Win 8 love

[Hagrid]

The vast majority of Windows 8 haters are angsting over the removal of one button.

How does one "slowly change" removal of the Start menu?

Well they could put up a 1/4 or so of the button and then slowly add to it over the couse of a year, until the button is a full circle.

Are you kidding me? Have you read anything or did not comprehend it on the 9999 thousand threads about why?

Its the change to everything overall(except the internals where they made it better). Start button is 1 thing, metro gui, no thanks. Moving cursor to corner, dont need it or want it, and whatever else was done that some people dont like.

 

[Hagrid]

I just wished they had (or would in the near future), allow desktop users the option to install the older interface. Now I'm not upset about the start button, but damn, I was just starting to actually use some of the aero features in windows 7 finally and liked the look of it, and now I have this flat cell based windows of 3.1 era. Choice seems like the best idea to me, let us choose which version of the desktop interface to use...

That is my #1 thing, is MS offering the choice of install. It would then serve most everybody! Win/Win!

 

[heatlesssun]

That is my #1 thing, is MS offering the choice of install. It would then serve most everybody! Win/Win!

The question though is Win/Win for how long? Much has been said about how much of a bomb Windows 8 has been and how it's hurt PC sales. However if you look at Mac sales last quarter, the declines there were even steeper than PCs.

The desktop, no matter the OS, is in a LOT of trouble and while the option of switching UIs might be a short term fix, it does nothing to address the long term issues facing Microsoft with Windows. And long term seems to be right now.

It's not that I am against the option, I'm just not sure if it would cause more harm than good. I think it's a much more complex problem than is generally discussed.

 

[Anemone]

I like it too - mostly for the back end changes that have helped things. I do use it mostly in desktop mode but that's not a worry to me.

 

[SuperSubZero]

Its the change to everything overall(except the internals where they made it better). Start button is 1 thing, metro gui, no thanks. Moving cursor to corner, dont need it or want it, and whatever else was done that some people dont like.

If you don't like ModernUI, don't use it. It is quite possible, and normal, to spend an entire day in front of Windows 8 without using a ModernUI app. I don't know why people seem to think otherwise.

 

[Hagrid]

If you don't like ModernUI, don't use it. It is quite possible, and normal, to spend an entire day in front of Windows 8 without using a ModernUI app. I don't know why people seem to think otherwise.

ROFL. So I see you still havnt read or comprehended any of it.

Let me recap, I know this already, and so do others, thats why we use the 3rd party apps.

People do know otherwise, IF you had bothered to read anything.

 

[Hagrid]

The question though is Win/Win for how long? Much has been said about how much of a bomb Windows 8 has been and how it's hurt PC sales. However if you look at Mac sales last quarter, the declines there were even steeper than PCs.

The desktop, no matter the OS, is in a LOT of trouble and while the option of switching UIs might be a short term fix, it does nothing to address the long term issues facing Microsoft with Windows. And long term seems to be right now.

It's not that I am against the option, I'm just not sure if it would cause more harm than good. I think it's a much more complex problem than is generally discussed.

Which is why I think MS should split the OS into 2. They could customize the tablet OS into a GREAT tablet OS. The desktop/laptop can continue to have a great OS.

 

[heatlesssun]

Which is why I think MS should split the OS into 2. They could customize the tablet OS into a GREAT tablet OS. The desktop/laptop can continue to have a great OS.

Again the problem with that is that as tablets become more and more prominent they are to cannibalizing desktop OS sales and that is even happening to Apple with the Mac. Keeping Windows a desktop only OS would only seem to assure diminishing sales. I believe that it is critical for Windows proper to work with tablets otherwise there's no where for it to grow.

 

[Hagrid]

Again the problem with that is that as tablets become more and more prominent they are to cannibalizing desktop OS sales and that is even happening to Apple with the Mac. Keeping Windows a desktop only OS would only seem to assure diminishing sales. I believe that it is critical for Windows proper to work with tablets otherwise there's no where for it to grow.

And thats why I would split it, still keep the base itself the same, just work around with it, to make the OS best suited and optimized for the tablet.(same with doing it for the desktop)

Yeah, the sales of PC's are probably down due to tablets. Most use it for browsing, light movie watching, and doing little games which you can get in apps. Why buy a PC when you can do it from a tablet.(and can take anywhere)
I havnt looked into tablets, but if you can hook it up to a big screen, then that hurts PC's even more.(I know I can hook my phone up to one with a mini hdmi)

 

[odditory]

Not sure where you're getting that Metro can't get top tier apps to save it's life. Metro did get the #1 game last year on mobile, Angry Birds Star Wars, many major content providers have Metro apps, Kindle, Hulu, Netflix, Nook, etc. At three months after general release Metro apps have a long way to go but not at all a bad start and do you really think that as the number of Windows 8 machines increase which is inevitable that more and more apps won't come to the Windows Store? We are talking about a platform that is going to be in the hands of at least 100 million people this year, the apps are going to come.

Here we go with the big round numbers again, 100 million people yaokay. Meanwhile MS is so embarrassed about the ACTUAL numbers they were too embarrassed to disclose them a few days ago during their quarterly.

And "three months after general release", are you trying to imply the opportunity to build metro apps has only been there for developers since release? Its been a YEAR since MS opened up the devkit and submissions to developers and third parties that saw potential in the platform.

The fact you can count the few decent apps on one hand proves the point. They can say they have 100 million apps or whatever the press release is up to these days but anyone can go look at the Top 50 Free and Paid screens and see how sad the situation is. Angry Birds means nothing when they don't even have official YouTube or Facebook pots to piss in, in terms of what mass audience expects minimally now.

 

[heatlesssun]

Here we go with the big round numbers again, 100 million people yaokay. Meanwhile MS is so embarrassed about the ACTUAL numbers they were too embarrassed to disclose them a few days ago during their quarterly.

Microsoft has always announced Windows sales as big round numbers, just like Windows 7, Vista, XP, etc. If someone can actually explain how Microsoft is announcing the number of Windows 8 sales and differently than prior versions I'd love to know. And only 100 millions Windows 8 users by the end of the year would be by Windows' standards a complete disaster. Windows 8 is probably about 1/3 of the way to 100 million deployments showing up at 2.14% on NetApplications survey and closing in on becoming the fourth most widely used version of a desktop OS after 7,XP and Vista.

And "three months after general release", are you trying to imply the opportunity to build metro apps has only been there for developers since release? Its been a YEAR since MS opened up the devkit and submissions to developers and third parties that saw potential in the platform.

In reality developers have only had a production level OS and tools for around 6 months. There were a lot of changes to Windows 8 and Visual Studio through the test versions. The first Metro app I developed with the Developer Preview as trivial as it was had to have a lot of work done to it to work in the final version of the OS and tools. I agree that the Windows Store has a long way to go with AAA tablet titles but of all of Windows 8's issues, app development is the one that I'm least worried about, there's just going to be too many Windows 8 machines for developers to ignore.

The fact you can count the few decent apps on one hand proves the point. They can say they have 100 million apps or whatever the press release is up to these days but anyone can go look at the Top 50 Free and Paid screens and see how sad the situation is. Angry Birds means nothing when they don't even have official YouTube or Facebook pots to piss in, in terms of what mass audience expects minimally now.

I just counted the ones off the top of my head that I use all of the time. I've got around 200 Metro apps installed on my various machines, some I used now and then, some I use once or twice and totally forget about them, much like tablets apps on any platform. I've said plenty of times that Metro apps are not desktop replacements and are much more like tablet apps out there. But even the small number of apps out there it totally crushes the number of touch friendly apps for Windows 7.

 

[odditory]

I've said plenty of times that Metro apps are not desktop replacements and are much more like tablet apps out there. But even the small number of apps out there it totally crushes the number of touch friendly apps for Windows 7.

So if you admit Metro apps aren't desktop replacements then you're one step closer to understanding why desktop users don't care about metro apps. And the idea that MS was going to 'leverage their installed desktop base' to ram their walled garden and 30% apptax dreams of iAppstore grandeur through becomes more laughable.

In other news, metro store growth appears to be slowing down not speeding up, but I have full confidence people will find some way to spin this as a good thing:

"MetroStore Scanner's data shows the pace of new app submissions grinding to a crawl. After hitting the 20,000 app mark near its one-month anniversary at the end of November, the Windows Store smashed the 35,000 app barrier on December 27. Between December 27 and January 23, however, only around 4,000 new apps were added to the marketplace. That's bad news for Microsoft, which needs exponential catalog growth--including a surge in high-quality apps--if it wants the Windows Store to be a selling point for the operating system. Microsoft isn't blind to the fact.

"While the number of apps in the Windows Store quadrupled, we clearly have more work to do," ZDNet reports Microsoft CFO Peter Klein saying during the company's quarterly conference call. "We need more rich, immersive apps that give users access to content that inform, entertains and inspires."

Ruh roh..

 

[leezard]

and this is why you dont post about liking windows 8, for whatever reason. People will eventually show up to tell you how wrong you are.

 

[heatlesssun]

So if you admit Metro apps aren't desktop replacements then you're one step closer to understanding why desktop users don't care about metro apps. And the idea that MS was going to 'leverage their installed desktop base' to ram their walled garden and 30% apptax dreams of iAppstore grandeur through becomes more laughable.

I've said plenty of times that if one is only using a keyboard and mouse driven device that I see why they may not like Metro. As a user of prior versions of Windows on tablets, the point about touch is no joke.

In other news, metro store growth appears to be slowing down not speeding up, but I have full confidence people will find some way to spin this as a good thing:

"MetroStore Scanner's data shows the pace of new app submissions grinding to a crawl. After hitting the 20,000 app mark near its one-month anniversary at the end of November, the Windows Store smashed the 35,000 app barrier on December 27. Between December 27 and January 23, however, only around 4,000 new apps were added to the marketplace. That's bad news for Microsoft, which needs exponential catalog growth--including a surge in high-quality apps--if it wants the Windows Store to be a selling point for the operating system. Microsoft isn't blind to the fact.

"While the number of apps in the Windows Store quadrupled, we clearly have more work to do," ZDNet reports Microsoft CFO Peter Klein saying during the company's quarterly conference call. "We need more rich, immersive apps that give users access to content that inform, entertains and inspires."

Ruh roh..

I had noticed the app count growing myself. I don't think that's necessarily due to in total at least lack of interest in Metro apps, most of Microsoft's own Xbox game titles that were announced prior to the general release of Windows 8 still haven't shown up. Metro app development is similar to .NET and Silverlight programing but there's a lot that's totally new. Even if Windows 8 were a super hit smash success it's not like metric tons of high quality apps were going to appear.

This is still just the beginning for Windows 8, there's still several months to go before we really know how this is going to play out. If Windows 8 fails then it fails. But that probably isn't going to bring back the Start Menu and it will still sell over a hundred millions copies this year and that would be failure.

 

[AndreRio]

ok sorry

 

[Climber]

...
Its the change to everything overall(except the internals where they made it better). Start button is 1 thing, metro gui, no thanks. Moving cursor to corner, dont need it or want it, and whatever else was done that some people dont like.

You don't need to use the metro UI, nor do you need to move corner to corner. I've literally zero need to use those features and the only time I do is because I want access to the tiles and I'm too lazy to use a windows command.

The tiles, the corner mouse movement are all optional and are no no different from using Rocketdock or any number of other Windows 7 tweaks that have been touted by many for the last few years.

There is no difference between Windows 8 desktop and Windows 7 desktop besides the removal of the start button. Yes, seeing the new control panel is quite a shock and it was the same as when Windows 7 upgraded their control panel. I will give the naysayers that at least Windows 7 offered a classic view which Windows 8 apparently doesn't do at this time. Learning the keyboard commands offers greater flexibility and speed to those who are willing to take an hour or so and learn how to navigate the new options.

ROFL. So I see you still havnt read or comprehended any of it.

Let me recap, I know this already, and so do others, thats why we use the 3rd party apps.

People do know otherwise, IF you had bothered to read anything.

That is the thing. You don't need a third party app to not use metro or the tiles, or the corner to corner movement, or anything else. Windows 8 is considerably faster than Windows 7 by a large margin for day to day tasks at least for me. My research generally consists of numerous browser pages option, ArcGIS open on another monitor, several spreadsheets, word documents, and other times lightroom and photoshop up. I can switch effortlessly between any program and I have several of my research projects and ArcGIS pinned to the start menu. Using the keyboard commands speeds up the switching between various pins and tiles. No more alt tabbing and combing through numerous pages, just pin each one and I can see exactly what is on there and can access it *gasp* with a mouse.

I like it and I understand you may not, but your complaints ring void of any real gripe, and it seems you...I don't know might be using it wrong if your constantly going from corner to corner with your mouse.

 

[Climber]

So if you admit Metro apps aren't desktop replacements then you're one step closer to understanding why desktop users don't care about metro apps. And the idea that MS was going to 'leverage their installed desktop base' to ram their walled garden and 30% apptax dreams of iAppstore grandeur through becomes more laughable.

In other news, metro store growth appears to be slowing down not speeding up, but I have full confidence people will find some way to spin this as a good thing:

"MetroStore Scanner's data shows the pace of new app submissions grinding to a crawl. After hitting the 20,000 app mark near its one-month anniversary at the end of November, the Windows Store smashed the 35,000 app barrier on December 27. Between December 27 and January 23, however, only around 4,000 new apps were added to the marketplace. That's bad news for Microsoft, which needs exponential catalog growth--including a surge in high-quality apps--if it wants the Windows Store to be a selling point for the operating system. Microsoft isn't blind to the fact.

"While the number of apps in the Windows Store quadrupled, we clearly have more work to do," ZDNet reports Microsoft CFO Peter Klein saying during the company's quarterly conference call. "We need more rich, immersive apps that give users access to content that inform, entertains and inspires."

Ruh roh..

Same thing happened to the every new market released and those same markets are looking for exactly what Klein said. After an initial release of the main apps, it takes a while for user developed apps to make the transition to a new market. There are a ton of major iOS apps that aren't on the Android market.

The whole app market ordeal is going to go the way the Steam/Origin/UPlay argument is going. Steam got to the market first and as such is the primary face of online video game sales. Everyone else is playing catchup; however, many of the new online stores are facing the same problems as Steam did when it was released or trying to recreate the wheel and failing hard. Microsoft may fall into the latter category but I doubt it. The whole market is changing, people are realizing they can do more with less and Microsoft tried to tap into that. Very few hit home runs at their very first at bat. While I'm loving everything about Windows 8 and I think it makes an excellent desktop OS I do see where improvements can be made.

I'm having a hard time grasping many of the complaints about Windows 8. I mean I don't even agree with the majority of them. The only complaint I see some truth behind is the lack of the start button. It should be able to coexist with the new keyboard commands or at least have the Windows key default to the traditional start menu. Oh well, to each their own. Windows 7 should be around for at least another decade and Windows 8 will either come and go and will either improve in quality or go the way of ME and Vista.

 

[heatlesssun]

I'm having a hard time grasping many of the complaints about Windows 8. I mean I don't even agree with the majority of them.

I'm kind of in the same boat. I usually get the complaints but at the same time many are simply about learning the new UI or doing things that aren't necessary because one doesn't really get the new UI. That's not to say that that isn't a problem, I think Microsoft has done a poor job of user education, but we're not talking about sophisticated concepts here generally.

For Windows 8 to shine the thing it is going to need it lots of new, light, battery efficient touch tablets and hybrid devices and the really good stuff is about another year out. I just got the keyboard dock for my Samsung Ativ 500T today, Staples had them on sale for $99 this week. This is the type of hardware that's going to drive Windows 8. Ultrabook one second, iPad the next. Galaxy Note afterward. It's not refined so many people are calling Windows 8 a Frankenstein monster which does make some sense, but damn, the flexibility of these things is just amazing. From laptop to desktop to touchscreen to ten screens, Windows 8 can power all of these things. The trick will be can it go from what people are calling a Frankenstein monster to a Swiss Army knife.

Windows 8 is really the OS Microsoft should have built 10 years ago when Windows XP tablet PC Edition came out. The run on anything and do everything OS. That's really the point of Windows. It's never been particularly pretty or elegant, just capable of doing tons of things. Windows 8 does a lot, more than any OS on the market currently. If Microsoft and Intel have the time to bake it, watch out, Windows 9 could be Windows 7^9.

 

[Hagrid]

I'm kind of in the same boat. I usually get the complaints but at the same time many are simply about learning the new UI or doing things that aren't necessary because one doesn't really get the new UI. That's not to say that that isn't a problem, I think Microsoft has done a poor job of user education, but we're not talking about sophisticated concepts here generally.

For Windows 8 to shine the thing it is going to need it lots of new, light, battery efficient touch tablets and hybrid devices and the really good stuff is about another year out. I just got the keyboard dock for my Samsung Ativ 500T today, Staples had them on sale for $99 this week. This is the type of hardware that's going to drive Windows 8. Ultrabook one second, iPad the next. Galaxy Note afterward. It's not refined so many people are calling Windows 8 a Frankenstein monster which does make some sense, but damn, the flexibility of these things is just amazing. From laptop to desktop to touchscreen to ten screens, Windows 8 can power all of these things. The trick will be can it go from what people are calling a Frankenstein monster to a Swiss Army knife.

Windows 8 is really the OS Microsoft should have built 10 years ago when Windows XP tablet PC Edition came out. The run on anything and do everything OS. That's really the point of Windows. It's never been particularly pretty or elegant, just capable of doing tons of things. Windows 8 does a lot, more than any OS on the market currently. If Microsoft and Intel have the time to bake it, watch out, Windows 9 could be Windows 7^9.

If they offer a install without the metro stuff, that would be the icing on the cake!!

 

[heatlesssun]

If they offer a install without the metro stuff, that would be the icing on the cake!!

Let me explain how this would have been perceived by many with a hypothetical review from one of the more popular tech sites like Engadget or The Verge:

HYOTEHTICAL REVIEW OF WINDOWS 8 WITH A METRO OFF SWITCH:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If you're not ready for the brave Modern UI world there is the option to disable it and revert back to the trusty if not somewhat rusty Windows 7 UI that is nearly 20 years old. Clearly Microsoft is worried that its new wunderkind is going to face stiff resistance from long time Windows users based on the feedback from the Windows 8 test versions. While this option will appease some existing users, the real threat that Windows 8 faces isn't from other desktop operating systems but from the iPad, Android tablets and smart phones.

Windows 7 is a great desktop OS but we do not see how using it will help Windows 8 compete against competitors that have long abandoned or never bothered competing with Microsoft on the desktop and have changed the rules of the game to the mobile world. We see Windows 8 as a capable OS, but one that has no identify or vision and clings to the past because of fear of the future and change that would upset its large but ever shrinking user base.

Windows 8 is a Kobayashi Maru test, there was no way to win. When I saw Apple's numbers and the horrific performance of Macs this past quarter it was clear to me that Microsoft did what it had to do. The desktop is far from dead but the Golden Age of the desktop and desktop is over. If Windows can't make a transition to tablets is just going to die. And in that respect my views aren't that different from many Windows 8 opponents that think that Windows is dead already.

 

[Hagrid]

You don't need to use the metro UI, nor do you need to move corner to corner. I've literally zero need to use those features and the only time I do is because I want access to the tiles and I'm too lazy to use a windows command.

The tiles, the corner mouse movement are all optional and are no no different from using Rocketdock or any number of other Windows 7 tweaks that have been touted by many for the last few years.

There is no difference between Windows 8 desktop and Windows 7 desktop besides the removal of the start button. Yes, seeing the new control panel is quite a shock and it was the same as when Windows 7 upgraded their control panel. I will give the naysayers that at least Windows 7 offered a classic view which Windows 8 apparently doesn't do at this time. Learning the keyboard commands offers greater flexibility and speed to those who are willing to take an hour or so and learn how to navigate the new options.



That is the thing. You don't need a third party app to not use metro or the tiles, or the corner to corner movement, or anything else. Windows 8 is considerably faster than Windows 7 by a large margin for day to day tasks at least for me. My research generally consists of numerous browser pages option, ArcGIS open on another monitor, several spreadsheets, word documents, and other times lightroom and photoshop up. I can switch effortlessly between any program and I have several of my research projects and ArcGIS pinned to the start menu. Using the keyboard commands speeds up the switching between various pins and tiles. No more alt tabbing and combing through numerous pages, just pin each one and I can see exactly what is on there and can access it *gasp* with a mouse.

I like it and I understand you may not, but your complaints ring void of any real gripe, and it seems you...I don't know might be using it wrong if your constantly going from corner to corner with your mouse.

For some people its faster, not for me. I dont want to use metro, and I also dont want to see metro. I have a taskbar and I can make 1 click icons, no need for it. They say win 8 is a bit faster, by alot, no, I have used it.
Use the keyboard? ROFL. I would rather just use a mouse, much easier and I can kick back with my coffee!

 

[Hagrid]

Let me explain how this would have been perceived by many with a hypothetical review from one of the more popular tech sites like Engadget or The Verge:

HYOTEHTICAL REVIEW OF WINDOWS 8 WITH A METRO OFF SWITCH:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Windows 8 is a Kobayashi Maru test, there was no way to win. When I saw Apple's numbers and the horrific performance of Macs this past quarter it was clear to me that Microsoft did what it had to do. The desktop is far from dead but the Golden Age of the desktop and desktop is over. If Windows can't make a transition to tablets is just going to die. And in that respect my views aren't that different from many Windows 8 opponents that think that Windows is dead already.

They can make the transition into tablets. The question is, are they going to have a good OS.
A hybrid is a good OS, win 8. I like good, but its nothing great. If they want great, they should either split them off, or make it 2 separate installs, so people can have the best of both worlds.

 

[Wrench00]

Let me explain how this would have been perceived by many with a hypothetical review from one of the more popular tech sites like Engadget or The Verge:

HYOTEHTICAL REVIEW OF WINDOWS 8 WITH A METRO OFF SWITCH:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Windows 8 is a Kobayashi Maru test, there was no way to win. When I saw Apple's numbers and the horrific performance of Macs this past quarter it was clear to me that Microsoft did what it had to do. The desktop is far from dead but the Golden Age of the desktop and desktop is over. If Windows can't make a transition to tablets is just going to die. And in that respect my views aren't that different from many Windows 8 opponents that think that Windows is dead already.

The problem is that Tablet UI and Touch base is not Needed on the desktop NO one is ever going to use it on the desktop and if they do it will be in the minority. Microsoft should have just made RT sepperate UI os and pushed that while making it easier to connect to your desktop and have better file compatibility between the two. Tablet UI is far to limited to be in a mouse and keyboard space, you loose to much functionality.

 

[Climber]

For some people its faster, not for me. I dont want to use metro, and I also dont want to see metro. I have a taskbar and I can make 1 click icons, no need for it. They say win 8 is a bit faster, by alot, no, I have used it.
Use the keyboard? ROFL. I would rather just use a mouse, much easier and I can kick back with my coffee!

Again, just use the desktop and pin things to the task bar just like you would in windows 7.

Also maybe I'm confused as I think "metro" is the screen with the tiles and the desktop is... well the desktop screen which looks like and functions the same, well almost the same, as any other windows desktop.

 

[Hagrid]

Again, just use the desktop and pin things to the task bar just like you would in windows 7.

Also maybe I'm confused as I think "metro" is the screen with the tiles and the desktop is... well the desktop screen which looks like and functions the same, well almost the same, as any other windows desktop.

Thats what I plan on doing when I get 8 on there.
I will run classicshell or maybe look into startisback, but classicshell runs fine for now.

 

[Climber]

What is the difference between metro on a tablet and metro on a desktop? I was actually considering picking up the Dell Latitude 10.

 

[Hagrid]

What is the difference between metro on a tablet and metro on a desktop? I was actually considering picking up the Dell Latitude 10.

Metro was made for tablets, but since they made it a hybrid OS, its on desktop as well.

You can use it on a desktop, its like a big icon, or as some have said, a fisher price toy computer GUI.(made for touch)
I dont use it, want it, or need it, just the regular old desktop works just fine for me.

 

[heatlesssun]

They can make the transition into tablets. The question is, are they going to have a good OS.
A hybrid is a good OS, win 8. I like good, but its nothing great. If they want great, they should either split them off, or make it 2 separate installs, so people can have the best of both worlds.

You may be right, all I am saying is that I don't think it is as great of a solution as you think. Yes it will appease some people but also slow down tablet and touch development and the challenges that Windows faces are in that area, not the desktop.

For me at least, I already have the best of both worlds with Windows 8. All the capability to run all of the desktop apps I've always run is still there and now there some decent tablet and touch capability.

 

[Hagrid]

You may be right, all I am saying is that I don't think it is as great of a solution as you think. Yes it will appease some people but also slow down tablet and touch development and the challenges that Windows faces are in that area, not the desktop.

For me at least, I already have the best of both worlds with Windows 8. All the capability to run all of the desktop apps I've always run is still there and now there some decent tablet and touch capability.

Decent tablet and touch capability? When MS makes it a great one, then sales might be better? I do believe they can do both, since the desktop OS is already great, they just need to keep a few updates going. The touch/tablet interface should be streamlined for tablets and touch, which would make it better then any hybrid.

 

[heatlesssun]

The touch/tablet interface should be streamlined for tablets and touch, which would make it better then any hybrid.

A number of people say things like this, that combing a touch and a desktop UI hurts the experience of both, but in real world use of tablets and desktops for 16 months with Windows 8 counting the betas, I just don't see how anything is really hurt on either side. Yes, there are some rough spots, desktop elements and programs that aren't touch optimized, some Metro apps that aren't keyboard and mouse optimized, though most Metro work just fine with keyboards and mice, that's a specific app issue, not Windows 8 issue.

But ultimately desktop apps work just as they always have. Touch based apps work like would on iOS or Android on a touch device. From the perspective of using applications Windows 8 is just like Windows 7 on the desktop and with Metro apps on a touch device there's really no difference between Windows 8 and iOS and Android, apps are just as touch friendly in Windows 8.

 

[Hagrid]

A number of people say things like this, that combing a touch and a desktop UI hurts the experience of both, but in real world use of tablets and desktops for 16 months with Windows 8 counting the betas, I just don't see how anything is really hurt on either side. Yes, there are some rough spots, desktop elements and programs that aren't touch optimized, some Metro apps that aren't keyboard and mouse optimized, though most Metro work just fine with keyboards and mice, that's a specific app issue, not Windows 8 issue.

But ultimately desktop apps work just as they always have. Touch based apps work like would on iOS or Android on a touch device. From the perspective of using applications Windows 8 is just like Windows 7 on the desktop and with Metro apps on a touch device there's really no difference between Windows 8 and iOS and Android, apps are just as touch friendly in Windows 8.

I guess some people want the best for both worlds.
For quite a few people it is just like 7, due to them putting the 3rd party apps on. When there are alot of people that have to do this, then that is a problem.(though at least they sold a copy of win 8)
Its all good, we all get what we want more or less in the end.

 

[Tsumi]

Decent tablet and touch capability? When MS makes it a great one, then sales might be better? I do believe they can do both, since the desktop OS is already great, they just need to keep a few updates going. The touch/tablet interface should be streamlined for tablets and touch, which would make it better then any hybrid.

Part of it is software, part is hardware, and the last part is price. You can have the best OS in the world, but without the right hardware at the right prices, no one will buy it.

Right now, there is a lack of hardware at the lower end of the price range, although that is slowly changing.

 

[heatlesssun]

I guess some people want the best for both worlds.
For quite a few people it is just like 7, due to them putting the 3rd party apps on. When there are alot of people that have to do this, then that is a problem.(though at least they sold a copy of win 8)
Its all good, we all get what we want more or less in the end.

I don't use any 3rd party Start Menu replacements and Windows 8 for me on the desktop outside of using Metro apps pretty much works just like Windows 7. Sure there are differences but launching apps from the task bar is just the same. Even launching apps from the Start Screen isn't all that different, in fact I think the Start Screen is much better at handling long lists of things than the Start Menu. The biggest flaw in the Start Screen is a lack of management and management tools. It's far to manual and clunky in that definitely needs to be addressed.

 

[heatlesssun]

Right now, there is a lack of hardware at the lower end of the price range, although that is slowly changing.

Hardware pricing is one of the bigger issues with Windows 8, though it does seem that higher end Windows machines did pretty well over the holidays even though total volume was down.

One part of the problem is that Windows OEMs have been in race to the bottom for so long and made so much cheap plastic crap they have put themselves in a position where price expectations are tough to meet with new hardware that simply can't be the same cheap crap that it's been for so long. Case in point, tablet and touch screens. Yes touch does add cost to a device but you also can't get away with lousy TN panels on a tablet or hybrid or convertible device, which also adds cost. Also, when people look at tablet hardware it's always compared to the iPad, which is just a much better built device than the cheap plastic crap that Windows OEMs have made for so long, and the need for increased device quality also puts the squeeze in.

But as production of devices ramps up prices should start to come down and hopefully we'll see an overall improvement in device quality at all price points.

 

[Climber]

Metro was made for tablets, but since they made it a hybrid OS, its on desktop as well.

You can use it on a desktop, its like a big icon, or as some have said, a fisher price toy computer GUI.(made for touch)
I dont use it, want it, or need it, just the regular old desktop works just fine for me.

I know what the desktop is and it is nothing as you described. The desktop os looks just like windows 7 minus a start button. I was under the impression you had us windows 8 but I guess not.

 

[Hagrid]

I know what the desktop is and it is nothing as you described. The desktop os looks just like windows 7 minus a start button. I was under the impression you had us windows 8 but I guess not.

I have used it, but when it boots up, you see a big tile screen.
If you see the same thing when running win 7, then I think you might need a shrink.

I forgot, when I stick the mouse in the corner, a menu pop up. Win 7 has that too?

 

[heatlesssun]

I have used it, but when it boots up, you see a big tile screen.
If you see the same thing when running win 7, then I think you might need a shrink.

I forgot, when I stick the mouse in the corner, a menu pop up. Win 7 has that too?

The Start Screen and Metro overlays aren't part of the desktop. Since these elements are always available even if you're not running the desktop that can't be part of the desktop.

 

[Hagrid]

The Start Screen and Metro overlays aren't part of the desktop. Since these elements are always available even if you're not running the desktop that can't be part of the desktop.

Whatever they are part of, I dont want or need them. I will enjoy win 8 regardless!
I will just get rid of what I can and minimize it.

 

[Eman D. Rahym]

Put your desktop tile in the top left corner of the Start Screen and then simply hit "Enter" when you first get to the Start Screen.

 

[Hagrid]

Put your desktop tile in the top left corner of the Start Screen and then simply hit "Enter" when you first get to the Start Screen.

I will just use one of the 3rd party programs, much easier.