heatlesssun
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2005
- Messages
- 44,154
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
How to get rid of Metro in Windows 8.1
- Thread starter DPI
- Start date
- Status
M76
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2012
- Messages
- 14,030
Source
I don't know if you intentionally try to ignore my point, or really can't understand it.
You list a number of things that should be self explanatory to do with a good gui, but you actually have to look them up to know. Otherwise you just end up clicking everywhere frantically and trying to figure out what happens and what did you do to make it happen. I've been there, and even after I learned a bunch of the confusing mouse gestures I still felt that I was obstructed by the gui rather than helped in my workflow.
You're right I don't want to watch tutorials on how to use a frackin gui. Since it's the purpose of a gui to be self explanatory. That's the greatest asset of the gui, over the command line. If we take it away we might as well start learning key in commands again. (which are btw still quicker to use than gui functions sometimes) For example it's much easier for me to type in appwiz.cpl to the search bar in win7, than finding the appropriate menu in the control panel. In win8 I was already having a hard time finding the control panel. And of course there is no type in search that's easily accessible. You have to go trough a lot of gestures to actually find something similar. Remember this took one click in windows 7.
So what you're saying is windows 8 is a straitjacket, that's preventing you from harming your own computer. No wonder it felt so restrictive.
Thanks but I'm perfectly capable of being mindful about what I click on to not fuck up my pc. I don't know why it never happens to me, and I have all "defenses" deactivated.
heatlesssun
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2005
- Messages
- 44,154
It actually takes two clicks from the Start button to get to the Control Panel which is the same number in Windows 8/8.1. In 8 you have to right click the lower left hot corner to get the Power Menu, that works as well in 8.1 along with just right clicking on the Start Button itself. Windows 8/8.1 introduced a new UI convention with the Power Menu that separated system functions utilities from applications. It's no harder to do these things in 8.1 but it is different from prior versions of Windows.
M76
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2012
- Messages
- 14,030
I'm all for the ribbon, it was bad in office 2007 but the 2010 version is pretty good. I'm not talking about that (however some of the functions on it could be better grouped but that's a minor issue) My problem is with the drop down menus in office 2010. A lot of functions and options are not where I'd be looking for them. And some functions are so awkwardly placed that I couldn't believe my eyes when I read the solution. I can't remember what I was looking for last time, but It was a shocking discovery for me.
I agree that it's easier for new users to get used to new things. Old habits die hard. The way I see it Microsoft didn't do shit for veteran users. I don't know why won't they make the metro optional. It can be on by default for all I care, just let me opt out.
And I still don't know where to put the metro ui as far as multitasking goes. I regularly have multiple applications open all over my screens. Making for example the calculator take up a whole screen is crazy.
Edit: Making small lightweight aid application take up the whole screen I just don't see where is the advantage in that.
Last edited:
M76
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2012
- Messages
- 14,030
I'm not talking about reaching the control panel. I'm talking about reaching a type in search function that I can (or could in win7) use to easily access any application I know the name of. You see I didn't know how to find the control panel so I was looking for a way to search.
heatlesssun
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2005
- Messages
- 44,154
Fair enough. In 8.1 search works functionally the same as 7 though it does look significantly different being Metro based. They took out the App, Settings, Files groupings so now typing "control panel" effectively works like it does in 7.
Consumers really like tablets. Windows doesn't have a very big share of the tablet market. Ergo, MS decided to annoy everyone without a tablet by sometimes pretending Win8 is an underpowered ARM-based tablet device which has limitations running multiple apps at a time. Problem. Solution. Gotta love that.
It seems obvious to me that in certain situations, a tutorial may be necessary to understand a better UI. We're not really addressing whether the UI is better, just whether you should have to take 5 minutes to watch a tutorial on the UI, which seems like naval gazing in the grand scheme of things. If you learn things the wrong way, then learning the right way takes some work, it is not a law of physics that anything better or easier to use will be easier to understand right away.
Great, you must have great luck. I'm very careful with my PC, and even though I haven't had malware since 2003 or so, I have still managed to screw up my PC with a poorly coded program here and there. There is no way to prevent this with desktop apps, which usually are granted Admin rights simply because they must be in the program files folder for no reason. You can be lucky I suppose, but many average users could use a system where they are guaranteed safety, but I suppose they don't matter? Even though you don't even have to use metro apps if you don't want. You can just pin desktop apps to your start screen and pretend modern apps don't exist..mind blowing concept, I know.
Last edited:
Consumers really like tablets. Windows doesn't have a very big share of the tablet market. Ergo, MS decided to annoy everyone without a tablet by sometimes pretending Win8 is an underpowered ARM-based tablet device which has limitations running multiple apps at a time. Problem. Solution. Gotta love that.
Gee, that must be it. Anyway, how I look at it, is that many users desire a tablet experience, so they buy tablets. A tablet experience is something like a store where you get apps that are checked for safety, run in a way that they can't harm your system, and can be used with touch (or mouse/keyboard if you choose). You.don't.have.to.use.modern.apps - so if you don't like them, ignore them, why is this so hard to understand for some people? Win 8 can't turn your desktop into something you can take everywhere, but it can give you almost all the benefits of that device, while allowing you to do the same things you have always done with a standard desktop. It's almost like you guys think Win 8 is too good to be true so you have to make up faults about it.
heatlesssun
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2005
- Messages
- 44,154
Consumers really like tablets. Windows doesn't have a very big share of the tablet market. Ergo, MS decided to annoy everyone without a tablet by sometimes pretending Win8 is an underpowered ARM-based tablet device which has limitations running multiple apps at a time. Problem. Solution. Gotta love that.
I guess I see this as strength. Use a Modern app or a desktop app on whatever device you want. Modern apps are restricted to tablets and desktop apps aren't restricted to keyboard and mouse driven machines. It's up to the user based on the circumstance. A lot of discussion about Windows 8 has focused on the lack of choice in the box because of no Metro off switch or Start Menu yet Windows 8 does give one complete choice in the applications they may wish to run, and most people do spend much more time in applications than the app launcher.
M76
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2012
- Messages
- 14,030
That's good to hear, maybe there is still hope for win8, to not go down in history like Windows ME. The os that nobody used, or wanted.
B00nie
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2012
- Messages
- 9,327
No that's not a 'tablet experience'. That's an iOS experience. Android app store is filled with compromised titles and is one of the most vulnerable attack platforms today.
And Apple was smart enough to create a mobile OS without messing up the desktop. I mean, who in their right minds would want to?
You know, it always bothered me when people compared Vista to ME, nevermind 8. ME's biggest problems were technical. It was erratic, slow and lacked ANY kind of stability. These aren't problems that Vista or 8 have ( well, ok, vista...kinda. But no where *near* the level of ME ). Oh, and incidentally, some of us not only used it, but had to support that clusterfuck of an OS. We went from SE to ME and my support load more than doubled.
In fact, that's partly what's so frustrating about 8 for me; they came so close to making a decent upgrade to 7, only to shoot themselves in the foot with the interface issues.
M76
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2012
- Messages
- 14,030
Consumers really like tablets. Windows doesn't have a very big share of the tablet market. Ergo, MS decided to annoy everyone without a tablet by sometimes pretending Win8 is an underpowered ARM-based tablet device which has limitations running multiple apps at a time. Problem. Solution. Gotta love that.
I honestly don't know what were they thinking. Forcing a tablet OS on the PC community.
I don't consider it luck, I consider it awareness. I know most users can't be bothered to look after their OS, so they do need these preventive measures (well ones that work, because I'm yet to see any that does, since the dumb user will click trough any number of warnings you put in front of him)
What I was and still saying, is let people opt out, don't remove the features.I don't demand an OS tailored to my exact needs. I want an OS that can be tailored to needs. Like the classic start menu in XP. To give time for people to adopt to the new one.
But why would I want to use Win8 with the start screen only? Windows 7 offers much more functionality with it's start screen. Also even trough I'm not using it I know that that crap metro is lurking there in the background taking up resources for no reason. And when I say crap I say it in the context of a PC desktop workstation environment. It'd be great for tablets, and small touch screen notebooks. But they put it on everything.
You don't have to introduce ME to me, I know why it was bad. I even tried the beta version. And I know that Windows 8 is technically a good OS. But in the greater scheme of things it doesn't really matter why it's a failure as long as it's a failure.
it's not the tiles start screen really. the damn thing are these metro apps...ugly, bad done, no taste, really stupid baddily done programmed applications, who made those? the real problem is Microsoft wants to end with the desktop and substitute it with this "metro modern ui" have they gone crazy?
B00nie
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2012
- Messages
- 9,327
Not only that all the metro apps are insanely SLOW. They take forever to launch compared to any other regular software on my computer (i5 4570k, 8gb, Revodrive 3 etc).
Call it what you want, bottom line is that it is desirable as an option, which is what Win 8 makes it. The start screen and metro apps are two different things, you do not have to use metro apps to use the start screen. The start screen simply allows you to pin 72 (on my 1680x1050 screen) apps and quickly launch them.
There is no click-through with metro apps, they simply aren't allowed to access the sensitive areas of the computer.
Start menu programs exist for that purpose.
There are many reasons I want it, I don't know what your likes are, but for me, I pin my most used items to the start screen and launch them in 2 clicks, with is on average less than Windows 7, so insinuating that it is a detrimental UI to mouse/keyboard makes no sense. Then I put useful items like weather, mail, various news items, etc. so I can be aware of many things happening in the world that are relevant to me in one click. I don't have to install desktop apps for this, that can screw things up if poorly coded or harbor malware, and suck CPU resources either intentionally or not, because metro apps are strictly controlled with regards to their resource usage. So there are reasons to want it, whether you want it or not is a different issue and you are presented options (start menu programs, not using metro apps, etc.)
I suppose nothing matters if one doesn't care about things. We can see many people hate the system, I think the question should be the technical and usability merits.
They are not replacing the desktop with metro apps, metro apps are an optional addition to the desktop. The only ones talking about replacing desktop apps with metro apps are the metro app haters, ironically. As far as ugly, badly done and no taste, well you're entitled to your opinion and I'm sure someone could say the same things about any particular thing you like. I have many metro apps that do exactly what they're supposed to and I use them to better my experience, save me time, and increase productivity. Metro apps are not meant to be replacements for heavy desktop apps, and if you think so you clearly don't understand the system, they are for simple programs kind of like widgets or gadgets that just give you some little, relevant, specialized info, and are tightly controlled so you don't have to risk your system to run one of them, or even lots of them, and can save risk taking for high end programs that are not suited for the metro app role. Or you could just use the start screen to launch desktop apps and forget about metro apps, in that case you can launch more programs in fewer clicks than Win 7 allows, so it's even better for that role as well.
Last edited:
It looks like they are finally adding tutorials in 8.1, although they will be buried under the Metro Help+Tips app. People like Julie Larson Green have defended the total lack of tutorials in Win 8, and so have many people on many forums. I'm glad they are finally taking this crucial step.
I remember *way* back when I posted about the inadequate tutorial in the early 8 builds, heatlesssun said he hoped oem's would include their own to make up for it, as we know that didn't happen and many people were confused by the new and strange OS.
I remember *way* back when I posted about the inadequate tutorial in the early 8 builds, heatlesssun said he hoped oem's would include their own to make up for it, as we know that didn't happen and many people were confused by the new and strange OS.
heatlesssun
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2005
- Messages
- 44,154
I made a guess that the little getting started animation was a place holder in the preview builds and would be fleshed out in the RTM. I was wrong about that, but from day one did agree that training needed to be in the box. Reading an article about the new UI from Paul Thurrott and a YouTube video is how I picked up the new UI, took about 30 minutes of my time and that's really all I needed. I know that others will have a harder time but still, the new UI isn't rocket science. One may not love it but it's not hard to use.
JayteeBates
[H]ard|Poof
- Joined
- Jul 21, 2007
- Messages
- 5,103
And still all would be fine if they had a 'Use Classic UI" option. I bought WindowBlinds just to get that horrid look off my desktop.
Thank god they took this brain surgeon off the windows team and handed the reigns over to the windows phone guy. Unfortunately the ribbon lady's damage is already done and many people aren't going to give a new Windows version another look until Windows 9.
B00nie
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2012
- Messages
- 9,327
Heh, she must be the epitomy of fail. First ribbon which is the worst train wreck ever - only superceded by Win8 UI.
heatlesssun
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2005
- Messages
- 44,154
What is it with some and these ridiculous hyperbolic claims? How is there any objective way to say that the ribbon, now six years old and in it's third major revision in Office is a train wreck? Have Office sales tanked? Is everyone using Google Docs or Libre Office?
Don't get emotional on us. There's no need to feel personally insulted every time someone wants choice or points out they didn't care for something made by Microsoft.
Last edited:
....Said literally nobody in the entire world.
Seriously, who bags on the ribbon? It's literally the greatest thing to happen to Office in the last decade and a half. It makes roughly 1636535532454232343254234234.098847 times as much sense as the old UI, and even the most tenured of white-collar workers use it without even missing the old interface.
Saying the ribbon is a trainwreck is like saying Switzerland's attempts at making chocolate have been a trainwreck....regardless of anything, objectivity or otherwise, it simply never could be true.
Not my users. They were used to what they were used to. All the ribbon did was lower productivity for a couple days while they figured out where their options were hiding. Eventually, after a week or so, they were back up to where they were before. But that was a week of constant griping and begging for their own version of office. Of course, I have users that never DID find what they were looking for, never bothered to ask, and just went back to doing things manually ( like creating a table of contents ).
Eventually productivity returned to somewhat "normal", but I can't see what the ribbon did to enhance productivity for my users.
M76
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2012
- Messages
- 14,030
Well the ribbons are a menace to me. They might work somewhat normally for people who use office every day all day, after learning all the functions by heart. But me who only use office occasionally, once or twice a month, I usually can't find most of the options on it. With the old ui I could always find what I was looking for by looking trough the menus. But with the ribbons I usually end up doing things manually, or searching the net for howtos. I can't say it enhanced my productivity
But the worst is that it's being copied by other companies like Autodesk. But until now they at least offered the option to use the classic interface. Something which Microsoft should also do. It would completely spare them all this bitching. Why can't I use the windows 3.11 interface if I want, as long as I pay for the damn os. This is the exact shitty policy why I suspect many people will use windows 7 long after windows 8 is dead and forgotten. Just as many are still using XP, and will keep using it after the "deadline".
But the worst is that it's being copied by other companies like Autodesk. But until now they at least offered the option to use the classic interface. Something which Microsoft should also do. It would completely spare them all this bitching. Why can't I use the windows 3.11 interface if I want, as long as I pay for the damn os. This is the exact shitty policy why I suspect many people will use windows 7 long after windows 8 is dead and forgotten. Just as many are still using XP, and will keep using it after the "deadline".
Well, what did you do to prepare the users for the move? How did you execute the migration from pre-ribbon versions to ribbon versions? At the time, I was still doing sys admin work, and in our environment, we informed users ahead of time that the new version would be different, offered training, and left the new version of Office as an 'opt-in' thing where appropriate. If you give your users little to no warning or training, and pull the rug out from them all at once with an immediate, forced migration, naturally some of the users are going to be mad until they have a chance to sit down, give the product it's fair attempt and decide they like it. Good user support groups should be like all of the other IT groups; proactive. A lot of help desk analysts don't bother doing anything unless they're resolving a problem. Good help desks should seek to prevent obvious problems before they become problems, just as any other IT role should. There's always scripts to develop, documentation to write, and users to inform. If you're not doing work to make the switch relatively painless before the switch happens, then a week or two of pain should be expected.
Funny you should mention "opt-in". We did give users the chance to opt in ahead of time. A month ahead of time, actually. Less than 1% took us up on that offer, and half of those wanted the old version back within days of doing the upgrade. And yes, that wasn't my first rodeo; announcements were made months ahead of time, an "open committee" was established in order to increase end user buy-in, user training sessions were provided, at the discretion of management of course, yada yada yada. But here's the interesting thing about user training; users and management never did quite grasp *why* we were changing, nor did they see the value in the change itself. Oh, anyone in IT can understand the need to keep up with version numbers of the software, but to those actually using it?
You could argue that was our failing, and you'd be right; management and users never saw the point to the new interface, and consequencely we never got the needed end user buy-in to make it a smooth transition. The flaw was, of course, that those of us driving the migration never saw the value in the ribbon, and thus we could never pass along that insight to our users. In my various job capacities over the years ( netadmin, sysadmin, user training, pmo, developer in addition to my management roles ) I have had the opportunity to observe countless users, and to this day I *still* can't tell you what productivity value the ribbon brings.
It's not better, it's just different.
heatlesssun
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2005
- Messages
- 44,154
There are actually a number of advantages to the ribbon in Office. It's highly customizable, if one wants they can put their important functions in a custom tab or tabs. In the 2013 version the ribbon can be almost completely hidden, auto-collapse or persist the ribbon bar. Furthermore many document formatting functions can applied dynamically to allow for real-time display of changes before being applied and the ribbon is much better with touch. Also I don't understand why people seem to think that it is easier to find functions in a bunch of dropdown menus when the ribbon can even more easily be inspected.
That really just makes you seem questionable to me now. To me, the value of it seems blindingly obvious; The ribbon gives you n pages worth of toolbar, instead of 1, and that gives you room for larger, more usable toolbar controls that previously opened as dialog boxes, as well as the ability to fit more functionality in the same amount of space. Why don't you go ahead and grab a non-ribbon copy of Word and enable enough toolbars to never use any of the dropdown menus and tell me that is usable, if you're struggling to grasp the idea of the ribbon being a good thing.
...Sure, if you say so.
wonderfield
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2011
- Messages
- 7,396
(No text)
None of which applies to the users I've worked with. And I didn't say they were easier, just different. Users learned where their stuff was ( users who use *maybe* 10 functions in office, mind you ). These users aren't going to customize* anything either. And they certainly aren't going to be doing their work on a touch device ( which, come on; really? Who would want to type anything up in office on a touch device? Tell me you think office workers utilizing touch would be more productive ).
* - Which isn't so hot of a feature in the long run. Consider; Typical user sets up a customized toolbar, then goes to work on someone else's login. Or worse, their profile corrupts. Suddenly, they need to find their stuff again. Depending on usage patterns, this can actually hamper productivity.
heatlesssun
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2005
- Messages
- 44,154
I never said easier either, I just listed some capabilities of the ribbon not present with the old dropdown menu system in Office. You say that these users you're mentioning only use 10 functions in Office, setting up those functions in a custom tab might very well be advantageous, everything one uses routinely in one place. It's quick and easy to setup and can big time saver over time.
As for tablets and touch, office automation applications seem to be pretty popular on iOS and Android. The point for most people wouldn't be to replace a keyboard and mouse but to have a convenient way to view files or do quick edits. OneNote however is an app that is right at home on a tablet, especially with used with a pen.
I agree, and that's exactly what I am doing, you couldn't pay me to use 8 because the user experience just doesn't work for me.
BUT, the problem is that Microsoft wants me to use 8 and they don't get why I don't want to use it. For a multi-billion dollar global company it's just mindboggling how far removed from the userbase they really are.
These threads are easy litmus tests to identify posters to disregard in future discussions
The greater the hyperbole, the greater the ignorance heh heh.
Do they really? What have they done to push you off of Windows 7 and onto Windows 8? Have they taken away software you're currently using on Windows 7 and made it Windows 8 exclusive? Have they dropped support for Windows 7? Have they stopped giving you security updates? Let's be honest here...The life of a Windows 7 user has not been altered by the release of Windows 8. If you're going to stay on Windows 7, you have nothing to complain about, since there really is nothing stopping you.
Microsoft would certainly love it if you upgraded to Windows 8. However, that isn't a problem for you. Microsoft wanting you to use Windows 8 hasn't changed your ability to use Windows 7, since Microsoft isn't Apple. You can go on using Windows 7 regardless, so Microsoft wanting you to upgrade to Windows 8 is not the problem.
Heh, I think this stands on it's own, so I'll just quote it for future use, shall I?
Not sure if serious ....
They have created Windows 8, that's what they have done.
Do you think companies like Microsoft spend literally billions of dollars and years of time to develop a product that they do not want their customers to buy?!
I know that I can keep using 7, my argument is that MS developed 8 because they want me to pay for 8, and keep making a profit, yet 8 is completely unusable for me especially because 7 is still accessible and supported. I want to pay for a new OS if it is better than my current one but there is literally nothing that 8 is better at than 7. So MS failed to capture me as a customer. Unless they stop support for 7 or release a product that is better than 7 I will just keep using 7.
MS has done nothing to make me want to spend money on 8. That they didn't somewhere along the way realize that many consumers will have zero interest in 8 is the mindboggling part.
8 just doesn't work for business/professionals, it's a consumer OS for people who occasionally use a computer or who use tablets. That MS also insisted on the completely screwed up user experience in the Windows 2012 server product really shows that someone at the decision-making level at MS is totally clueless.
ManofGod
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Oct 4, 2007
- Messages
- 12,863
First, you totally avoid what he said which is clear from your post. Then you proceed to make a blanket statement about people you do not even know. Fine, you do not like 8, cry up a river, but please do not claim you know what is best for everyone else.
- Status