface is only being used for "apps", not my regular programs.  But if I were interested in apps, I'd already have an ipad.  The Windows Desktop/Explorer is not touch friendly.  So Windows 8 doesn't seem to offer me anything so far.  Honestly, I was hoping that Microsoft would go ahead and reskin the entire Traditional windows with something more attractive.  Things like expose' and Quicklook on OS X are worth their weight in gold.  Windows looks pitiful next to it.  I've read that traditional programs from the PC won't run on ARM processors.  This means that a tablet with an ARM processor (quiet with great battery life) won't be running photoshop and Microsoft Office?  If that's true it kills all the excitement I've been building up since hearing about having "Full Windows on a pad form device".  Seems like that's not really the case.

    Saturday, September 17, 2011 3:40 PM
  • Hate it.

    Metro is designed for fingers and I do not understand why it is on desktop/laptop which use mouse and keyboard. It would have been better if there was desktop UI with regular task bar, start menu and tiles on same screen similar to widgets on windows 7. A separate tablet UI for touch devices where it would only be Metro UI. The switching between desktop and metro is a bad experience. 

    Saturday, September 17, 2011 3:51 PM
  • Dislike it.

    Totally inadequate for desktop use.

     

    Saturday, September 17, 2011 4:15 PM
  • I have a WP7 and love the metro UI on mobile devices but personally think that metro on a desktop OS is too limiting, uncostomizable and simply ugly (of course b/c of the larger screens, higher resolutions, etc.)
    Saturday, September 17, 2011 4:31 PM
  • I like it because it's a fresh start. It forces developers to re-do things, without legacy strings attached, in the 2011 way. It's a lot of hard work, but I think it'll benefit end users in the end.

    I really hope Microsoft goes through with it, rather than abandoning it and sticking to the legacy Windows 7 way. That'd be taking the easy way out, not pushing innovation forward. Similar to how OpenGL 3 spec was supposed to be revolutionary, but instead they just scaled  back and abandoned all the "cool" features, sticking to same old things.

    Bottom line is, starting from scratch has the potential for much improvement. If it succeeds. Otherwise, the old way will win out anyway, so no loss. It's better to try than not to try to set a new higher standard.

    Saturday, September 17, 2011 4:40 PM
  • Dislike it strongly. I feel Microsoft finally had a great little OS with Win 7 and they have ruined it completely with the Metro UI. I know some folks like it but Microsoft needs to restore full functionality to the desktop and make Metro and option you can turn on and off.
    Saturday, September 17, 2011 4:43 PM
  • I like it because it's a fresh start. It forces developers to re-do things, without legacy strings attached, in the 2011 way. It's a lot of hard work, but I think it'll benefit end users in the end.

    I really hope Microsoft goes through with it, rather than abandoning it and sticking to the legacy Windows 7 way. That'd be taking the easy way out, not pushing innovation forward. Similar to how OpenGL 3 spec was supposed to be revolutionary, but instead they just scaled  back and abandoned all the "cool" features, sticking to same old things.

    Bottom line is, starting from scratch has the potential for much improvement. If it succeeds. Otherwise, the old way will win out anyway, so no loss. It's better to try than not to try to set a new higher standard.

    The problem is productivity of the operating system when used in a desktop context not the ability to develop in it. I like the way Microsoft pushes API's to reflect the more recent paradigms like the jump from DX9 to 10, but this compromises user interaction that is the heart of the system.
    Saturday, September 17, 2011 8:31 PM
  • The feeling i have is that instead of trying to beat apple with a superior product, they dumbed down what they had so it was in the same league as the i-crap stuff. Metro looks like it was designed for kids.

    If i had ever wanted a glorified phone to work with, i would have bought an i-something-or-other ages ago. I have a full pc (in fact, quite a few of them) that i use to do real work, not use glorified web-browser app(lets) that give you little more than the time and the weather, which, incidentally, i could check on my wrist and through the window on the wall.

    Saturday, September 17, 2011 11:27 PM
  • Dislike it STRONGLY.

    I agree with the poster who said, Microsoft in their history, had a stable OS with nice UI for the first time with windows 7 and they are ruining it. I hate windows 8 metro UI on my laptop. I have been playing with it and it is just useless and makes me more frustrated and less productive. I never felt that way, when I moved from XP to Windows 7. In fact, with Windows 7, I loved it more every minute and that is what made it successful.

    Microsoft would fail, then they would fire few people who developed this crap and move on. This is what they have been doing for years. They don't correct their mistakes until it is too late. History shows that, 95 ok, 98 success, ME crap. On NT front, NT4 ok, 2000 crap, XP ok, Vista bullcrap, win7 awesome, win8 crap.

    Windows 8 on desktop with this UI would be equivalent to KIN on phone.

    Sunday, September 18, 2011 5:52 AM
  • I like it because it's a fresh start. It forces developers to re-do things, without legacy strings attached, in the 2011 way. It's a lot of hard work, but I think it'll benefit end users in the end.

    I really hope Microsoft goes through with it, rather than abandoning it and sticking to the legacy Windows 7 way. That'd be taking the easy way out, not pushing innovation forward. Similar to how OpenGL 3 spec was supposed to be revolutionary, but instead they just scaled  back and abandoned all the "cool" features, sticking to same old things.

    Bottom line is, starting from scratch has the potential for much improvement. If it succeeds. Otherwise, the old way will win out anyway, so no loss. It's better to try than not to try to set a new higher standard.

    The problem is productivity of the operating system when used in a desktop context not the ability to develop in it. I like the way Microsoft pushes API's to reflect the more recent paradigms like the jump from DX9 to 10, but this compromises user interaction that is the heart of the system.
    Very well said.
    Sunday, September 18, 2011 5:54 AM
  • I think it needs a lot of work before I will like it.

    It feels like, as a keyboard and mouse user, I am being treated like a second class citizen. On a touch device you can "pinch" the start screen to zoom in and then move and name groups of tiles. I have not been able to find a way to do this on a desktop.

    If you right-click a tile, a list of available options appears along the bottom of the screen. You then have to move the mouse all the way to the bottom-right to access these options. They should appear under the mouse pointer, like every other right-click context-menu has since Windws 95. The same thing happens with the new Startmenu, if you click "Search" in the bottom left corner, the search pane appears on the right side of the screen. This is a horrible way to use a mouse.

    A touch interface needs to be different from a keyboard/mouse interface. There is no reason why the desktop version of Windows can't be different to the touch version, in a way that is easier for use with a keyboard and mouse.

    Sunday, September 18, 2011 8:56 AM
  • 3: Ambivalent

    I am looking to purchase a tablet device in the near future. Maybe an Android device, maybe a Win8 device dependent upon the market. I would use it mainly for browsing the web and watching videos and TV shows. Metro seems like a decent framework for that. They would need a proper Metro UI file browser, currently the Windows Explorer browser just kicks you back into Aero. Also a proper Metro media player.

    The only Metro app I currently use is the weather app. I do lilke the fullscreen display with animated scenes and information. Mine doesn't work however - it only updates when you launch. As this Metro app is not supposed to be closed it's a headache having to close in Task Manager and relaunch so I just stick with the weather gadget on my sidebar.

     

    As for the desktop, I have been using the preview for a few days now. I find I never need to go to the Metro start screen. The fact that the start button doesn't work is an annoyance. I have had to put a link to 'Computer' on my quick launch and from there I can get pretty much where I want to go. I can get to my drives, open  the control panel etc.

    I do like the refreshed interface in Aero. I love the new Task Manager. The ribbon interface I can take or leave - I usually just have it tucked away to save screen space.

     

    I think the finished product needs an option to disable the Metro start screen for desktop users. I'll guess most users will disable it anyhow in the registry.

    Sunday, September 18, 2011 9:01 AM
  • I like it very much; granted I am using it on a Toshiba M400 (Convertible Tablet).

    Siad that I do not agree with the idea to use "Immersive" UI on portable devices.

    The ideal solution would be to have the OS installing "Immersive" as default and allowing users to switch, if they want to, to the "Classic" UI.


    Fritzly
    Sunday, September 18, 2011 9:06 AM
  • Also, we need Store window version - for classic desktop users.

    Store is the only good thing in Metro UI.

     

    Sorry for my English.


    • Edited by adam664 Sunday, September 18, 2011 11:31 AM
    Sunday, September 18, 2011 11:29 AM
  • I like it. In its final form I guess we will have the option to use classic desktop instead of Metro on laptops/desktops.
    HP Pavillion DV2000 Entertainment PC, Centrino DUO Core, 2.5G ram, 80G hard drive running Windows 8 Developer Preview
    Sunday, September 18, 2011 11:37 AM
  • I guess we will have the option to use classic desktop instead of Metro on laptops/desktops.


    Don't guess it, demand it!

    -Noel

    Sunday, September 18, 2011 4:37 PM
  • I guess we will have the option to use classic desktop instead of Metro on laptops/desktops.


    Don't guess it, demand it!

    -Noel


    I am afraid that it is already to late Noel.

    MS has i.m.h.o. already decided that this is what we have to like.

     

     

    Sunday, September 18, 2011 4:47 PM
  • Yes, that's very scary indeed. 

    I just finished commenting on another thread that by the time we got a peek at Windows 7 virtually NOTHING was changed per feedback from users.

    -Noel

    Sunday, September 18, 2011 4:54 PM
  • I like it

     

    I really like it and I think that the future is the METRO Interface.

     

    Keep up the work Microsoft!

    Sunday, September 18, 2011 5:16 PM
  • Dislike it.

    See my post on the subject "... and a Tablet is not a Desktop (or Laptop)"

    We have a bunch of smartphone addicts who assume computer-like features on a phone means computers "naturally" need phone like intefaces.

    It will only be after they get weary of reaching up to touch their desktop screen that they'll realize "Dear God, this was a categorically stupid concept, did I really let my addiction to my smartphone lead me to believe this was a good idea?

    Yep, there are good applications for touchscreens for a business environment.  (1) is order entry screens in the food industry.  Trouble is, I don't enter food orders at my desk, so I don't want to be goobering up my monitor screen with fingerprints, nor do I want to have to work around an interface designed for touch when I have no intention of touching.

    There are vendors currently providing touch capability for the market segments that need it or can put it to good use.  Trouble is, there are far MORE machines where touch would be completely out of place, so WE don't want our interfaces mucked up to support the toy and fast-food markets. 

    Sunday, September 18, 2011 5:28 PM
  • I like it for its novelty but I don't think I'd like it for my daily computing.

    I don't use any tablet, smart phone, or touchpad.  Just keyboard and mouse based desktops and notebooks.  I am at an advanced age, but i am still keenly interested in new Windows interfaces and some stuff under the hood.  But the idea of this one being a way of life for this non-mobile user turns me off.  To me Windows is all about the apps anyway, not the OS, but even so I don't want to use it.   It is beyond the next step for Windows to me.  It is just too jarring.  And don't talk to me about resisting change.  That is just human nature. 


    Colin Barnhorst Windows 7 Ultimate x64 on DIY with 6GB ram.
    Sunday, September 18, 2011 5:31 PM
  • I like it.

    I simply cannot see how the conventional (out-dated) desktop could have been improved. It's the correct direction to go, it's the future.

    Sunday, September 18, 2011 5:45 PM
  • I'm also an old geezer who fondly remembers DOS 2.11. That aside, my impression of using Metro on a desktop seems pretty much like using Windows 3.1 with a lot of lipstick. It basically is a full screen, colorful Program (aka app)Manager clone complete without multitasking. An now Metro has "improved" this clone by crippling mouse and keyboard functionality and the ability to customize. I can also envision those who are required to do 8 hour days in a productive environment developing the shoulder equivalent of carpel tunnel syndrome. The big screw-up was Msoft making the Metro THE primary os and desktop we all came to love just another secondary app with a take it or leave it attitude.
    Sunday, September 18, 2011 6:32 PM
  • I like it.

    I simply cannot see how the conventional (out-dated) desktop could have been improved. It's the correct direction to go, it's the future.


    One has to ask...  Did it NEED to be improved?  What couldn't you do?

     

    Going years without a major paradigm shift is bad in what way?

     

    -Noel

    Sunday, September 18, 2011 6:37 PM
  • 1) Love it! It's what we've been needing. Perfect!


    Thanks,
    Bobby Cannon
    http://sharpdeck.net
    Sunday, September 18, 2011 6:41 PM
  • I agree.  If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
    Colin Barnhorst Windows 7 Ultimate x64 on DIY with 6GB ram.
    Sunday, September 18, 2011 6:47 PM
  • I sense a (missed?) opportunity to split Windows into two things:

    • Windows 8 Home/Portable - A touchy feely Metro game playing handy sidekick system.
    • Windows 8 Professional - A real OS on which Metro apps are developed and real work is done.

     

    What advantage is there to having one system that's not good at either one?

     

    -Noel

    Sunday, September 18, 2011 7:39 PM
  • I'm against the multiple-editions scheme that MSFT Marketing cooked up starting with XP.  I don't see the need for more than one RETAIL edition of Windows.  I realize that there are some needs in the market, such as Starter, but I do not see why there needs to be anything but just Windows for RETAIL and OEM sales. 

    The history is that some segment of the user base loses something just so Marketing can build in an a "value-added" element.  Look at the illogical structure of lifecycle support.  Windows Vista Home Premium and Ultimate will go out of support two years BEFORE XP Home.  Windows 7 Home Premium and Ultimate go out of support in less than a year after that.  If Ultimate editions were supposed to be everything, how come Professional (Business) gets five years MORE support?  We are a fragmented community on these issues.  If there is only one edition we will all be in the same boat and our protests about dumb decisions will carry maximum impact.


    Colin Barnhorst Windows 7 Ultimate x64 on DIY with 6GB ram.
    • Edited by Cbarnhorst Sunday, September 18, 2011 8:02 PM
    Sunday, September 18, 2011 8:01 PM
  • Like it.

    I don`t know how it`s working with you guys, but after a strange initial impression, working with metro on the desktop makes a lot more sense to me, I know everbody here included myself is used to the good old desk metaphore we used since Win 95, but here is the thing, launching, swithing and organizing aplications became so much faster with metro than before, that I just can`t go back, and even when I though swtching beetween metro and desktop should look jarring, it feels, well you know, as "fast and fluid" as they said it should.

     

    First I organized everthing I used most to be shown first in the start screen, and then I added the live titles to show me info.

     

    now to switch between desktop apps all I do is press win key and choose the one I want, if I want to use the metro IE, i just click the left side of the screen and i`m there, i found much more efortless than clicking in the little icons in the taskbar, or even using alt+ tab.

     

    i`m finding a great experience overall, the only gripe i have is using the metro IE10 and managing tabs is painfully slow and clunky having to right click to show the tabs bar, using the keyboard shortcuts made thinks much faster, but it would be better if hovering the upper edge showed the controls, oh, and metro IE reloads the page if you spend lots of time without returning to it, my internet is not fast and that`s very annoying. but regardless metro IE10 things have been great with metro on my personal experience.

     

    (sorry for my bad english, couldn`t change the spellchecker language to english, but, you know, its only a developer preview... not aimed to general public)


    • Edited by Cesar D Sunday, September 18, 2011 8:09 PM
    Sunday, September 18, 2011 8:07 PM
  • In Windows XP, Windows actually had less version differences than it did in the 95/98 era. Why do I say this? Because before Windows XP, Windows was actually two separate operating systems. One was the 95/98/Me that we all remember. It was geared toward home users, was highly backward compatible with older programs, and was notorious for crashing all the time. Windows 9x is an example of what happens when you push an old architecture too far. The last version of Windows in this line, Windows Millennium Edition (also known as Windows Me) was Microsoft's greatest Windows failure. At the same time, another, completely different OS with the same UI and name appeared. That was Windows NT. Windows NT 4.0 was the Windows NT equivalent to Windows 95 and 98, while Windows 2000, one of Microsoft's best Windows operating systems, was the business equivalent of Windows Me. Ultimately, plain old "Windows" failed in 2001, when Windows Millennium was poorly recieved and Windows XP came out only a year later. Today's Windows is not the plain old "Windows" that we remember from 1998, but Windows NT. Windows XP was intended to merge Microsoft's two product lines into one single OS, but Microsoft couldn't discontinue separate home and business versions entirely. It is definitely in Microsoft's best interest to create separate home and professional versions of Windows 8, one with Metro as the primary UI and one where Metro is a secondary application layer for running special programs. Think about it. Microsoft could sell Windows 8 Home OEM for $100, while selling Windows 8 Professional for $140, like Windows 7. I know that despite the price jump, I would buy the professional version. Imagine the money-making opportunity for Microsoft! Isn't that what's most important to any company? In this case, it would work to the advantage of both customers and Microsoft.

    Sunday, September 18, 2011 8:16 PM
  • The NT branch was created because the MSDOS based branch was not ever going to be what was needed in enterprises.  When the NT branch matured in 2000 the MSDOS branch was dropped.  The reason there were two different editions was that the NT and Win9x codebases were totally different.  No such code-base difference exists between editions of Windows 7 so different editions are NOT needed. 

    One edition of Windows with user selectivity between Metro and traditional UIs is sufficient.  You don't see Mac Home and Pro.  Why do we need Windows 8 Starter, Home Basic, Home Premium, Professional, Enterprise, Ultimate and who knows what else?  They were mandated by Marketing in order to enhance the revenue stream.  There is no technical reason barring a unified edition.  There is no need for anything but Windows 8.  Just Windows 8.  Separate editions are NOT in the user's best interest.  Any desired specialization can be achieved by roles that can be enabled and disabled.  Even the N and K versions can be handled that way.

    This debate is long and sorely needed!


    Colin Barnhorst Windows 7 Ultimate x64 on DIY with 6GB ram.

    • Edited by Cbarnhorst Sunday, September 18, 2011 8:59 PM
    Sunday, September 18, 2011 8:55 PM
  • Separate editions is NOT in the user's best interest. 


    Colin Barnhorst Windows 7 Ultimate x64 on DIY with 6GB ram.

    Well that depends upon how much you're prepared to pay for the features you never use, I think.

    As to Metro on the desktop, I like it and I think it will work. It still needs a lot of work, some aspects of keyboard/mouse control in particular need refining. The more you use it though, the more you can start to see the value. Especially when you think about the kinds of information applications could present to you via the Live Tiles approach.

    Sunday, September 18, 2011 9:01 PM
  • I have never had any problems with the different editons of Windows. For me, the home editions are usually sufficient, and I probably save money buying them compared to what I would pay if Windows had only one edition. As for why there is no Mac Home and Mac Professional, this is because Apple only has about 9% of the total PC market, most of which is home users and graphic designers who probably fell in love with Metro as soon as they saw the demo. Windows caters to a more typical audience, but with widely varying needs. I, for one, think it would be best if the option to disable Metro as the primary interface was either in the installer, or based on a separate version of Windows. Most companies do what is best for themselves, rather than the customer, and it is to Microsoft's benefit to include the multiple editions idea mentioned above, considering they, like all companies, want to make as much money as possible. At least they are not as guilty as Apple in this regard.
    Sunday, September 18, 2011 9:04 PM
  • As far as the "live tiles" approach goes, there is nothing here that can't be duplicated on the desktop. That's what Windows Sidebar is for. As for navigating the Start Screen, I figured it out, but that didn't make me like it. On the contrary, I dreaded opening up the Start Screen and any new Metro applications, since they typically got in the way of actually using the computer for me. Why do I need a list of applications I want to close when I am actually trying to scroll down in the real Internet Explorer (not Metro)? As for Metro-style IE, it seems incomplete, inspired by Google Chrome's "less is more" idea, which I never liked. My Internet Explorer 9 performs like Google Chrome while looking like a better Internet Explorer 8, and I'd like to keep it that way. Even the completed Metro apps (Internet Explorer 10) feel rough and feature-incomplete. Metro feels like a cell phone interface that has been pasted onto computers. People don't want this, at least not as far as I can tell.

    For more information about Windows 8's problems, read this: http://www.extremetech.com/computing/96249-5-deal-breaking-flaws-in-windows-8. I agree with just about every complaint in the article.

    Sunday, September 18, 2011 9:27 PM
  • At least they are not as guilty as Apple in this regard.

    Microsoft doesn't make and sell computers.  The cost of OS/X and Windows over a three year period is essentially the same.  Instead of buying a new OS from Apple every 18 months you pay twice as much for Windows but get free service packs.  It is pretty much the same.

    I want to see one edition at the current price of Home Premium. 


    Colin Barnhorst Windows 7 Ultimate x64 on DIY with 6GB ram.
    Sunday, September 18, 2011 9:31 PM
  • I am actually using it on Acer W500 tab. Metro UI does work there very very well but at the end of the day it still feels like a seperate app that could have been added to windows 7. Reason I say it is as soon as I plug in my USB key there is nice big notification popping up, I can do usual, open, use as extra memory, do nothing and so on. I select browse and standard file explorer pops up with to small scroll bar and many other to small buttons. Did you try to resize the left hand side pane on touch screen?!!

     

    MS we need UI styled file explorer or stock file explorer to have an option to add finger friendly support.

    For example to resize the mentioned left had side navigation pane I put two fingers in side it and slide them away from each other.

    Sunday, September 18, 2011 9:40 PM
  • One edition of Windows at Home Premium's price is unlikely. If Microsoft released only one Windows 8 edition, they would likely use a weighted average to calcuate the price of the single edition, based on the amount of money they made selling Windows in multiple editions. Do you expect to get Windows 8 Ultimate for the price of Windows Vista/7 Home Premium?
    Sunday, September 18, 2011 10:00 PM
  • I Like it. I find the metro UI to be nice, though it needs a lot of refining. Such as my problem of the side swipe switching in "legacy" programs that are full screen. Namely games that need there to be no definitive side of the screen.

    My other major quirk is that I love the new Metro IE10 experience, but the lack of having flash and java plug-ins really hinders me. I use many flash based websites in my browsing, even if it is just for an audio file or something, and having to open the desktop version to get them not only takes more time, but interrupts my browsing experience and takes me away from the webpage, which is bad. The other problem with the Metro IE10 is the lack of a save picture functionality.

    Another thing Microsoft needs to do is use mouse based gestures to mimic the touch based ones, rather than use a plethora of new keyboard shortcuts. It makes the system seem disjointed from it's touch brethren, and would make switching between the two different environments a troublesome matter.

    Another disjointing matter is that the system feels wrong using a trackpad on a laptop, while I have never been a fan of trackpads on Windows (Mac OS and Apple just do it better) the Metro UI and Windows 8 makes it downright unusable. My normal multitouch gestures no longer work, and the need for a lot of space to operate all the touch features with a cursor just make the miniscule size of most trackpads feel even smaller.

    While I'm sure the touch experience is amazing with the Metro UI (I've yet to use it), The Windows 8 development team needs to do a lot of work to make the OS feel like one unified and refined experience across it's three major platforms, the PC, the laptop, and the tablet. And for the love of all things good PLEASE allow plugins for the Metro version of IE10. And get it's rendering system to work right. Half the websites I go to still don't render right in IE9, let alone 10.

    Sunday, September 18, 2011 10:09 PM
  • Dislike it. They need to make several changes before it is suitable for use with a mouse+keyboard.

    Sunday, September 18, 2011 10:26 PM
  • One edition of Windows at Home Premium's price is unlikely. If Microsoft released only one Windows 8 edition, they would likely use a weighted average to calcuate the price of the single edition, based on the amount of money they made selling Windows in multiple editions. Do you expect to get Windows 8 Ultimate for the price of Windows Vista/7 Home Premium?


    "Unlikely" doesn't mean we shouldn't ask for what we want.  "Unlikely" is for quitters.

    I don't expect for there be an Ultimate at any price.  Windows 7 Ultimate is a poor buy because of its lack of extended support.  There is no point to it if you don't do language switching or use BitLocker.  Microsoft never even delivered what was promised when Vista Ultimate was announced.  Ultimate needs to go regardless of what else happens.  It is an embarrasment.  I sure am not going to buy a Windows 8 Ultimate if there is one.  I don't use a single thing in Windows 7 Ultimate that isn't already in Pro. 


    Colin Barnhorst Windows 7 Ultimate x64 on DIY with 6GB ram.
    Sunday, September 18, 2011 10:44 PM
  • 1) I like it. More so on my tablet than my desktop pc. I would say I love it on my tablet, but merely like it on my desktop.
    Developer. Windows, Mac OS X, iOS, WP7, Silverlight.
    Sunday, September 18, 2011 10:56 PM
  • 3) Jury is still out.

    There are quite a few things with the Metro UI that don't quite work right yet, and I can deal with that.  But I think I'm coming to a couple of conclusions about Windows 8 that if they don't change will effect my productivity.  Keep in mind I still spend a lot more time in front of a full computer or laptop than I do a tablet, and that won't change anytime soon.

    1. Give me back the Windows 7 Start, Programs, and all the other links. My workstation has hundreds of applications that I use. How in the hell am I going to find them in a flat space like metro. The program tree in Windows 7 is very fast to navigate, and I can ignore applications or tools I don't use. BTW, I do SCCM, Windows Server Admin, AD, write code, and then there are all the utilities that I use.  Just go look at your own Windows 7 programs folders, how much stuff do you have there.
    2. Metro feels too much like the limitations I have with the iPad.  I don't want an app to suspend when I put it in the background, if it's doing something that needs processing power, let it use it.  Makes sense to suspend video, but not an app that's downloading something for me that is quite happy in the background.
    3. Switching apps in metro is clunky, unless I'm missing something. Alt Tab is ok, but feels so XP.
    4. I can understand the interface for a tablet where screen space is limited, but why does that apply to my desktop.
    5. It would be really nice if I could see the comments in Facebook, I pretty much gave up on the metro social interface and went back to the browser.  Yeah, I know Alpha code. :)
    6. It would really help if the Windows 8 group would put together some videos on how to do some of the new functions.  I still haven't figured out how you move around a group of blocks on the metro screen, I know it can be done, but no clue how.  Lots of that kind of stuff.
    7. There are some things that are running that I just can't close, two of them are IE and control panel.  Sorry guys, you need to put a nice visible X on there to close the session when we are done with it.  It's been one of the things that came out of Windows Phone 6.x, the need to let users close things.  Guess what iPad/iPhone is a pain in the neck to do this too, and there are apps that I have to kill because there isn't a way to turn them off when I'm done with them.  Don't make me go to Task Manager to stop an application, let me close stuff when I'm done with it.
    8. Oh, and one more request, the same one I've had for Windows 3.1, 95, 98, NT 4.0, 2000, XP, 7, 8. I am NOT one of the brainless morons that you think all users are, I am a power user, and have been using Windows since before version 1; don't make me navigate through these friendly interfaces.  Don't believe me, how many times do you have to click to change your IP settings, no fair modifying the UI settings in 435 different places.  It used to be only a few clicks, took me ages to find it in Windows 7 because it was buried under lots of useless UI.  There are ways around it, but I have to change a bunch of settings to get things in place so that I can do it quickly, then when I have to use a USER pc without all those tweaks it's a pain in the neck.  How about a simple question at first logon, are you an experienced Windows user, if so would you like us to enable the advanced functionality?  If we answer yes, then do things like show the run command, put the control panel applets in the start menu, show all the administrative tools, the list goes on and on.
    9. I installed Office 2010, didn't appreciate all the start menu stuff showing up in the splash screen, put those in Start Programs where I can find them, the main apps Excel, Word, PPT, Outlook, go ahead and put in the screen.
    10. Why don't applications that are running out of metro show up on the task bar?  I needed to switch out, but to get back to this I have to use Alt Tab.  Would have been easier to be able to just click on the task bar like I do in Windows 7.
    11. Full screen, nice on a tablet, on a large display, not so nice.  I've found myself not using the metro browser and going to the full IE because I can resize the windows.  I have a feeling when I'm on a desktop and probably a laptop I'll ignore the metro interface and use the old style interface.  Have you considered letting metro be a background desktop with stuff sitting above it?  Lower right corner brings metro to the foreground?

    Sorry if this sounds negative, there is a lot of interesting stuff in there, can't wait for apps that can leverage it, particularly Outlook. Looking forward to seeing how this morphs in the Beta.


    Bob
    Sunday, September 18, 2011 11:39 PM
  • Dislike It

    The desktop pc is no place for a mobile OS.  The interaction between mouse and keyboard with metro couldn't be worse.  Why did you break the start button?

     

    Snap is always launching something when my daughter is drawing in ink pad.  IE with metro is missing so many things it is maddening.  I have looked up how to turn off metro and have done so.   

    I like Windows 8 other than metro.  It is much faster to boot.

    Note to Microsoft : If you want to make an OS for tablets and touchscreens, leave it as an option during OS installation.  If you want to push "special apps" like certain "other" companies, good luck with that.



    • Edited by espaghetti1 Sunday, September 18, 2011 11:54 PM
    Sunday, September 18, 2011 11:50 PM
  • I actually think that Windows is better in multiple editions. Nobody uses all of the features in Windows, so why buy an edition of Windows with features you don't use? I don't see anything wrong with multiple editions, but if you do that's your opinion.
    Sunday, September 18, 2011 11:59 PM
  • RSS feed font in metro cannot be re-sized with ctrl + scroll up/ down.
    Monday, September 19, 2011 12:01 AM
  • OK, new opinion about IE in metro view: very useless.  I installed 64bit version of OS.....no flash for me in IE :(
    Monday, September 19, 2011 12:05 AM
  • Like I said, one edition, one price, roles that can be enabled or disabled.  Nobody pays for anything they don't use.
    Colin Barnhorst Windows 7 Ultimate x64 on DIY with 6GB ram.
    Monday, September 19, 2011 12:15 AM
  • I have changed my opinion about Metro on the desktop. My opinion is now that I dislike it.

    As I used Windows 8, I was optimistic about Metro on the desktop, thinking I could adapt to the new user interface. As it turns out, I could, but this revealed that the new UI is hopelessly flawed. As it turns out, Microsoft's keynote at BUILD was mostly about the touch interface. Steven Sinofsky showed Windows 8 running on a regular desktop, but that was only as an "it works on desktops, too" demonstration rather than actually trying to show how Metro was made for the desktop (because it wasn't). I can't justify buying a version of Windows that uses a cell phone interface where it isn't needed. Cell phone interfaces like Metro are basic and simplified because that's all cell phones are capable of. My desktop is capable of so much more, it's hard to justify even using Metro as an app launcher. For comparison, what Windows 7 on the desktop feels like and what Windows 8 feels like on tablets:

    WARNING! I recommend turning on YouTube's Safety Mode before watching any videos.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mf7-ixllcgo

    Don't go away, I'm not done yet. This is what Windows 8 is like on regular computers:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6o47N-aYd08&feature=related

    The first link is to the original song (there are no words in either one). It is smooth, easy to listen to, and has a pleasing sound. Now, listen to the second one. It's choppy, made of disconnected samples, and slowed down. This is similar to the workflow and Metro navigation on Windows 8 with normal input devices (mouse and keyboard). I've said this before, but this seemed like the best way to demonstrate how I see Windows 8: a cell phone interface on a real computer. If touch is completely removed from the picture, the Metro UI becomes hard to justify.

    Monday, September 19, 2011 12:21 AM
  • Dislike it STRONGLY.

    I agree with the poster who said, Microsoft in their history, had a stable OS with nice UI for the first time with windows 7 and they are ruining it. I hate windows 8 metro UI on my laptop. I have been playing with it and it is just useless and makes me more frustrated and less productive. I never felt that way, when I moved from XP to Windows 7. In fact, with Windows 7, I loved it more every minute and that is what made it successful.

    Microsoft would fail, then they would fire few people who developed this crap and move on. This is what they have been doing for years. They don't correct their mistakes until it is too late. History shows that, 95 ok, 98 success, ME crap. On NT front, NT4 ok, 2000 crap, XP ok, Vista bullcrap, win7 awesome, win8 crap.

    Windows 8 on desktop with this UI would be equivalent to KIN on phone.

    Exactly! I HATE it. Really sad. I love Windows 7. But this Metro crap is an abomination.
    Monday, September 19, 2011 12:34 AM
  • I learned how to use the product.  I didn't take the time to watch the BUILD keynote, or read anything about how to use Metro prior to installed the Developer Release.  The first time I booted into Windows 8, I became frustrated within minutes.  I decided to take a step back and do some research, and that helped to get me going and completely changed my perspective.  The new OS is definitely a change and has a bit of a learning curve.

    I don't find the transition from Metro to desktop to be that jarring.  What will be more important is how Metro app developers allow interaction between Metro / desktop.  I'm hoping that I will be able to do most of my work in Metro, and only switch to the traditional interface when needed (I'm thinking of IE and how it allows me to open a page in the traditional environment straight from the Metro app).  I've also done a little reading on WinRT, and I like what I've read so far.  It sounds like there will be some really cool possibilities with Metro.

    Other than that, I noticed how liquid smooth the OS is.  For a pre-beta build, this thing moves along nicely.  I will be interested to follow Windows 8 throughout it's development process.  I like what I see so far, and am very excited to see what else Microsoft has in store for us!

    Monday, September 19, 2011 12:44 AM
  • Really dislike Metro.  It reminds me of my coworkers who automatically full screen any program they are using, even though they only get white space.  When I ask why they do that, they have no answer.  It's a throwback to the days when we used smaller monitors.  Why do I need IE to open fully in a 24" monitor and I have no access to the desktop?  Why is there no way to close IE and return to the start window?  (Same for all those Metro apps.)

    At least with Win7 (and Win8 in 'classic' mode) I can have multiple windows open on screen and arrange them where I want them.

    Those coworkers who only want to read email and use a web browser (and always do it full screen) will love Metro.  Although, they may get frustrated when they can't find an easy way to close IE or the email client.
    Monday, September 19, 2011 1:12 AM
  • 1) Love it! It's what we've been needing. Perfect!

    Speak for yourself, it is not what I have been needing. In Windows 7 after I download something, I click "Downloads" from the Startmenu and the downloads folder opens.

    Please explain to me how I can do this with the Metro screen.

    This is only one example of the many things I won't be able to do without a Startmenu.

    Monday, September 19, 2011 9:45 PM
  • reminds me of my coworkers who automatically full screen any program they are using, even though they only get white space.  When I ask why they do that, they have no answer.

     

    I know EXACTLY what you mean!

     

    Helping my college-resident son with a computer project the other day, I watched him switch from a full-screen PDF describing the project to his full-screen Xcode environment (he has a Mac).  He made mistakes transcribing the text the instructor wanted him to output from the program.  I asked him why he didn't tile the windows so he could see one while working in the other, and his answer was "I like having Xcode full screen."

     

    Now, maybe some people will like working with Metro, but it in NO WAY improves the real work environment where it matters when details are gotten right or wrong.


    -Noel

    Monday, September 19, 2011 9:54 PM
  • - Finally, Windows still lacks of organization concepts that other OS adopted long ago, like switching to multiple desktops. I'd love to Alt-Tab from my Visual Studio with a debugger running to my Socials desktop with all my Metro Tiles showing my mail, friends and such instead of jump to Start. The current model just make me feel that Windows is hiding things from me.



    +10

    That indeed would be absolutely awesome. 

    In the current form, I dislike it.

    I am sold for a "one OS to rule them all" idea.  But not in this form.  They took the desktop and hidden it away in a box in the metro eco system.  I think that's pretty much unacceptable.

    Monday, September 19, 2011 10:49 PM
  • I Dislike It ... but the jury is still out.

    My first reactions were VERY negative.  Looked like a child's Big Chief Tablet Paper and Pencil.  After using the product for a couple of days and a MS update, I see potential for the new Metro 'Start' menu.  Although it is very obvious that the design came from the phone paradigm, in it's present state it isn't acceptable as a user interface for touch or the desktop.  The tiles can be moved around and can now be resized.  The greatest issue at the moment is the lack of an organization structure for the tiles - perhaps the abilities to group tiles into categories or functional groupings.  In addition, it is very awkward to have all the monitor real estate available but the only functional area to place tiles is a center strip in the middle.  If the use of real estate could be better managed for the desktop by changing or optimizing for a tablet, touch screen or smaller monitor, then perhaps this issue could be minimized.

    As to the use of the Metro UI for general applications, there isn't any way to describe the experience except that it sucks to revert back to a full screen without controls to minimize, shrink, or otherwise place the workspace in a desired location or to close the application when done. As others have pointed out, the inability to close an application is a big mistake.  It is GREAT from a technology standpoint - at least in the simple, controlled examples that currently make up the metro application portfolio today - but what happens when REAL applications that require lots of memory are suspended or are suspended when you don't want them suspended.  We don't have the insight to the final version - but at the present MS has a VERY, VERY long way to go to maintain an acceptable user interface for all.

    Monday, September 19, 2011 11:17 PM
  • I dislike it on the DESKTOP. I like it on a TABLET device.

    Just a reminder: Remember guys the question is whether you like or dislike it on a DESKTOP/LAPTOP computer, not on a tablet.

    Tuesday, September 20, 2011 7:53 AM
  • Dislike It

     

    I think this is a major blunder for Microsoft to force a touch-centric UI on desktop users. It is unintuative, clunky, and creates a jarring and fragmented experience for those that truly *work* in Windows.

    I think the Metro interface and applications have great potential for touch-centric devices like tablets, but are clearly not the right choice for a desktop or laptop.




    I completely agree with Richard. A touch UI does not work on a traditional desktop, it is not intuitive with a keyboard and mouse.

    I am not looking forward to learning a new OS which is what this feels like to me. My father struggled with Vista so I encouraged him to go with 7 which he really likes, he will not be able to cope with the differences that 8 brings and I'm sure he's not the only one.

    I get the feeling that MS is trying to move away from the desktop to touch devices too much. I realise that the old desktop can be used but it still feels awkward having to change over from Metro.

    MS did great with 7, I feel this is a step back towards the problems of usability that Vista created.

    Maybe it will be better with the beta and maybe the final release will be great but my first impressions are not good and I'm left thinking Mac and OS X Lion are the way for me now.

    Tuesday, September 20, 2011 8:49 AM
  • Dislike It

     

    There's should be option to completely disable Metro Start screen.


    +1

    Metro breaks fundamental design of "window" applications. If i want to reduce my user experience to data display only, i'd turn on my ipad or galaxy s. If i have to do my work i want be able to start feature rich applications without switching between virtual start screens.

    Usually i have one or more browser instances, skype, and my dev tools open and running, need to copy between applications and quickly pull up calc or notepad e.g.. There is no place for metro in my virtual world...

    Metro and Windows just dont go together, btw guys voted for "Like it" in this thread should ask themselves how often they used gadgets or sidebar in vista/win 7.

    Beside that i really appreciate technical stuff win 8 will deliver, especially hyer-v and azure. But Metro is just fail.


    Absolutely, if I want the Metro experience I will use my iPad too, if I want more control and need to do "proper" work I use my desktop. If I wanted just apps and didn't need the amount of control traditional windows gives I would get rid of my desktop and just use my iPad.
    Tuesday, September 20, 2011 9:04 AM
  • Love it.

    Makes my EP121 Slate and HP 2740p Tablet PC so much easier to use. WinKey plus app you launch gets me to the "legacy" apps as fast as ever and as more and more apps transition to the Metro style integration the use of the "normal" desktop we all learned to love and hate at the same time will get reduced more and more I guess.

    M

    Tuesday, September 20, 2011 9:14 AM
  • Just a reminder: Remember guys the question is whether you like or dislike it on a DESKTOP/LAPTOP computer, not on a tablet.

    This!

     

    Tuesday, September 20, 2011 10:01 AM
  • Dislike It!

    I like Metro, but not on my Desktop PC. Metro is great for tablets and other phone-like devices but I don't think it is the right way for desktops.

    I have many applications installed on my desktop and really need some sort of Start menu. Metro was designed for touch gestures, not for mouse and keyboard making it difficult to work with on a desktop. The fact I have to keep switching between the two environments (Aero/Metro) is highly annoying, not very productive and it just does not feel right. The environments look and work differently and do not form one uniform experience. I doubt they can ever fit together. It is distracting.

    Don't get me wrong I like Metro but not on a desktop PC. Please make it possible to choose between the usual Aero (with Start menu) and Metro experiences and don't try to blend them together too much.


    • Edited by Petr Malik Tuesday, September 20, 2011 11:59 AM
    Tuesday, September 20, 2011 11:25 AM
  • Love it. Simple and elegant. Fantastic font! Segoe UI Light is brilliant! However made the font should be granted a prize!

    Finally, no windows. Who needs them nowadays? Why worry about minimizing, restoring, closing. Just click and work! That is what Metro about. Work as you want! When working is joy, that is what I feel about Metro. I really love it since I got it on my Windows Phone device and I continue to like working in it.

    I think that Metro beats all the existing design concepts and implementations. I am serious.


    Well this is the world we live in And these are the hands we're given...

    Tuesday, September 20, 2011 11:52 AM
  • 1) Like it. Just two suggestions:

    > mouse based gesture controls would make metro ui on non-touch devices very convenient

    > better integration of desktop apps and metro apps; e.g. split screen with a desktop app and a metro app!

    Tuesday, September 20, 2011 12:28 PM
  • Finally, no windows. Who needs them nowadays?

    How about the people who need to run more then 5 applications simultanously while preferably seeing all of them side by side? You know... people who actually do some serious work.

    Why worry about minimizing, restoring, closing. Just click and work! That is what Metro about. Work as you want!

    No, not as "you" want. More like how windows / msft thinks you should work. And why worry about minimizing, restoring, closing? I'll refer you back to my previous paragraphes. I'm at work now, working on a .NET project. Applications running:

    - vs20011
    - sql management studio
    - notepadd++
    - profiler
    - media player
    - multiple instances of explorer
    - browser
    - outlook
    - msn
    - word
    - excell
    - remote desktop

    Of all those, there's really only one I could afford to ditch and that is media-player. Any other will break my productivity.

    You were saying?

    I really love it since I got it on my Windows Phone device and I continue to like working in it.

    I'm curious... What kind of "work" do you do on your phone?

    I think that Metro beats all the existing design concepts and implementations. I am serious.

    If you are talking about existing tablet experiences, then I agree.

    Tuesday, September 20, 2011 12:34 PM
  • How about the people who need to run more then 5 applications simultanously while preferably seeing all of them side by side? You know... people who actually do some serious work.


    C'mon my address space shares 130+ processes with near 20+ simultaneously running apps (oh no, these aren't your solitaire). What's wrong with Metro? How about the good old Alt+Tab which is supported in Metro?

    >>No, not as "you" want. More like how windows / msft thinks you should work. And why worry about minimizing, restoring, closing? I'll refer you back to my >>previous paragraphes. I'm at work now, working on a .NET project. Applications running:

    >>Of all those, there's really only one I could afford to ditch and that is media-player. Any other will break my productivity.

    How dare you! Is that it?

    >>I'm curious... What kind of "work" do you do on your phone?

    Oh, dude, your're hilarious! Checking mail is a part of anybody's work. Working with reports isn't that easy but this is only due to small screen.

    >>If you are talking about existing tablet experiences, then I agree.

    Of course I am talking about tablets. But desktop won't suffer from it.

     

    Nothing personal. Have a nice.

     


    Well this is the world we live in And these are the hands we're given...
    Tuesday, September 20, 2011 1:15 PM
  • >>C'mon my address space shares 130+ processes with near 20+ simultaneously running apps (oh no, these aren't your solitaire). What's wrong with Metro? How about the good old Alt+Tab which is supported in Metro?

    Alt+tab switches the focus of applications.  It doesn't show them side by side.  And no, 'snap' is not an adequate substitute for working with multiple windows

    Oh, dude, your're hilarious! Checking mail is a part of anybody's work. Working with reports isn't that easy but this is only due to small screen

    Last time I checked, READING (mails) and RETRIEVING data (reports) is consumption of services.  Not productive work.
    I'm talking about the people who are programming your mail/report client.  Or the people who are actually inputting/creating the data that you query in your consumption app.  Or even the one who's creating/formatting the mail (which could include data gathered from a series of files, applications, websites,...) being send to you before you read it. 

    Of course I am talking about tablets.

    This thread is not about metro on tablets.  It's about metro on desktops.

    But desktop won't suffer from it.

    Having used win8 for about a week pretty intensively, I consider that to be a demonstrably false statement (with regards to win8 as it exists today).

     

    Have a nice day yourself.

    Tuesday, September 20, 2011 2:09 PM
  • Of course I am talking about tablets. But desktop won't suffer from it.

    The desktop is already suffering from it. The windows 7 Startmenu includes links to the following items:

    the current user folder

    Documents library

    Pictures library

    Music library

    Downloads folder

    Computer

    Network

    Recently used files

    Recently used programs

    Shortcuts to any file or folder the user wants quick access to

    an All Programs button

    None of these are available in the Metro start screen, all of these features are gone. How is this a better UI for users who need access to things other than Metro apps?

    Tuesday, September 20, 2011 2:46 PM
  • You mean that you can't stack your screens like you did with your windows? Is that the only concern? Well, I see your concern now. Possibly that's partly why they left Windows UI.

    Why isn't snap a substitute? If you could split and stack several screens wouldn't that be your stacked windows?

    Any analysis is a part of synthesis. If reading wouldn't be productive would you join this forum? Reading is a part of collaboration and MSFT clearly understands it. People need to stay in contact. People need to share their ideas, their works.

    But, you know what? Your position looks pretty clear to me. If somebody is not doing what I do a PC (I see, you call yourself a developer), he's a waster. All the best with your illusions. PC nowadays aren't what they've been in 70s take it or not. They are mostly for browsing, office work, entertainment.

    If what you've said is your vision of a typical user of your dev. works, consider re-shaping it.


    Well this is the world we live in And these are the hands we're given...
    Tuesday, September 20, 2011 3:02 PM
  • Of course I am talking about tablets. But desktop won't suffer from it.

    None of these are available in the Metro start screen, all of these features are gone. How is this a better UI for users who need access to things other than Metro apps?

    They are. Tap/click Search and get want you want. You have an option of most recently used apps. How many of they are you using on a daily basis. Three? Half a dozen? Do you need all that gazillion of apps on your desktop/Start menu all the time. Get what you need when you need it. Since Vista you see these 5 apps in the Star menu, others can be filtered with the Search field. Same idea here.

    All that being said, I am afraid MSFT does NOT target Metro for the desktop... So all of you who do not get the idea of Metro may rest assured, you won't leave your icon clutter on the desktop.

    However, personally, I'll prefer Metro to Windows Forms.


    Well this is the world we live in And these are the hands we're given...
    Tuesday, September 20, 2011 3:11 PM
  • 3) Mixed

     

    They broke multi-tasking.  The inability to have several Apps visible at the same time is a complete show-stopper for a desktop UI.  While this is especially true for business uses, it's also true for many consumer-style usage patterns.  I have two large monitors at home because it's fantastic to be able to simultaneously view four or five windows.  The Metro interface scales horrendously to large view areas for most apps.  Microsoft could go a long way towards fixing that by allowing Metro-apps to run in a window on the desktop.

    Consider IE for a non-touch user.  The desktop version is strictly superior.  By simply utilizing F11, you can seamlessly transition between an "immersive" full-screen experience and windowed mode for viewing multiple pages (or another application).  (You also get the choice between having plugins enabled or disabled, but that's not an issue inherent to Metro).

    On the other hand, I think Metro is a fine UI for small screen touch devices.  The "contracts" concept is fantastic.  The only issue is the clunkiness of task switching.

    Tuesday, September 20, 2011 3:46 PM
  • Richard,

    I don't think Microsoft is trying to "force" a touch-centric UI on anyone. I do think that they are trying to change the way we're used to interacting with PCs and IMHOm, Metro is a great "lauching point" to interact with your PC(s) im the way you're most accustomed. They just need to figure out how to let users control the two different yet functional UIs.

    Tuesday, September 20, 2011 3:49 PM
  • Love...not like...Love

    I've said it elsewhere and I'll say it here, the Metro start screen is an amazing way to aggregate and display information, that will help users make more informed decisions on what to act on and how best to act.

    Everyone who hates Metro, take a step back and realize just how much you have to do currently to find out how many emails you have( if any), view the latest headlines on you favorite news sites, check social feeds, etc.

    The Metro start experience can feed you all that data and let you know if you even need to bother opening that email client or news reader. All at a glance and available from cold boot in under 20 seconds. (Try putting all those apps in your startup and see how long it takes before you can use your PC.)

    *Work* mode is there in the classic desktop and is only one click away.

    To me, there are only two issues Microsoft needs to address to make Windows 8 the next great step in Personal Computing. App switching and the transition between the two UIs.

    If they get those experiences right, than Windows 8 will be the perfect OS for both legacy PCs and the devices of the future.

    And to those that are saying the two UIs are not the answer, take off your 2011 goggles. As time passes the majority of apps will become "Metro style" and the need for the classic desktop will fade. Yet it will be there in one form or another for as long as its needed whether as an app or running a "classic" version of Windows via VM for legacy apps.

     

     

    Tuesday, September 20, 2011 4:23 PM
  • Exotic Hadron stated, as though with authority:

    All that being said, I am afraid MSFT does NOT target Metro for the desktop... So all of you who do not get the idea of Metro may rest assured, you won't leave your icon clutter on the desktop.

    By what reference or authority can you make that statement?  Unless you're a member of Microsoft management (e.g., Sinofsky himself), you simply can't.

     

    I gather as well that you've not participated in the prior pre-releases of Windows - for example the Windows 7 public betas. If you had, you'd realize that there was TREMENDOUS feedback about things that were (and are still) broken in Windows 7, and Microsoft did NOTHING to change these things.  It was clear that they had already heralded "code complete".   A good example is "pop-behind" windows, or the various Explorer deficiencies such as the fact that sometimes things jump out from under your mouse.   Some of these are still broken in Windows 8!

     

    No, what we're concerned about here - and rightfully so - is that Microsoft thinks that this Fisher-Price "Metro" interface is something people who need to use their powerful desktop computers for serious work can "get used to".  There's a SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE between a change that one can get used to and one that provides FAR less utility.  Most folks here understand that.

     

    -Noel


    • Edited by Noel Carboni Tuesday, September 20, 2011 4:31 PM
    Tuesday, September 20, 2011 4:27 PM
  • Completely agreed! The Metro does not replace, it adds to existing UI.
    Well this is the world we live in And these are the hands we're given...
    Tuesday, September 20, 2011 4:38 PM
  • But the Metro start screen doesn't aggregate information in any more a useful way than the traditional desktop - it is just more friendly to touch (which is why it is great for tablets \ phones). If I am running Outlook (which I assume most of us here are) I can see at a glance if I have new messages or not - it doesn't matter if I can see the number, as I have to open the email client to act against 1 or 100. I can use widely availabe applications to do the same for RSS or "social" information. Addtionally - I can have all those apps start on a moderately powered computer and it is completely usable in 20 seconds (or less).

    You said yourself that work mode is just "one click away", but why would it be any clicks away? Most people (from the enterprise point of view) spend their time on the desktop doing work and don't need another layer to get in their way with mostly useless information and eye candy.

    I also think you are incorrect in your assumption that most apps will be Metro style, as the Metro styling is only an advantage on a touch screen. No, the majority of apps on the workstation will continue to be in the standard format (legacy is  the incorrect term to use).

    People seem to think that the Windows desktop is the way it is just by accident, but it certainly isn't. It is the way it is because it is the most efficient and intuative interface to use with a keyboard and mouse - many others have arrived at the same conclusion (as Windows, Linux, Mac look more or less the same).

    There is no new paradigm for the workstation and Microsoft needs to stop pretending that there is - keep Metro for touch but get it off my desktop!

    Tuesday, September 20, 2011 4:47 PM
  • By what reference or authority can you make that statement?  Unless you're a member of Microsoft management (e.g., Sinofsky himself), you simply can't.


    Sorry? What? Do I understand it like I can't have my own thoughts on that? Reminds me of "Du bist ein Untermensch weil Du eigene Meinung hast."

    No, thanks! Yes, I do have personal opinion and I can express it until it does not offense others. Sir, we've all heard statements like "By what reference or authority can you..." in 1933. I don't want these times back! If it does offense, please delete this post as I do NOT want to offense anybody.

    This is my personal opinion and I express it, and it does not have to interfere with any of others. I don't have to be a MSFT authority to say that I think personally that MSFT does not target Metro at Desktop, do I have?

    So you are saying as if MSFT didn't implement a thing of what was present in feedback? Personally, I see MAJOR improvements in, say, hypervisor, and many of them were made due to the feedback.

    Puff... everybody has its own understanding of utility. I don't understand your criticism here. You are like "I don't like it because I used to use windows". Okay, what the problem?

     

     


    Well this is the world we live in And these are the hands we're given...

    Tuesday, September 20, 2011 4:49 PM
  • 1) I like it BUT Switching from Windows standard interface and Metro all the time is quite frustrating for desktop users.

    I'd like to get the following choices (profiling):

    1. I use a tablet (Mostly Metro then)

    2. I use a laptop PC (Metro or standard interface)

     

    For example:

    - Choosing a Wifi network automatically shows a Metro style menu but what if I prefer standard Windows interface (or vice versa)?

     

    Another issues:

    - navigating using Metro desktop may fell somewhat unnatural with a mouse - have a look at how Lauchpad works with a mouse in OS X Lion

    - Control Panel still complicated compared to OS X 'System Preferences'

    - Accessibility options in OS X Lion are years ahead of Windows

    Tuesday, September 20, 2011 4:55 PM
  • Exotic Hadron stated, as though with authority:

    All that being said, I am afraid MSFT does NOT target Metro for the desktop... So all of you who do not get the idea of Metro may rest assured, you won't leave your icon clutter on the desktop.

    By what reference or authority can you make that statement?  Unless you're a member of Microsoft management (e.g., Sinofsky himself), you simply can't.

     

    I gather as well that you've not participated in the prior pre-releases of Windows - for example the Windows 7 public betas. If you had, you'd realize that there was TREMENDOUS feedback about things that were (and are still) broken in Windows 7, and Microsoft did NOTHING to change these things.  It was clear that they had already heralded "code complete".   A good example is "pop-behind" windows, or the various Explorer deficiencies such as the fact that sometimes things jump out from under your mouse.   Some of these are still broken in Windows 8!

     

    No, what we're concerned about here - and rightfully so - is that Microsoft thinks that this Fisher-Price "Metro" interface is something people who need to use their powerful desktop computers for serious work can "get used to".  There's a SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE between a change that one can get used to and one that provides FAR less utility.  Most folks here understand that.

     

    -Noel


    You are again so right Noel.

    I have tested Office 2010 from the technical preview onwards, Windows 7 from the first beta onwards, IE9 from the first beta onwards.
    And I have noticed the same things you mentioned.

    Office 2010 never came on my computers (same thing for Office 2007) because some functionality in Office 2003 was lifted out.
    A lot of people made a lot of remarks, requests, etc - none of them have made it in the final releases.
    That is why we still use Office 2003 although I love the ribbon in Office 2007/2010.

    The same goes for Windows 7:
    Lots of comments, requests, suggestions from testers - the answer: sorry it is by design.
    I replaced nevertheless from Vista to 7 because it was better (it couldn't have been worse).

    I fear that Windows 8 will finally be what we see today (when it comes to the interface).
    That is why I stopped testing it, since I know by now that it will never make it's way to our desktops - period.

     

     

    Tuesday, September 20, 2011 5:00 PM
  • Completely agreed! The Metro does not replace, it adds to existing UI.
    Well this is the world we live in And these are the hands we're given...
    I wish it were that simple.  The issue is that developers will be encouraged to develop Metro Apps rather than desktop applications, and multi-tasking is fundamentally broken with Metro apps, because you're not allowed to have more than 1.5 apps displayed at once.
    Tuesday, September 20, 2011 5:07 PM
  • Hello,

    To assist with thread management we are going to lock this thread. If you would like to continue the discussion or have additional questions feel free to create a new thread.

     

    Thanks,

    Marilyn

    Tuesday, September 20, 2011 5:18 PM
    Moderator