Windows 8 Release Candidate in Late May-Early June?

Sly said:
Not necessarily worth the upgrade, but if you're going to buy a new system, there's really nothing to keep you from choosing Win8 over Win7.

I've been trying out Win8, and it's essentially still Win7. If you look at your desktop now, that's pretty much what Win8 is. The desktop environment that you're used to for work productivity is exactly the same. The taskbar, the control panel, the windows shortcuts, context sensitive middle clicks. It's all there and completely intact.

They did remove the start button, but i'm not missing it. My Win7 start menu is a mess. If i open it up now there's over a dozen folders i need to expand and the dozens (if not hundreds) of shortcuts i need to browse through to get at what i need. Inside one of the folders are 20 links, but i only ever use two (The rest are update shortcuts, config shortcuts, etc. that i never use) the Win8 'start menu' lets open a complete list of all your shortcuts, and 'pin' the ones you'll actually use. Only the ones that are relevant to you will display when you press the windows key.

I'm a web developer so i'm pretty heavy on the multitasking, and there's nothing on Win8 that's detrimental to my workflow. I can set it up pretty much the same as my Win7 workdesk.

There's not much on it that will benefit you (aside from being able to install tablet apps) if you're on a desktop, but there's nothing on it that will hurt your productivity. Being able to easily customize your start menu is actually a plus in my case. Much like how Win7's taskbar is superior to the WinXP one.

I haven't actually paid much attention to Win8 reviews until recently. I only even tried Win8 after a chat with heatlesssun. After trying it out, i figured out quite a bit on how to navigate it (The video demos were no help since i'm installing on an Atom rig, not a tablet) by treating it like a Win7 taskbar and the only thing i needed to look up was how to find the shutdown button. Other than that, i found the Control Panel rather quickly and set it up pretty much the same way i did on Win7.

I've been reading comments and the common misconception is that the metro UI is the desktop replacement. It's not. The desktop is still your primary work environment. If you launch an application, it's not gonna use the Metro, it'll open in a normal window on a normal desktop. Metro is the new Start Menu, it is NOT the desktop! After getting past this, there's really nothing else they're ranting about out there.


BTW, lower left corner = start menu, lower right corner = minimize everything, upper right corner = close current application. That's how the Win7 desktop works. It's the same thing on Win8. Except the previously unused upper left corner is now the mouse equivalent of CTRL-ALT-TAB.
Click to expand...

You sir get it very well, this is a desktop OS that just bridges the gap between tablets and the PC. Same folks that are dinging Microsoft for being revolutionary are the same ones that whine and complained that the same company doesn't do something more dramatic or better.

Well I'm impressed with Microsoft going out of there comfort zone and shaking up this desktop OS market. Since I've used Windows 8 I've had no trouble getting used to things. If the changes just overwhelm and causes some people worlds to just fall apart... sucks to be you. I respect your disagreements about things but just don't bash it because it isn't tailor made to your oh so important human exsistence.

And if you are a corporate IT monkey shamne on you seeing that it's gonna be ages before a corporation upgrades anyway(Most of them that is). I'll be on windows 9 or 10 by then for the corporations I know.
 
Sly said:
Curiously, what is it about the Start Menu that you missed that you can't do on Metro?
Click to expand...

Metro was pretty slick, but not having a touch screen for a monitor made for a big process change for me. I get the idea of making this a more moble OS and touch pad friendly. But I'm not interested in touch pads. It was like looking at my phone just bigger. I personally like to keep both of them seperate. Anyway, getting to the control pannel, and just general poking around was clunky. But I'm sure everyone said the same thing about 95 and XP when they came out.

I wasn't ready to break up with the start button yet. We've been together for more then 17 years and we knew how to work well with each other. MS gave me the "its not you, its me speech", and I just feel dirty about it.

Obviously what ever direction MS goes, I'll have to follow. Can't play deadisland or l4d2 on Linux natively now can I?
 
@kdh
So far, the Metro start screen seem easier to use for me than the traditional start menu.

Everytime i need to run something i have to browse through the start menu to get at it. Expanding folders and carefully scrolling through the lists so i don't accidentally fly past them.

img0k.jpg


On metro, you actually have two screens. The secondary one is accessed with a right click

img1pm.jpg


Like the original start menu, it lists all your links and you can launch them from here as well. However, the trick is that you pick which ones you actually want to show up without needing to scroll through everything each time. So you end up with this.

img2aq.jpg


You pretty much got rid of the clutter on the top screenie by only making the ones you really want to be easily accessible. And the original links like the config icon, help icon, etc. are still in the secondary screen a right click away if you need them. As i'm adding more tools to my repertoire, along with it comes more miscellaneous links that i can't delete. Install one application, four more items get added to the stuff you need to browse through. The Start Menu is now a directory tree. Imagine needing to open windows explorer (Win+E) and sifting through the folders to get at your EXE each time you wanted to run something. That's how complex the start menu has become, it's now comparable to file browsing back in Win95.

Much like the Win7 taskbar vs the WinXP taskbar, i'm liking this new start screen better. The Metro just made things faster in that you no longer have to "browse" your start menu. All that other crap like picture passwords, metro apps, and whatever they advertised can come later as i learn the nuances of the OS, much like what i went through when i went from WinXP to Win7. All that matters to me is productivity. Is a certain feature hurting my work environment? Is it doing anything to make my work easier? Is it slowing me down? Is it affecting the quality of my work output?

"Where the f*ck did they put the joystick panel???" - Me when i got Win7

Is this enough for an upgrade? No. But when i'm building a new rig, and have to choose between Win7 and Win8, i'm strongly leaning towards the latter. I'm using the same Control Panel as Win7, much like how i was treating Win7 as WinXP until i learned the different nuances and Win7's desktop really was better than WinXP as a work environment. Will Win8 be the same? Well, i'm installing my work files onto it right now, i'll find out after a month.
 
The win7 start menu is NOT the traditional start menu, the old classic is, I cant stand the win7 one which was forced upon one, and I'm very likely gonna hate the win8 Metro (havent tried it yet though, so just an assumption).
 
Sly said:
Everytime i need to run something i have to browse through the start menu to get at it. Expanding folders and carefully scrolling through the lists so i don't accidentally fly past them.
Click to expand...

You're doing it all wrong.
 
Ultima99 said:
95 was a major advancement and instantly superior to 3.1 IMO.
Click to expand...
Yep. Windows 95 is still a moderately usable OS. You'd probably want to run 98 instead, for obvious reasons, but you can definitely get things done in 95 without being stuck with too much horrendously old software.

Not that you would, but you could.
 
No you can't, trying to install Win95 or Win98 will fail on today's hardware.
 
With Windows 8, Microsoft is taking most of your choices away. Once you open programs, you don’t get to decide to close them. You don’t get to decide if you’d like a nonintrusive log-on screen. You don’t get to decide if you don’t like Metro enough to boot into it. You don’t get to decide how, or even if, you want to arrange programs on your screen. Microsoft will do it all for you, because that’s how tablets work — and your computer not being a tablet is irrelevant.
Click to expand...

They're looking to merge their mobile and desktop platforms and unfortunately it's some sort of weird hybrid thing. Having tried it on a test box I had to force myself to use it and quell the urge to format the entire drive. Metro is god awful and it shows itself in a few ways:

1 - The icons are too damn big. This is on purpose because you're essentially supposed to use your finger. Unfortunately for me, I don't have snicker bar fingers and I use a mouse.

2 - Sweeping gestures on a mouse... Really? Can't just click it?

3 - Getting to the settings has become a fucking nightmare. This is of course normal when you introduce such a radical change but MS has unnecessarily tucked them away in registry files (why the hell do we even have these anymore?) or hidden in some crevice in who knows where. This is something that's also an issue with win7 but even more so with win8 and the Metro UI.

4 - It's packaged with the intent of going to tablets and phones. You get these nice big colorful icons and screens that are very easy to work with on a tablet and wouldn't require any fiddling on your part, but if you're a PC user of old who likes a very slim OS that doesn't intrude then you're likely going to kill yourself.

Win8 feels like some sort of weird Microsoft Windows Distro specifically meant for mobile devices that found its way onto the desktop. I mean, you still get a "desktop" but unless you're planning on buying a touchscreen monitor you're going to be very frustrated.
 
DeathPrincess said:
You're doing it all wrong.
Click to expand...

I posted this in other forums as well, and the common advice is to put your icons on the taskbar or desktop. Basically the best way to use the start menu it seems is to not use it at all :p
 
Well as it is right now, I like Windows Vista more than 8. Yup, I found it that terrible.
 
pelo said:
1 - The icons are too damn big. This is on purpose because you're essentially supposed to use your finger. Unfortunately for me, I don't have snicker bar fingers and I use a mouse.
Click to expand...

You can change their size.
 
Sly said:
Curiously, what is it about the Start Menu that you missed that you can't do on Metro?
Click to expand...

Being able to see something other than the "Start Menu (Metro)" when it's up.

No, Microsoft, I don't need 27 inches or 3,686,400 pixels of the Metro UI simply to launch an application.
 
Why is it that users on the hardest forum on the web are such a collection of whiners about something that a couple of simple keyboard shortcuts can fix ? notably i can mention these: win+r, win+d, win+e, win+x and win+c

For the whiners:
What exactly are you using your machines for ? staring at the desktop all day or something ?

Personally I either work, game or watch a movie.


For everyone else: Windows 8 is actually a nice under-the-hood upgrade on several fronts. The addition of the metro and the possibility of what it will look/feel like when its in its final version, personally make me very optimistic about what Microsoft has in store for us (the users) in the coming years.
 
Alt+f4 brings up a shut down window , window.
Guess that's one way to shut down and removes one step or 2. Tho u might have to click on the desktop or taskbar first if u got stuff open.
 
kontact said:
You can change their size.
Click to expand...

Why? What I mean is, why the hell are the icons so damn big on a desktop OS? Why should I jump through hoops just to get it to act like a desktop OS? It's ridiculous. All of the issues people have with Unity Ubuntu are exponentially worse in win8 because of the Metro interface and the OS's new direction. Honestly, I hate them both but they suffer from a lot of the same issues but unlike Unity which has gotten far better and can be avoided by simply going KDE or XFCE or even Gnome, with Win8 you don't have a choice.

A lot of the people who are complaining about Linux or Unity are going to have a hell of a time with Metro.
 
steal said:
Being able to see something other than the "Start Menu (Metro)" when it's up.

No, Microsoft, I don't need 27 inches or 3,686,400 pixels of the Metro UI simply to launch an application.
Click to expand...

Maybe not. And there are likely better ways to go about it. But it's a heck of a lot better than the win7 start menu when you need launch a program. Atleast you didn't have to scroll at all in WinXPs start menu. ;)
 
Sly said:
Maybe not. And there are likely better ways to go about it. But it's a heck of a lot better than the win7 start menu when you need launch a program.
Click to expand...

What extra steps do you need to do in one that you don't have to do in the other? :p
 
Sly said:
Maybe not. And there are likely better ways to go about it. But it's a heck of a lot better than the win7 start menu when you need launch a program. Atleast you didn't have to scroll at all in WinXPs start menu. ;)
Click to expand...

To be honest it's my only real gripe with the metro UI. There was definite room for improvement upon the start menu, and the metro ui looks/works very nicely, but at the same time it does not need to fullscreen every single time I switch to it. Being able to split metro ui and something else like the desktop would be great but that's more of a band-aid rather than an actual fix because the ui itself was designed to be used fullscreen...
 
DeathPrincess said:
What extra steps do you need to do in one that you don't have to do in the other? :p
Click to expand...

They applied the ease you can customize the Taskbar links to the Start Menu. Think of what it's like to make taskbar links in WinXP vs the one in Win7. That's it.

The functionality i want may be easily implemented in a service pack. But the point of comparison for me, is which one lets me access my applications easier. WinXP Start Menu? vs Win7 Start Menu? vs Win8 Start Screen?

So far, all my desktop and work habits, my links, my shortcuts. Are all intact in the Win8 demo. So as far as i'm concerned that's a non-issue. What Win8 brought to the table was an easy way to organize you applications launcher.




Just as comparison between the different start menus.

WinXP basically lets you expand groups into seperate menus
60467089.jpg

You can have all your audio applications grouped into a folder quickly navigate to it, and pick any that you think is good for the situation.

Win7 then compressed everything into a single list that you have to scroll through
img0k.jpg


On Win8, they left the list method, went the other way, and got rid of 'browsing' altogether.

I never was able to get why they made Win7 like that aside for aesthetic reasons.
 
I think metro would be nice if it faded into the desktop as a menu with the taskbar static instead completely switching to another interface, much like gnome shell 3, but different. Simply trying to mesh aero and metro together just makes things more of a hassle, imo.
 
Sly said:
On Win8, they left the list method, went the other way, and got rid of 'browsing' altogether.

I never was able to get why they made Win7 like that aside for aesthetic reasons.
Click to expand...

No plugins. Using default start menu options (documents, display as menu).

xlf4zl.png


Any folder you add to your C:\Users\Name folder comes up.


You still haven't said any things that 7 makes you do that 8 doesn't. Or that 8 makes easier!
 
DeathPrincess said:
You still haven't said any things that 7 makes you do that 8 doesn't. Or that 8 makes easier!
Click to expand...

When you press your start menu, how far are you from launching an application? On Win8, your links are organized in such a way that it's there without using hacks. The document folder hack was also proposed, but once again, it's a suggestion that skips the start menu, it was actually brought up back when Win7 first came about when people wanted to bring back the expanding menus (They didn't like the Win7 'list' style back then either, it slows them down, i was of the same mind at the time until i learned to use the taskbar)

Really, every solution or suggestion that's been proposed (including this last one) is essentially to NOT use the start menu.
 
@sly, thanks for the detailed reading and screen shots.

Im man enough to admit it.. clearly.. i was just doing it wrong.

i'll revisit the RC when it comes out.
 
Sly said:
When you press your start menu, how far are you from launching an application? On Win8, your links are organized in such a way that it's there without using hacks. The document folder hack was also proposed, but once again, it's a suggestion that skips the start menu, it was actually brought up back when Win7 first came about when people wanted to bring back the expanding menus (They didn't like the Win7 'list' style back then either, it slows them down, i was of the same mind at the time until i learned to use the taskbar)

Really, every solution or suggestion that's been proposed (including this last one) is essentially to NOT use the start menu.
Click to expand...

About this far:
33zb384.png


Notice the links on the left. You can set over 30 of them. The list normally below is removed but shows the stuff you use the most. You can set small icons and have a load of stuff. More than the horrid touch screen crap that is metro.

But thats not the issue I really have with it. They could make the whole thing flash in your face and rearrange the icons randomly for all I care. But, still allow people to customize their own software. The current way metro is set up is terrible, so you look for some way of suiting it to your needs... there isn't really any. It's their way, or fuck you, thanks for paying.

There was registry "hacks" in the developer preview to bring back some customisation and allow people to suit it for their needs. So...in the next version instead of addressing the issues people had, or compramizing, they just removed the method to fix it... Because that makes sense.

How is a solution using the default capabilities of the start menu, not using the start menu? :p

It's not a registry hack like some junky OSs need to change functionality (until it was removed)... It demonsrates that one is customizable, one is not.

Just mouse it is less usable.
Windows 7
Start, program.

Windows 8.
Drag mouse to corner. Wait.
Click on little pop up.
Program.

On 7 you can show more icons, so have more programs visible. On either OS you can type the first few letters and have them come up. In no imaginable way is 8 faster or better. It's just a huge step backwards for no reason.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top