Win 8 - How do I multitask?

[XOR != OR]

But Windows 7 supports the SAME input methods as and has a unified UI across desktops and tablets. Of course that's not worked well in tablets but Windows versions prior to 8 all but ignored touch beyond an input method. In a way Windows 8 simply balances out and pays more attention to things that were already there and have been before anyone knew what an iPad was.

I just pointed out that you can have a unified programming interface without a unified GUI, and then you point out that windows 7 had a unified GUI.

What's your point?

 

[heatlesssun]

I just pointed out that you can have a unified programming interface without a unified GUI, and then you point out that windows 7 had a unified GUI.

What's your point?

My point is that touch is consider very bad in Windows 7. For everything that I've seen people complain about keyboard and mouse support in Windows 8, Windows 8 is a hundred fold better for touch and tablets. Windows 8 in one way simply makes usable what wasn't very usable at an in a single UI with virtually no loss to current desktop and keyboard and mouse users that can adapt.

 

[chinesepiratefood]

Ah, you managed to misunderstand the points of my post. Here you go;

Does it work like it did in 7? No? Then it's a loss of functionality. That's the objective part.

Whether the new interface is worth the trade off is the subjective part.

Could you be more wrong?

 

[heatlesssun]

Could you be more wrong?

Does it work like is did in DOS? Nope, loss of functionality. Strange argument indeed.

 

[XOR != OR]

Could you be more wrong?

This is very simple; Functionality exists in Windows 7 that does not exist in Windows 8 ( because it's been changed ). "Does not exist" ( for whatever reason ) constitutes a "loss".

Which part was confusing to you?

 

[XOR != OR]

My point is that touch is consider very bad in Windows 7. For everything that I've seen people complain about keyboard and mouse support in Windows 8, Windows 8 is a hundred fold better for touch and tablets. Windows 8 in one way simply makes usable what wasn't very usable at an in a single UI with virtually no loss to current desktop and keyboard and mouse users that can adapt.

Which is irrelevant to the point that you were utilizing a false dilemma fallacy.

If the topic is going to degenerate to you throwing fallacies and me pointing them, let's just call it here, shall we?

 

[heatlesssun]

This is very simple; Functionality exists in Windows 7 that does not exist in Windows 8 ( because it's been changed ). "Does not exist" ( for whatever reason ) constitutes a "loss".

Which part was confusing to you?

As though all software has kept the same UI and never dropped features or added new ones ever.

Which is irrelevant to the point that you were utilizing a false dilemma fallacy.

If the topic is going to degenerate to you throwing fallacies and me pointing them, let's just call it here, shall we?

You position is no less false than mine in that its simply not possible to create a unified UI. And if one has not used Windows 8 on multiple form factors and input methods they'd be condemning something they at least don't understand through use, which is a fallacy of the worst kind.

 

[XOR != OR]

As though all software has kept the same UI and never dropped features or added new ones ever.

So..yes, you're going to resort to use of fallacies. So noted.

You position is no less false than mine in that its simply not possible to create a unified UI. And if one has not used Windows 8 on multiple form factors and input methods they'd be condemning something they at least don't understand through use, which is a fallacy of the worst kind.

Technically, that's not a fallacy but ignorance. More to the point, that's not what I said.

I think we're done here.

( btw, if anyone from MS is reading this; I'm not above being bought out, and I could do a far better astro-turfing campaign than your current effort )

 

[heatlesssun]

( btw, if anyone from MS is reading this; I'm not above being bought out, and I could do a far better astro-turfing campaign than your current effort )

So I've used Windows 8 extensively long term across a myriad of devices and form factors and I'm astro-turfing where most of the "honest" folks have tried it on maybe one machine for a day. I am a stooge, at least I've used what I'm talking about rather than throwing out random words.

If we were talking about some product that you used extensively and I had no experience with it while constantly criticizing it you'd be making the same point and calling me the same names. So there's the true fallacy in what you're saying.

 

[chinesepiratefood]

This is very simple; Functionality exists in Windows 7 that does not exist in Windows 8 ( because it's been changed ). "Does not exist" ( for whatever reason ) constitutes a "loss".

Which part was confusing to you?

Loss of functionality would be if they removed search from the start screen/menu. Just because it now looks different doesn't mean you lost any functionality. My problem is that you don't seem to understand the word functionality.

 

[XOR != OR]

So I've used Windows 8 extensively long term across a myriad of devices and form factors and I'm astro-turfing where most of the "honest" folks have tried it on maybe one machine for a day. I am a stooge, at least I've used what I'm talking about rather than throwing out random words.

If we were talking about some product that you used extensively and I had no experience with it while constantly criticizing it you'd be making the same point and calling me the same names. So there's the true fallacy in what you're saying.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_premise

( btw, you described ignorance again. Not a logical fallacy )

 

[XOR != OR]

Loss of functionality would be if they removed search from the start screen/menu. Just because it now looks different doesn't mean you lost any functionality. My problem is that you don't seem to understand the word functionality.

I believe you may be getting hung up on the idea that because the same mechanics exist, the function is the same regardless of the graphical element changes. This is not, however, how end users view the computer. The functionality for the end user is both in what is achieved AND how it's achieved, graphical elements included.

 

[nOrVow]

Loss of functionality would be if they removed search from the start screen/menu. Just because it now looks different doesn't mean you lost any functionality. My problem is that you don't seem to understand the word functionality.

If practicality of a certain feature lessens due to a drastic change in its interactive process, it would constitute as a loss of functionality.

 

[chinesepiratefood]

That would be usability. Not functionality. They are very distinctly different in software.

 

[heatlesssun]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_premise

( btw, you described ignorance again. Not a logical fallacy )

I always laugh when people will post these things to cover up their lack of experience. Instead of actually investigating something on their own they link to this.

The fallacy in you arguments is that ignorance is somehow superior to knowledge and experience and that authority is not related to experience.

 

[nOrVow]

That would be usability. Not functionality. They are very distinctly different in software.

Practicality and functionality are relative.

 

[XOR != OR]

I always laugh when people will post these things to cover up their lack of experience.

Oh? This happens to you a lot does it? From folks other than myself of course.

Oh, ya, you did the false premise thing again. I have not ever, in fact, called you name ( nor will I ). You are further mischaracterizing the nature of our disagreement to cast yourself in a more advantageous light.

 

[heatlesssun]

Oh? This happens to you a lot does it? From folks other than myself of course.

Oh, ya, you did the false premise thing again. I have not ever, in fact, called you name ( nor will I ). You are further mischaracterizing the nature of our disagreement to cast yourself in a more advantageous light.

All I am trying to say in all of this is that I believe that it is very difficult to get a true feeling for what Windows 8 is and can do without using it on multiple hardware platforms and with different input methods because that's a key factor in the design on Windows 8. I've never said that people who haven't done this don't have points about weaknesses in Windows 8. I probably understand at least some of the weaknesses better than Metro opponents simply because I've actually, well, seen them with my own eyes.

 

[Tawnos]

This is very simple; Functionality exists in Windows 7 that does not exist in Windows 8 ( because it's been changed ). "Does not exist" ( for whatever reason ) constitutes a "loss".

Which part was confusing to you?

The functionality still exists, per your own statement. Changing is not removing, no matter how strenuously you argue that to be the case.

The start menu still exists... it's just fullscreen now.

 

[Wrench00]

Let's flip this back for a second. What is there that you can't do in the GUI install of server that you could do before? The system administration tools are still there and as powerful as ever. Care to explain what exactly Metro takes away from that?

I've tested Server 2012 and I found everything is Buried under a useless UI level. I am still one of the people that got pissed at stupid network sharing centre. What was wrong with network connections applet?
I just found there is more stupid clicking to get to the thing I need to get too. I found the stupid metro annoying because it got in a way. Unless microsoft pulls a magic shit bunny out of their ass for usability of server components I will just use 2k8r2. I also don't use a stupid mouse for anything I depend on shortcuts and RUN and and command line.

 

[Tawnos]

I've tested Server 2012 and I found everything is Buried under a useless UI level.

...


I also don't use a stupid mouse for anything I depend on shortcuts and RUN and and command line.

Let's play a game called "talking out of both sides of our mouth." The first step, you say "I rather NOT have to do 99% of server administration through Powershell." The second, you claim that everything is buried under UI. Third, you claim you don't use a mouse and use run/the command line.

So, which one is it? Or are you just bitching for the sake of it? I know I've done that before, it feels good sometimes to alleviate personal frustration as if it were someone else's fault.

 

[Deleted member 82943]

I can't stand the interface I have it running on parralells in osx mountain lion and I wanted to see if I could get used to it but no metro sucks!

 

[Gorankar]

All I am trying to say in all of this is that I believe that it is very difficult to get a true feeling for what Windows 8 is and can do without using it on multiple hardware platforms and with different input methods because that's a key factor in the design on Windows 8. I've never said that people who haven't done this don't have points about weaknesses in Windows 8. I probably understand at least some of the weaknesses better than Metro opponents simply because I've actually, well, seen them with my own eyes.

You don't seem to get the most of us do not care about that when it comes to our desktops.

There is no good reason to make multitasking more difficult, or to remove the start menu and replace it with touch centric start screen. An icon to the app store on the desktop, will be just as effective at bringing people to your store.

The only passing reason I can think of for forcing this is that professional apps have a better chance of being ported over to Metro since MS is forcing it.. Otherwise I guess I would not see the writers of productivity software bothering with Metro past viewers/readers

There is no reason for a unified UI. Nobody else uses one, because they knew it would suck for one input method or another..

 

[heatlesssun]

You don't seem to get the most of us do not care about that when it comes to our desktops.

I understand that there are people that don't care about the hybrid nature of Windows 8 and ability to work across form factors and input methods and just care about keyboard and mouse driven operation. It's well and good to say that Microsoft should just focus on the traditional desktop for Windows or that there should be an optional to disable Metro. The question there however would be, considering the surge of mobile devices and the flat lining of PCs, is that a something that truly helps advance Windows or simply placate users?

There are just too many questions about the future of the traditional PC particularly as it relates to average consumers and their need and desire for PCs.

There is no reason for a unified UI. Nobody else uses one, because they knew it would suck for one input method or another..

Apple and Google simply leveraged what they already had with their tablets, iOS and Android which are their respective market leading products. Neither had a dominant desktop OS to leverage. It wasn't so much as matter that a unified UI doesn't work as much as simply taking the strongest product that you have a leveraging it. From that perspective Microsoft isn't doing anything different than Apple or Google.

There are reasons for the unified UI, it is possible to use only a single device and have both a tablet and traditional PC in one device and it allows for touch input across a range of devices. Setup my sister-in-law with my old HP tm2 with Windows 8 yesterday to replace her broken laptop and she seemed love it. She went to town just touching everything and it just seem to click. I spent a few minutes going over things and warned her that a lot of people didn't like Windows 8, she really didn't care as long as it ran Office and all of documents and pictures would come up. She left saying that she really liked the new OS and the lack of a Start Menu or button didn't even concern her.

Windows 8 is going to be controversial without question. There's going to be people that hate it, those that love it and middle won't care. It's not going to be picked up much by businesses but that was going to be the case regardless as business are knee deep in migrating to Windows 7 and Windows 8, if it were the greatest desktop and keyboard and mouse OS ever, wasn't going to change the path of businesses to Windows 7.

It just a new world for the PC love or hate Windows 8 and I don't see where Microsoft had much choice in doing that it has done with overall design of Windows 8 if it intended to keep Windows 8 relevant to average people how are increasingly turning to mobile and touch based computers and eschewing traditional PCs.

 

[Stone Cold]

MS dumbed-down the taskbar in Windows 7 (turned it into a program launcher, not a taskbar) because few people multi-tasked. So, it's only natural progression that Windows 8 be even less multi-tasking friendly. Stupid people suck.

 

[Gorankar]

I understand that there are people that don't care about the hybrid nature of Windows 8 and ability to work across form factors and input methods and just care about keyboard and mouse driven operation. It's well and good to say that Microsoft should just focus on the traditional desktop for Windows or that there should be an optional to disable Metro. The question there however would be, considering the surge of mobile devices and the flat lining of PCs, is that a something that truly helps advance Windows or simply placate users?

There are just too many questions about the future of the traditional PC particularly as it relates to average consumers and their need and desire for PCs.



Apple and Google simply leveraged what they already had with their tablets, iOS and Android which are their respective market leading products. Neither had a dominant desktop OS to leverage. It wasn't so much as matter that a unified UI doesn't work as much as simply taking the strongest product that you have a leveraging it. From that perspective Microsoft isn't doing anything different than Apple or Google.

There are reasons for the unified UI, it is possible to use only a single device and have both a tablet and traditional PC in one device and it allows for touch input across a range of devices. Setup my sister-in-law with my old HP tm2 with Windows 8 yesterday to replace her broken laptop and she seemed love it. She went to town just touching everything and it just seem to click. I spent a few minutes going over things and warned her that a lot of people didn't like Windows 8, she really didn't care as long as it ran Office and all of documents and pictures would come up. She left saying that she really liked the new OS and the lack of a Start Menu or button didn't even concern her.

Windows 8 is going to be controversial without question. There's going to be people that hate it, those that love it and middle won't care. It's not going to be picked up much by businesses but that was going to be the case regardless as business are knee deep in migrating to Windows 7 and Windows 8, if it were the greatest desktop and keyboard and mouse OS ever, wasn't going to change the path of businesses to Windows 7.

It just a new world for the PC love or hate Windows 8 and I don't see where Microsoft had much choice in doing that it has done with overall design of Windows 8 if it intended to keep Windows 8 relevant to average people how are increasingly turning to mobile and touch based computers and eschewing traditional PCs.

LOL, you spin like a top. You came off like a PR man with this one. Look, it should be easy. Metro, however much it improves useability for touch devices, does not add to desktop useability. We are not asking MS to change focus from tablets. We are asking that they leave a few critical features, that we use daily, that have been present in Win for several generations. We are not asking them to add, or change their focus, we are asking them to not remove some very important useability features.
We don't particularly care that MS is attempting to leverage it's PC business to get into the tablet business. Regular people have been using a different UI for different devices for a while now. The crappy ass start screen on a PC is not going to make someone want a MS tablet. It's going to make them want their old Win7 PC back.

 

[heatlesssun]

LOL, you spin like a top. You came off like a PR man with this one.

I'm no more or less of a PR man than people that don't like Windows 8 and dismiss constantly without using it much. My perspective is to understand this OS and to understand it's strengths and weaknesses and why some like it and some don't. If Windows 8 fails then it fails. My "PR" nor yours nor anyone else's is probably going to determine that. But there's a lot of criticism of Windows 8 floating particularly around the traditional desktop and not a lot of people actually discussing the experience across input methods and devices and touch enabled hardware. It's obvious that the focus of Windows 8 is on mobile and touch and tablets and that's where it's strengths do lie and as much as people may want to dismiss these capabilities there's just going to be a lot of hardware designed about the strengths of Windows 8. Traditional PCs are not the real target of Windows 8 and in the coming months ahead there are going to probably be millions of Windows 8 users out there with touch hardware.

I understand that a lot of people look at this as taking away from the desktop and/or dumbing it down and I do see and even agree with some of the points. However these shortcomings simply do not compare with the impact that new UI has when coupled with new hardware and Metro apps. The bottom line is that Windows PC are undergoing the most radical shift probably ever. There's going to be pain, there may be failure but I've not seen anything from Metro opponents that would have probably any higher degree of success. Separate desktop and tablet OSes as you point out others are doing, Microsoft would just be a late also ran with that approach. And a Metro off switch would simply defeat the purpose of Windows 8 and slow the development of Windows as touch capable OS, an ability that it desperately needs to be viable with consumers.

Look, it should be easy. Metro, however much it improves useability for touch devices, does not add to desktop useability. We are not asking MS to change focus from tablets. We are asking that they leave a few critical features, that we use daily, that have been present in Win for several generations. We are not asking them to add, or change their focus, we are asking them to not remove some very important useability features.
We don't particularly care that MS is attempting to leverage it's PC business to get into the tablet business. Regular people have been using a different UI for different devices for a while now. The crappy ass start screen on a PC is not going to make someone want a MS tablet. It's going to make them want their old Win7 PC back.

I don't think you're asking for easy, you asking for Windows 7 or prior versions of Windows. Not that that isn't a reasonable request as the Windows UI is old and familiar with many millions across the globe. But the evolution of technology is filled with examples of device combination and unification. Refrigerators, freezers, clocks, radios, toasters, oven, copiers, printers, scanners, phones, media players, GPS, etc. The convergence of tablets and PCs is already happening with people just going with tablets and not buying new PCs.

 

[haileris]

Had a bit more of a play with Windows 8. I do like the fact that at last I can have a tablet with separate profiles for each user.

On the other hand whilst it kind of works (so far) I still find the whole experience very very disjointed. For example to setup Minesweeper for all the family members I have had to install it 5 times (all users option? Maybe I am missing a trick?) Installed Office 2010 and then have to prune all the unwanted icons away instead of hiding them like I did before. I also need to do some research on jump lists - not sure how they work in "Modern"....

What it described as convergence above is imho incorrect - it isn't convergence, its about a person choosing a device for its use case. I would never want to type out a report on my iPad or Playbook, but when I want to quickly check the weather forecast, or news, or TV schedule or some light shopping, that is where I go to first. The PC (for me at least) is used for more substantial work as well as all of the above.

I also don't think the poster was asking for a lack of change but that the changes made (potential) productivity gains across all use case scenarios. As you have indicated it seems like MS have focused on the touch / tablet scenarios. I guess time will tell if that is the right choice.

So far I think it will do quite nicely on a tablet and I look forward to Surface. I also think (again so far) as a mouse driven UI it just hasn't impressed me. But only used it 3 days I guess

 

[heatlesssun]

What it described as convergence above is imho incorrect - it isn't convergence, its about a person choosing a device for its use case. I would never want to type out a report on my iPad or Playbook, but when I want to quickly check the weather forecast, or news, or TV schedule or some light shopping, that is where I go to first. The PC (for me at least) is used for more substantial work as well as all of the above.

But this is the beauty of Windows 8 to make who like it. There's no need to choose a device, one device does it all. A Windows 8 x86 tablet can be used like an iPad or Playbook to do the very things that you described and then be put in a dock or attached to a keyboard and mouse and external monitor and the very same programs as Windows 7 and do the same things. I can even do those lighter things on a full desktop if I so chose or explore the file system of my network with File Explorer using touch on my tablets. The choices you make with Windows 8 is simply what you want to do based on the environment, need or mood.

I also don't think the poster was asking for a lack of change but that the changes made (potential) productivity gains across all use case scenarios. As you have indicated it seems like MS have focused on the touch / tablet scenarios. I guess time will tell if that is the right choice.

My experience has been that productivity on a Windows 8 desktop using desktop apps just hasn't been significantly different than Windows 7. Once a person looks at Windows 8 for what it is instead of trying to make it a prior version of Windows it's just not that different when dealing with desktop programs. The discussion of productivity in Windows 8 tends to focus on a very tiny slice of the total time spent being productive for most folks. The location of the power controls, starting up in the Start Screen, the size of the Start Screen. I just don't see how these extremely tiny pieces of time and workflow compare to the overwhelming amount of time spent in comparison to actually working inside of an application.

 

[haileris]

But this is the beauty of Windows 8 to make who like it. There's no need to choose a device, one device does it all. A Windows 8 x86 tablet can be used like an iPad or Playbook to do the very things that you described and then be put in a dock or attached to a keyboard and mouse and external monitor and the very same programs as Windows 7 and do the same things. I can even do those lighter things on a full desktop if I so chose or explore the file system of my network with File Explorer using touch on my tablets. The choices you make with Windows 8 is simply what you want to do based on the environment, need or mood.

And the argument put forward is that Windows 8 in trying to be something else has harmed the UX on its traditional platform. I don't deny some of what you have said - I am going to find it 200% easier to stream movies of any codec from my media centre to a windows tablet than my Playbook / iPad. But so far, on my desktop, I am simply not convinced; so far anyway.

My experience has been that productivity on a Windows 8 desktop using desktop apps just hasn't been significantly different than Windows 7. Once a person looks at Windows 8 for what it is instead of trying to make it a prior version of Windows it's just not that different when dealing with desktop programs. The discussion of productivity in Windows 8 tends to focus on a very tiny slice of the total time spent being productive for most folks. The location of the power controls, starting up in the Start Screen, the size of the Start Screen. I just don't see how these extremely tiny pieces of time and workflow compare to the overwhelming amount of time spent in comparison to actually working inside of an application.

Hmmm...I know what are saying but when there are basic questions like how to shut down the OS I do think there is a degree of head scratching as to what the designers were thinking about I'm still finding my way around some things BUT I do see some things like I liked that have been degraded in usefulness (as far as I can tell at the moment) - for example to use application jump lists, I need to pin the application to the start bar. So I need to pin every application that I want to use these? I've already mentioned the lack of "All Users" installations. So far I see a lot of change but not much in the way of benefit - hence the "not convinced" review.

Btw, can you only snap one application to the edge as well (unlike gadgets where you could have multiple gadgets running?)

 

[Numan]

MS dumbed-down the taskbar in Windows 7 (turned it into a program launcher, not a taskbar) because few people multi-tasked. So, it's only natural progression that Windows 8 be even less multi-tasking friendly. Stupid people suck.

Adding the ability to pin stuff to the taskbar yet it works as it always worked made it dumbed down in Win7? lolwut?

 

[Dogs]

I don't really see how multitasking is any harder (at least for me, anyways) in Windows 8. If I'm doing productive stuff, half the shit I use is just a keyboard shortcut away. Windows Key+R to get to things like mstsc, winword, mmc, cmd, powershell and all that jazz. Windows Key+X to bring up a context menu full of things like Computer Management. The other half is stuff I'd open once and then use for the rest of the day, like browsers or Visual Studio or SQL Management Studio, and most of that can be pinned to the task bar and launched with Windows Key+<position> or, believe it or not, clicked on.

And of course, I've never had a problem just hitting Windows key and then search to get anything else.

From there, I can have all of my crap open and work just the same as I would on Windows 7. Have 20 things open, spread them out across my monitors and layer them how I want them, and go to work.

 

[heatlesssun]

Desktop programs and productivity isn't really different from Windows 7 once you get past the cosmetics and get familiar with things. Metro apps I will admit do add a layer of difference and they don't work great with multi-monitor setups due to being limited to one screen. But I'm not trying to use Metro apps to be productive. I'll use the music player, keep in running but not on screen, podcasts that sort of thing. check news and weather. For those kinds of activities Metro is fine on multiple screens. but using Metro apps for productive tasks on a dual screen machine, not the best experience for sure.

 

[Webhead]

Using Metro on a desktop rig makes me feel like I'm playing wiffle ball with one of those big, red retard bats. Win h8!

 

[MrCrispy]

If we look past all the PR spin and BS, here's the bottom line - Windows 8 was designed for the lowest common denominator - touch devices, and people who don't need any options or customization. Then they added a bunch of hacks to placate desktop users, but it is obviously not an OS you are meant to run anything but WinRT apps on. Thus the huge blog posts 'justifying' the new start screen, the desktop experience etc, while not addressing any actual issues.

An OS should be designed to be productive and efficient for all its users, not punish those who don't have touch devices. There is no point in bringing up the problems with Metro on desktop because the standard defense is 'its the future' and 'you hate change'. All the discussion here is about how there are workarounds and how Win 8 is not significantly different from Win 7, and how its easy to adapt.

But crucially, for normal pc users, there isn't a single thing (I'm not talking about kernel changes or new Explorer) that makes Win 8 better. Everything is geared for touch devices. Even simple things like printing from a Metro app are convoluted. They could've spent some time and effort to actually make Metro usable on a pc, e.g. removing the stupid fullscreen restriction, have Metro apps show up on the taskbar etc. But no, the whole OS is designed with the assumption that you only run WinRT.

 

[XOR != OR]

If we look past all the PR spin and BS, here's the bottom line - Windows 8 was designed for the lowest common denominator - touch devices, and people who don't need any options or customization. Then they added a bunch of hacks to placate desktop users, but it is obviously not an OS you are meant to run anything but WinRT apps on. Thus the huge blog posts 'justifying' the new start screen, the desktop experience etc, while not addressing any actual issues.

An OS should be designed to be productive and efficient for all its users, not punish those who don't have touch devices. There is no point in bringing up the problems with Metro on desktop because the standard defense is 'its the future' and 'you hate change'. All the discussion here is about how there are workarounds and how Win 8 is not significantly different from Win 7, and how its easy to adapt.

But crucially, for normal pc users, there isn't a single thing (I'm not talking about kernel changes or new Explorer) that makes Win 8 better. Everything is geared for touch devices. Even simple things like printing from a Metro app are convoluted. They could've spent some time and effort to actually make Metro usable on a pc, e.g. removing the stupid fullscreen restriction, have Metro apps show up on the taskbar etc. But no, the whole OS is designed with the assumption that you only run WinRT.

I'll add that touch is really only efficient in mobile devices; workstations with touch monitors are little more than a gimmick ( niche applications aside ).

I've used touch monitors, I've supported them, and I can tell you that home users are not going to use it beyond the "ooh, touchy" phase. A week tops, and they'll be back to a keyboard and mouse. They are simply more efficient interfaces than touch.

 

[E^vol]

Ok, I started reading this and I gave up on the last 2 pages because it's just a bunch of arguing.

Here's my situation:
I am a Win7 desktop user. I have an Android phone. I have an ipad for the summer (borrowed from my wife's school).
I HATE iOS, but love the whole tablet thing. I could get an Android tablet, but I want to be able to connect to my other computers on my home network to view files, play movies, listen to music, etc..(with Android I'd have to install a 3rd party app just to be able to view the network)

From everything I saw about the upcoming Surface Pro, I want one ASAP....(I know I have to wait until Feb.)
The reason I want the Surface is that I am assuming that I will be able to "completely" connect to my network as I do with my other PCs I have...eg: I can watch a movie on my main rig, even though the file is stored on my HTPC.


So here's my question:

When I get the Surface Pro, will I be able to do (1) browse the web, (2) chat on live messenger and (3) listen to music all at the same time? In Metro? Remember, this will be on the tablet.

When I'm not gaming, this is how I use my computer, and how I WANT to use my upcoming tablet.

 

[Webhead]

Ok, I started reading this and I gave up on the last 2 pages because it's just a bunch of arguing.

Here's my situation:
I am a Win7 desktop user. I have an Android phone. I have an ipad for the summer (borrowed from my wife's school).
I HATE iOS, but love the whole tablet thing. I could get an Android tablet, but I want to be able to connect to my other computers on my home network to view files, play movies, listen to music, etc..(with Android I'd have to install a 3rd party app just to be able to view the network)

From everything I saw about the upcoming Surface Pro, I want one ASAP....(I know I have to wait until Feb.)
The reason I want the Surface is that I am assuming that I will be able to "completely" connect to my network as I do with my other PCs I have...eg: I can watch a movie on my main rig, even though the file is stored on my HTPC.


So here's my question:

When I get the Surface Pro, will I be able to do (1) browse the web, (2) chat on live messenger and (3) listen to music all at the same time? In Metro or only in desktop? Remember, this will be on the tablet.

When I'm not gaming, this is how I use my computer, and how I WANT to use my tablet.

Yes. Although you can only have 2 "Metro" apps (for lack of a better term) on the screen at one time. I have my Samsung Series 7 Slate loaded up with Win8 and, for that, it works okay when I'm in "tablet mode". In "laptop mode" (when I have a keyboard/mouse attached) it's bit cumbersome to me and I'm on the desktop more.

 

[E^vol]

Thanks for the input. While using Metro mode, can you have the music playing in the background while having the 2 metro apps (browser and IM) side by side? Or would it "close" the music app? Know what I mean?

 

[heatlesssun]

But no, the whole OS is designed with the assumption that you only run WinRT.

Having run Windows 8 on a dual screen keyboard and mouse desktop for a almost year now doing running the same desktop programs pretty much the same way I always have under prior versions of Windows. I'll admit that the integration between Metro and the desktop needs to be improved but Metro isn't intended to be just another thing on the desktop.

I'll add that touch is really only efficient in mobile devices; workstations with touch monitors are little more than a gimmick ( niche applications aside ).

http://www.usatoday.com/money/small...ent-small-business-apps/57121726/1?csp=34tech

Looks like small business like tablets, even for productive things.