If Windows 8 fails...

[devil22]

What's wrong with 'UI designed for a touch interface' as a negative? If tomorrow an OS came out with a UI designed to be operated by a pair of sticks, and someone listed that as a bad thing, would you have an issue with it too?

Majority of pc's today don't have touch. They won't have touch for the next 2-3 years as well (remember, we're talking about pc's not tablets, and not everyone can afford or will upgrade to a fancy touchscreen ultrabook). Win 8 is designed to work best with touch, they've been very specific about that design goal. That's reason enough.

The details have been hashed over in countless threads. For every issue someone will list an alternative or simply say 'its not that different, you just don't like change, MS had to do it' etc. That's not productive.

Your example is ridiculous (why not go all out, and talk about a UI that requires castration?), BUT, if you could quantify the only metric of UIs that matters, AND, a stick operated UI had a better score in this metric, then yes. But it is not remotely possible that stick operated UI would score higher at any meaningful metric than the typical UI inputs. You're basically asking two questions at once, can a stick operated UI be better, and would I use a better interface, but combining them into some Frankenstein pseudo-question, where there is no right answer, and then acting like this has anything to do with Windows 8's UI. Anyway, that is not the case for a 'tablet UI', it can actually be better, some people have their opinion, but I view the program launcher (e.g. start menu and start screen) as having one meaningful metric; how painless it is to launch apps - and a UI that takes 2 clicks to launch all my programs is better than one that takes 2-5, with the average being 4, at this metric. Now that I've met our analysis quota, we can return to the regularly scheduled "Windows 8 TABLET PHONE UI SUCKS!@#" programming.

 

[heatlesssun]

More than 1 year of MS demos and events, and they never once showed how their new UI is usable without touch, like they claim it is. No one had seen how the new Windows would work on the pc's they already had. And trust me, if the new UI had in fact been more usable or efficient, they definitely would have shown it with a kb+m.

Not really true: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nMxhopm6Roo

There's plenty of discussion and demos about the Windows 8 desktop from Microsoft but yes they are pushing tablets more.

 

[Eman D. Rahym]

More than 1 year of MS demos and events, and they never once showed how their new UI is usable without touch, like they claim it is.

Are you seriously arguing that Modern UI cannot be used without touch? That blows my mind. I've been using Windows 8, to include Modern UI apps, with nothing but a keyboard and mouse for months now. Not once have I had to touch my screen. Not that it matters, as I have no "touch capable" input devices. Here's a clue: Windows 8 and Modern UI both work just fine with a keyboard and mouse.

No one had seen how the new Windows would work on the pc's they already had.

Except the few million of us who downloaded the various previews or who watched the videos Microsoft posted on their site or who bothered to check youtube to see all the third party videos of people using Windows 8 with a keyboard and mouse.

And trust me, if the new UI had in fact been more usable or efficient, they definitely would have shown it with a kb+m.

Can you explain to me how Modern UI is less usable or efficient with a keyboard and mouse? While touch might allow gestures, a keyboard and mouse allows keyboard shortcuts. Seems to me they would pretty much balance out.

 

[YeuEmMaiMai]

Starting off with a personal attack? That's going to lend you a lot of credibility. I just told you, that is a generic response many people have, especially people that don't know anything about the new UI. Also, saying that your experience with the new UI = 99% of the public's experience just shows your immaturity.

So... you couldn't be bothered to adjust the start screen to your liking? What's so hard about arranging the tile shortcuts on the start screen? I have all my most commonly accessed programs on the left side, with less commonly accessed towards the right side. Programs I almost never access are removed from the start screen, but I can still easily access them by right clicking on the start screen and selecting all apps.

The layout of the "All Apps" screen is one that I have issue with, as it is a bit harder to find things since it's like all folders open at once.

Like I said, "It's different" is a legitimate reason. You want to be able to see all your installed programs all the time whenever you open the start menu? That's your preference, and I'm not going to argue with that. Edit: I'm just suggesting things that can/might improve your experience with Windows 8.

Windows 8 is NOT a logical progression from Windows 7. It is a radical departure and it is NOT doing people any favors especially if you want to do something useful. There are programs that I use and do not want to keep on my desktop but want to leave in the start menu. so now you are telling me that i have to search on this crap instead of start -> all programs-> folder -> program name. I do not want everything to be an icon on my screen.

 

[Eman D. Rahym]

There are programs that I use and do not want to keep on my desktop but want to leave in the start menu. so now you are telling me that i have to search on this crap instead of start -> all programs-> folder -> program name. I do not want everything to be an icon on my screen.

So put a toolbar on your task bar that points to the Start Menu folder. When I do this on my machine I see "Start Menu" on the task bar and clicking on it gives me -> programs -> folder -> program name. Looks pretty much like what you're asking for and what you're saying you can't have in Windows 8. Yet there it is on my Windows 8 machine.

Or create a library and link the Start Menu folder to it. Then you can have your list of programs available every time you open a Windows Explorer window.

Or heck, do both.

Or, gee, maybe you could learn to rearrange and organize your Start Screen. Just don't say that the "out of the box" Start Screen is your only option. It's not.

 

[devil22]

It is a radical departure and it is NOT doing people any favors especially if you want to do something useful

Yea, I want to do 'useful' things, so I click the app I need in the start screen, and the program loads, then I sit there and can't do anything useful in it simply because it's Windows 8, or whatever. makes sense.

 

[wonderfield]

Can you explain to me how Modern UI is less usable or efficient with a keyboard and mouse?

There is one way: searching for settings and files in Start Search. What was once one key and a search term is now a context-specific, two-key hotkey (Win+F or Win+W) and a search term. Alternatively, there's the more cumbersome procedure: Windows key, search term and three to four additional key presses.

It isn't a big deal, but people tend to obsess about keypress efficiency ad nauseam around here. Or at least one particular user does. Constantly.

 

[Tsumi]

Windows 8 is NOT a logical progression from Windows 7. It is a radical departure and it is NOT doing people any favors especially if you want to do something useful. There are programs that I use and do not want to keep on my desktop but want to leave in the start menu. so now you are telling me that i have to search on this crap instead of start -> all programs-> folder -> program name. I do not want everything to be an icon on my screen.

The start screen is not a replacement for the desktop, it's a replacement for the start menu. Not sure what putting tiles onto the start screen has anything to do with putting shortcuts on the desktop.

 

[Eman D. Rahym]

There is one way: searching for settings and files in Start Search. What was once one key and a search term is now a context-specific, two-key hotkey (Win+F or Win+W) and a search term. Alternatively, there's the more cumbersome procedure: Windows key, search term and three to four additional key presses.

It isn't a big deal, but people tend to obsess about keypress efficiency ad nauseam around here. Or at least one particular user does. Constantly.

The context of my question was in reply to Mr. Crispy's apparent claim that within Modern UI the keyboard and mouse are not as "usable or efficient" as touch. I'm not seeking to revive the old debate of the relative merits of Modern UI versus Legacy Desktop (which seems to be what your post replies to), but I am trying to find out just how exactly Modern UI is not as "usable or efficient" with only a keyboard and mouse as compared to touch.

Again, from my perspective Modern UI works very well with only a keyboard and a mouse. While I'm sure touch would be a different experience, and perhaps even preferred by many, I'm not at all clear on how it could be more usable or efficient.

 

[devil22]

There is one way: searching for settings and files in Start Search. What was once one key and a search term is now a context-specific, two-key hotkey (Win+F or Win+W) and a search term. Alternatively, there's the more cumbersome procedure: Windows key, search term and three to four additional key presses.

It isn't a big deal, but people tend to obsess about keypress efficiency ad nauseam around here. Or at least one particular user does. Constantly.

Must be a smart user, because that's what I would focus on! Anyway, the reason I do that, is because people whine about "OMG TABLET UI WARBLEGARBLE!!##@" and the only reason to do so is if you believe that a tablet UI *has* to be less efficient on a desktop, it's been shown that that's not the case with Windows 8. Now with search, I guess it's a matter of opinion, personally I like the separate categories better, to be honest I never liked search in Windows 7, and is has nothing to with the fact that Windows 8 does it differently, but because there was all kinds of stuff in the search results when I usually only search for apps. To be honest, even though Windows 8 is better for searching imo because you can just get your apps like I want, I never touch search as everything is in the start screen, not separated into folders where I sometimes forget the folder names for some apps.

 

[bigdogchris]

I love the new BSOD. Microsoft views it's customers as simpletons and idiots. A frown face, are you kidding me?

 

[devil22]

I love the new BSOD. Microsoft views it's customers as simpletons and idiots. A frown face, are you kidding me?

Is this what we're debating now, the hidden nefarious meaning of a sad face in an error screen? Sigh, no worse than most the stuff posted I guess..

 

[wonderfield]

Must be a smart user, because that's what I would focus on! Anyway, the reason I do that, is because people whine about "OMG TABLET UI WARBLEGARBLE!!##@" and the only reason to do so is if you believe that a tablet UI *has* to be less efficient on a desktop

Again, your obsessive focus is on so-called "efficiency". There is more to a user interface than how "efficient" it is. Factors like ease-of-use also play a role there, even if it's something you dismiss as being unimportant.

I love the new BSOD. Microsoft views it's customers as simpletons and idiots. A frown face, are you kidding me?

Now, let's not go around knocking Microsoft's genuine innovations.

 

[devil22]

Again, your obsessive focus is on so-called "efficiency". There is more to a user interface than how "efficient" it is. Factors like ease-of-use also play a role there, even if it's something you dismiss as being unimportant.

How can it be hard to use, and efficient? Ease of use and efficiency seem to be different terms for the same thing in this context. No explanations, just declarations..

Now, let's not go around knocking Microsoft's genuine innovations.

Google has after all invented everything they do from scratch..

 

[wonderfield]

How can it be hard to use, and efficient? Ease of use and efficiency seem to be different terms for the same thing in this context.

No, they're different things in this context. The command line, for example, can be incredibly efficient for certain kinds of tasks, but that doesn't make it easy to use. Some of the most efficient programmers work in old-school text editors like Vim, but they're among the most difficult applications to interact with. Metro introduces a greater level of complexity by means of its control obfuscation (via hot corners and strange gestures like pull-down-to-close) and introduces interaction paradigms unfamiliar to many users, which hinders its initial ease of use.

Once the new paradigm is mastered, there's no difference, but mastering new paradigms is a time-consuming and potentially frustrating process.

Google has after all invented everything they do from scratch..

No.

 

[MrCrispy]

The context of my question was in reply to Mr. Crispy's apparent claim that within Modern UI the keyboard and mouse are not as "usable or efficient" as touch. I'm not seeking to revive the old debate of the relative merits of Modern UI versus Legacy Desktop (which seems to be what your post replies to), but I am trying to find out just how exactly Modern UI is not as "usable or efficient" with only a keyboard and mouse as compared to touch.

Again, from my perspective Modern UI works very well with only a keyboard and a mouse. While I'm sure touch would be a different experience, and perhaps even preferred by many, I'm not at all clear on how it could be more usable or efficient.

There are only 2 ways to navigate ModernUI -

1. keyboard shortcuts. Only power users know these
2. Mouse gestures - these are confusing, non-intuitive and non-discoverable.

Why do I have to go to the edge of my screen to activate charms bar? My screen is not a trackpad or touchscreen. Why do I have to make the cursor switch to a hand at the top, then drag to dock or close an app? Why is there no chrome? Why when I right click do I not see a context menu and instead have to travel the whole screen to click the options.

The entire UI acts as if its on a tablet, all the time. I guess we will have to disagree on what's usable and efficient.

 

[Eman D. Rahym]

There are only 2 ways to navigate ModernUI -

1. keyboard shortcuts. Only power users know these

Does knowing some of these make me part power user? Sweet!

2. Mouse gestures - these are confusing, non-intuitive and non-discoverable.

And yet, even a numbskull like me managed to discover them and learned how to use them! It wasn't so bad. I think you are exaggerating the difficulty. For the typical user there are only four corners and two edges to worry about. Frankly, tying your shoelaces is a higher level of abstraction than navigating Modern UI.

Why do I have to go to the edge of my screen to activate charms bar?

Why did you have to go to the Start Menu to turn off your PC? Because that's where the control was. If you want to activate the charms bar then you have to go to where it is.

My screen is not a trackpad or touchscreen.

Who said it was?

Why do I have to make the cursor switch to a hand at the top, then drag to dock or close an app?

If you haven't noticed, there is no "close" widget to click on in Modern UI apps. Instead you use that mouse gesture which to me at least is even faster than mousing to and then clicking on a close button.

Why is there no chrome?

Why should there be? Do you really like having big chunks of your screen taken up by useless stuff you don't need?

Why when I right click do I not see a context menu and instead have to travel the whole screen to click the options.

Because in Modern UI the charms bar is the context menu. If they gave you a right click option you'd still have to go over there anyhow. Is mousing over to the edge of the screen really that arduous for you? Just how slowly do you have your mouse cursor set? I can move mine from screen edge to screen edge without moving my wrist. Mousing around Modern UI is a breeze for me.

The entire UI acts as if its on a tablet, all the time.

Haven't you clicked on the desktop icon yet? You should try it and see what happens!

I guess we will have to disagree on what's usable and efficient.

I guess we will. But it's still fun to debate the issue, isn't it?

 

[MrCrispy]

Your answer to everything is 'do X because X is how it works'. That doesn't address usability or efficiency. I gave you specific examples of how ModernUI is less efficient and your response is

"Is mousing over to the edge of the screen really that arduous for you? Just how slowly do you have your mouse cursor set"

? Really? That's a textbook example of something being less efficient and usable for no reason.

Why the hell would I talk about the desktop when the whole debate is on Modern UI?
And in case you haven't noticed, normal users don't use keyboard shortcuts.

 

[devil22]

Your answer to everything is 'do X because X is how it works'. That doesn't address usability or efficiency. I gave you specific examples of how ModernUI is less efficient and your response is ? Really? That's a textbook example of something being less efficient and usable for no reason.

Why the hell would I talk about the desktop when the whole debate is on Modern UI?
And in case you haven't noticed, normal users don't use keyboard shortcuts.

You can use the start screen without using Metro apps, if they are too much work for you. You still get what I consider to be a more efficient program launcher than the start menu. You still have the ability to run all the same desktop applications. Somehow when I'm using Modern Apps, the thought of using the charms bar being too much work never occurs to me. Also not everything in a charms bar would be something you put into a context menu.

 

[devil22]

No, they're different things in this context. The command line, for example, can be incredibly efficient for certain kinds of tasks, but that doesn't make it easy to use. Some of the most efficient programmers work in old-school text editors like Vim, but they're among the most difficult applications to interact with. Metro introduces a greater level of complexity by means of its control obfuscation (via hot corners and strange gestures like pull-down-to-close) and introduces interaction paradigms unfamiliar to many users, which hinders its initial ease of use.

Once the new paradigm is mastered, there's no difference, but mastering new paradigms is a time-consuming and potentially frustrating process.

I personally find the pull-down-to-close much easier to use. If you close an app on the desktop, you are going to have to move your mouse to the top of it, click it, and then move your mouse again probably towards the center of the screen to continue using other things, so doing that with metro apps seems to make little difference. What does make a difference, is I can close a metro app blindfolded, instead of having to precisely click the small close button which I could almost never do blindfolded, I just move up until I get stuck at the top of the screen, hold the mouse button and go back to the center. Don't know if that's a good way to explain it, but it's much less mental effort I find.

The hot corner's complexity, depends on what you're comparing it against, every desktop app has it's own way, and in my mind that in itself is complexity, you don't have to learn how every app's settings accessing work, or how their search is different, it's all the same, at the expense of having to use a hot corner, which to me is easily offset by those benefits.

It's unfamiliar, yes, but in mind, it's unfamiliar in the sense that an automatic is unfamiliar to a clutch only driver. Not hard to master, if you would even call it that, and today most people prefer them.

 

[Eman D. Rahym]

Your answer to everything is 'do X because X is how it works'. That doesn't address usability or efficiency. I gave you specific examples of how ModernUI is less efficient and your response is ? Really? That's a textbook example of something being less efficient and usable for no reason.

Why the hell would I talk about the desktop when the whole debate is on Modern UI?
And in case you haven't noticed, normal users don't use keyboard shortcuts.

Call it a hunch, and I don't mean to put words into your mouth, but somehow I get the feeling that you just don't like Modern UI.

Don't fret though. In the course of my day to day life, besides starting the machine or shutting it down, I hardly ever have to wander into the Modern UI. I know that may sound amazing to you but it's true: it's possible to use Windows 8 for hours on end and never leave the desktop! Pretty cool, huh? I know this is true because I do it every day. I bet with a little thought and effort you could do it too! There's no need to fuss with those inefficient Modern UI apps at all if you really don't want. In fact, given your apparent distaste for Modern UI, I have to wonder why you bother with it at all?

 

[Greggy_D]

Yeah, every demo of Windows 8 that MS does involves a tablet or a touchscreen monitor.

You nailed it. I went to Microsoft's office last Wednesday for a Roadmap briefing for my company. Was there from 8am until 6pm and sat through 8 separate presentations. The Windows 8 presentation lasted 2 hours.

The presenter for Windows 8 used a TABLET the entire time (which was projected on a screen) to demonstrate the features. Swiping, pinching, pulling, expanding..all with his fingers. Not once did he demo Windows 8 on a laptop/PC with a keyboard/mouse combo.

I said, "That's all well and good, but when I touch my laptop screen (which was in front of me).....nothing happens. What am I gaining on my non-touch laptop and how is the Metro/desktop combination more efficient?"

Blank stares followed by more tablet based Windows 8 marketing spiel.

 

[Tsumi]

You nailed it. I went to Microsoft's office last Wednesday for a Roadmap briefing for my company. Was there from 8am until 6pm and sat through 8 separate presentations. The Windows 8 presentation lasted 2 hours.

The presenter for Windows 8 used a TABLET the entire time (which was projected on a screen) to demonstrate the features. Swiping, pinching, pulling, expanding..all with his fingers. Not once did he demo Windows 8 on a laptop/PC with a keyboard/mouse combo.

I said, "That's all well and good, but when I touch my laptop screen (which was in front of me).....nothing happens. What am I gaining on my non-touch laptop and how is the Metro/desktop combination more efficient?"

Blank stares followed by more tablet based Windows 8 marketing spiel.

Use the desktop, and only use the Start screen to launch applications. It really isn't all that hard or different.

At its core, the keyboard/mouse usage is essentially the same as Windows 7 with the addition of a few keyboard shortcuts.

 

[MrCrispy]

Call it a hunch, and I don't mean to put words into your mouth, but somehow I get the feeling that you just don't like Modern UI.

Don't fret though. In the course of my day to day life, besides starting the machine or shutting it down, I hardly ever have to wander into the Modern UI. I know that may sound amazing to you but it's true: it's possible to use Windows 8 for hours on end and never leave the desktop! Pretty cool, huh? I know this is true because I do it every day. I bet with a little thought and effort you could do it too! There's no need to fuss with those inefficient Modern UI apps at all if you really don't want. In fact, given your apparent distaste for Modern UI, I have to wonder why you bother with it at all?

There's no need to be patronizing. I'm typing this from Win 8 and have been running it for almost a year. This may be news to you, but just because I use an OS doesn't mean I can't be critical of it, and just because I'm critical doesn't mean I hate it.

You apparently feel that the implementation in Win 8 is perfect and are willing to defend every UI decision made. I don't feel that way at all. But it is quite ironic that Modern UI is the only real UI change in Win 8 and whenever someone complains about it, they are told to just use the desktop instead. This is the same behavior from the defenders here and from MS.

 

[Greggy_D]

At its core, the keyboard/mouse usage is essentially the same as Windows 7 with the addition of a few keyboard shortcuts.

So why would I need Windows 8?

And from personal use, the switch from desktop to Metro (and vice versa) is too jarring. For example, within Windows Explorer (from the desktop), I click on a MP3 that I want to listen to. Windows 8 throws me out to Metro. But wait! I still want to navigate Explorer to find my next song. Now I have to transition back to the desktop, which is entirely annoying.

In Windows 7, I could snap Explorer to the left and Media Center to the right and still have full use of Explorer as soon as a MP3 starts to play, without ridiculous desktop transitions.

 

[Wrench00]

Use the desktop, and only use the Start screen to launch applications. It really isn't all that hard or different.

At its core, the keyboard/mouse usage is essentially the same as Windows 7 with the addition of a few keyboard shortcuts.

Man You need to spend some time on a server. You would then have the full apreciation how annoying as fuck Metro is.

 

[Tsumi]

So why would I need Windows 8?

And from personal use, the switch from desktop to Metro (and vice versa) is too jarring. For example, within Windows Explorer (from the desktop), I click on a MP3 that I want to listen to. Windows 8 throws me out to Metro. But wait! I still want to navigate Explorer to find my next song. Now I have to transition back to the desktop, which is entirely annoying.

In Windows 7, I could snap Explorer to the left and Media Center to the right and still have full use of Explorer as soon as a MP3 starts to play, without ridiculous desktop transitions.

Change the default program to Windows Media player. Or wait for when Windows Media Center for Windows 8 is released, download that and use it. I've disabled using Metro apps for usage of all my files. The only thing I use Metro for is the Start Screen, which I find much easier to launch all my applications than using the Start Menu, and the occasional Marketplace game.

Man You need to spend some time on a server. You would then have the full apreciation how annoying as fuck Metro is.

Not everyone uses a server. Everyone proclaiming that Windows 8 is going to fail because of Metro is just full of hyperbole.

 

[Eman D. Rahym]

There's no need to be patronizing. I'm typing this from Win 8 and have been running it for almost a year. This may be news to you, but just because I use an OS doesn't mean I can't be critical of it, and just because I'm critical doesn't mean I hate it.

My mistake! Still, I'm curious. At a guess, how much time do you spend in Modern UI each day?

You apparently feel that the implementation in Win 8 is perfect and are willing to defend every UI decision made.

And you apparently like to overgeneralize and jump to hasty conclusions.

I don't think Windows 8 is perfect, far from it! I do think that most of the objections I've seen raised about it are either inane or finicking. If people are free to post fatuous claims on the internet, why can not other people be free to rebut those claims?

But it is quite ironic that Modern UI is the only real UI change in Win 8 and whenever someone complains about it, they are told to just use the desktop instead.

What other advice can people give in that situation? Go buy a Mac? Wipe your boot partition and install Linux? I don't know. You seem to think saying that is offensive, so what would you say? To me it makes sense that if you really, really hate Modern UI then you should not use it, especially when a solid alternative is already installed on the very same machine. If banging your head against the wall hurts, then stop doing it. Instead open the door and go into the next room.

 

[heatlesssun]

But it is quite ironic that Modern UI is the only real UI change in Win 8 and whenever someone complains about it, they are told to just use the desktop instead. This is the same behavior from the defenders here and from MS.

There's nothing ironic about this at all when you understand the hybrid nature of Windows 8 and use with different form factors and input methods.

 

[dnottis]

I love the new BSOD. Microsoft views it's customers as simpletons and idiots. A frown face, are you kidding me?

tablet users = not smart enough to use a real PC, dumb enough to think they are still 'relevant'.

 

[Eman D. Rahym]

tablet users = not smart enough to use a real PC,

Or mayhap they simply want a PC like device in situations or places where even a laptop would be too much and a smart phone not enough?

dumb enough to think they are still 'relevant'.

So tablet users are irrelevant? Good Grief! If you hadn't noticed, they are only turning the entire PC industry upside down right now. Imagine the disruption they could cause if they were relevant!

 

[slackerjack]

I just want to see Win XP die. I'm sick of that OS.

 

[bAMtan2]

Everyone proclaiming that Windows 8 is going to fail because of Metro is just full of hyperbole.

METRO SUCKS WITH KEYBOARD AND MOUSE

THERE ARE ALMOST NO METRO APPS

THIS IS A PROBLEM

 

[Wrench00]

Change the default program to Windows Media player. Or wait for when Windows Media Center for Windows 8 is released, download that and use it. I've disabled using Metro apps for usage of all my files. The only thing I use Metro for is the Start Screen, which I find much easier to launch all my applications than using the Start Menu, and the occasional Marketplace game.



Not everyone uses a server. Everyone proclaiming that Windows 8 is going to fail because of Metro is just full of hyperbole.

So why did Microsoft include metro in server then?

 

[devil22]

METRO SUCKS WITH KEYBOARD AND MOUSE

THERE ARE ALMOST NO METRO APPS

THIS IS A PROBLEM

Notice which side does things like use all caps..

Anyway, there are 'few' metro apps (about 3,000 now though) because Windows 8 has not been released to consumers yet. If Metro sucks with a keyboard and mouse, so does Windows 7, since I can launch every program I have faster in Windows 8, which is all the start menu does, and something you can use the start screen for only if you want.

 

[Eman D. Rahym]

METRO SUCKS WITH KEYBOARD AND MOUSE

Says the person who hasn't figured out how to use the Caps Lock key. I guess for some of us everything sucks with keyboard and mouse.

THERE ARE ALMOST NO METRO APPS

You need to click on the "Store" tile in the Start Screen to get more Modern UI apps.

THIS IS A PROBLEM

Don't be so hard on yourself! This post isn't any problem at all!

 

[YeuEmMaiMai]

Your answer to everything is 'do X because X is how it works'. That doesn't address usability or efficiency. I gave you specific examples of how ModernUI is less efficient and your response is ? Really? That's a textbook example of something being less efficient and usable for no reason.

Why the hell would I talk about the desktop when the whole debate is on Modern UI?
And in case you haven't noticed, normal users don't use keyboard shortcuts.

that's what the MS nut swingers do, totally ignore the obvious and give you some redicilous answer that takes even more time...

 

[devil22]

that's what the MS nut swingers do, totally ignore the obvious and give you some redicilous answer that takes even more time...

Ignore the obvious like the fact you can open more programs faster with the start screen than the start menu? And there's very little difference beyond that if you want to ignore metro apps? Yea, tell us "MS nut swingers" all about it, why don't you.

 

[nekrosoft13]

Average people don't really love or hate Windows, they just tend to use what's there.

Tell that to vista. Windows 8 will be same story. People will demand windows 7 on their new pc instead of windows 8.

 

[XOR != OR]

Tell that to vista. Windows 8 will be same story. People will demand windows 7 on their new pc instead of windows 8.

heatlesssun's statement is probably best rephrased as, "Ideally, average people don't really love or hate Windows, they just tend to use what's there.". And that'd be right. User's don't care about the OS: it's a necessary shim between the user and their applications, and should be, at best, transparent.

One of the problems I have with win8 is that MS is going out of their way to make the user pay attention to the OS, a result of such a radical UI change.