On the other hand, the lack of customization might bring companies like Stardock back into relevancy.
LOL. Those asshats were never relevant.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
On the other hand, the lack of customization might bring companies like Stardock back into relevancy.
I'd like to see this claim substantiated. I'd do it myself right now, but I don't have access to a Windows 8 install at the office.There is more room for customization than you get with the current start menu.
Is that supposed to be a good thing? It's hardly a step forward. Different does not equal better, nor does it equal progress or improvement, at this point it's still just different for the sake of being different.
There is more room for customization than you get with the current start menu. Besides, if you just can't live without it, you could always just keep using Windows 7. I think keeping legacy options through multiple OS iterations just to please a vocal minority who can't handle change is a good way to end up with a bloated OS with features that should have been removed a long time ago.
People may not like where MS is going with Metro but I think it's respectable that they're making an attempt to do something new instead of releasing yet another iteration of Windows 95.
The Metro UI is certainly not just for the sake of being different for difference's sake. It's primarily about touch input. And yes, the debate about forcing a UI that's optimized for touch will rage on no matter even if Windows 8 is a huge success.
I think Microsoft did the only thing it could do, it added touch to the core of Windows. More and more people are using touch devices for their computing needs and there's ever more talk of tablets, especially the iPad, entering to corporate world.
We're simply experiencing a paradigm shift in computing, one that's moving away from traditional keyboards and mice and windowed programs to the current tablet model like the iPad. Traditional computing with mice and keyboards isn't going away anytime soon if ever but it's simply no longer enough for Windows to be only about mice and keyboards.
I do see the argument of having a switch between the classic desktop and Metro as reasonable but that brings up a lot of issues especially around how Metro apps would even work.
However I do admit that at one level of the changes are for the sake charge. Windows is an extremely old product by technology standards and the last deep change to the UI was 17 years ago. Metro is controversial and in a way that's good because for the first time in a long time there's something in Windows to talk about that's front and center and radical. And there's conversation about Windows that's more than just about minor incremental change.
With the rise of mobile devices this version of Windows had to be different so it wouldn't be confined to role of the thing dad uses for work.
Microsoft couldn't pay me money to change from Windows 7 to Windows 8. At least not from what I'm seeing from the beta. I'm going to throw up if Microsoft comes out with Windows 8 commercials with people saying "It was my idea". This clearly is just Microsoft's out of touch with desktop users idea.
Microsoft should have developed a separate version of windows for tablet devices or as a modular add-on for windows 8. That way existing users aren't impacted by Microsoft's decision to target tablet users.
This same sort of arrogance in forcing all users to adapt to a tablet style interface happened when Mark Shuttleworth pushed Unity on all Ubuntu users. Even though Unity has improved many users moved on to other desktop environments or away from Ubuntu entirely.
I think Microsoft's marketing approach is going to involve quite a lot of talking about the laurels of Windows 8 on tablets. In fact, I think 100% of the advertising is going cover tablets and the Windows 8 experience on tablets.
What the hell is wrong with people now. Any opinion different to their own is a "troll", are people that feeble and fragile that they can't stand opposition. Yes I have a different opinion just to piss you off.
Already answered that. Read up.
I did read that, page. So the total of this "customization" is changing the tile sizes and background color and having different programs on it? Thats not really customization, is it? Customization would be more like a "metro off/on" option, or "disable touch screen optimizations and controls".
Microsoft should have developed a separate version of windows for tablet devices or as a modular add-on for windows 8. That way existing users aren't impacted by Microsoft's decision to target tablet users.
The Metro UI is certainly not just for the sake of being different for difference's sake. It's primarily about touch input. And yes, the debate about forcing a UI that's optimized for touch will rage on no matter even if Windows 8 is a huge success.
I think Microsoft did the only thing it could do, it added touch to the core of Windows. More and more people are using touch devices for their computing needs and there's ever more talk of tablets, especially the iPad, entering to corporate world.
We're simply experiencing a paradigm shift in computing, one that's moving away from traditional keyboards and mice and windowed programs to the current tablet model like the iPad. Traditional computing with mice and keyboards isn't going away anytime soon if ever but it's simply no longer enough for Windows to be only about mice and keyboards.
I do see the argument of having a switch between the classic desktop and Metro as reasonable but that brings up a lot of issues especially around how Metro apps would even work.
However I do admit that at one level of the changes are for the sake charge. Windows is an extremely old product by technology standards and the last deep change to the UI was 17 years ago. Metro is controversial and in a way that's good because for the first time in a long time there's something in Windows to talk about that's front and center and radical. And there's conversation about Windows that's more than just about minor incremental change.
With the rise of mobile devices this version of Windows had to be different so it wouldn't be confined to role of the thing dad uses for work.
I really enjoy my copy of W7...immensely. I have a feeling that I'm gonna be holding onto it for many many years. fwit...
Given this logic, Microsoft might be better off if they marketed W8 as an operating system designed solely for use with devices that operate via touch screen...and stop portraying it as a desktop/lap top replacement because it's not.
LOL. Those asshats were never relevant.
Other than "new operating system syndrome" what is Windows7 missing that makes you want a new version?
This is Office 2007 all over again and as each day passes it's becoming more and more clear that much of the issue with being complaining about Windows 8 is that it's different and it's just not that very familiar and comfortable 17 old UI any more.
There just isn't enough precision and I'll accidentally go too far and bring up the charms menu when I didn't want to, or the left panel... Then, I have to move for it to disappear and then go back... There are little things that bug me, but I'm still going to upgrade. I use it on the laptop exclusively, and desktop occasionally... I want a tablet to use it with, though.
And what will the reviews say? The thing is most people using Windows 8 aren't using it on touch capable hardware and there's a ton of new hardware coming out with Windows 8 that's going to slick, laptops will have better battery life than ever and boot faster than ever. And there's going to be thousands of new Metro apps, stuff never before seen on the PC.
Not trying to be a dick, but if I wanted apps I would buy an Apple product. Since I don't want "apps" and prefer software, also known as programs, I stick to PC. What you are saying makes me dislike the idea of Win8 even more. Basically developers are given a larger platform to make substandard software that can be sold at a low price point to the masses. Sounds like we'll be going backwards even further.
Trying to find Windows Update alone was a trial and a half.Think of all the cool things a touchscreen centric OS can do. Remove anything you'd be slowed down with a mouse for or anything you had to manage or control yourself.
Now take away the touchscreen and hide all your shit.
Welcome to Windows 8.
That is an incredibly ignorant statement, sorry. Some of the Metro apps are actually better than what would be their contemporary as an "program" on anythign else. Apps are no more substandard by default that any other coded piece of software. They load and run much faster and closing them is as simple as pulling the top of the screen down with the mouse. Does everything need to be an app? No. However, for the things that I saw in the Consumer Preview, I could see using those apps as they were faster and more specialized for what I wanted them for.Not trying to be a dick, but if I wanted apps I would buy an Apple product. Since I don't want "apps" and prefer software, also known as programs, I stick to PC. What you are saying makes me dislike the idea of Win8 even more. Basically developers are given a larger platform to make substandard software that can be sold at a low price point to the masses. Sounds like we'll be going backwards even further.
That is an incredibly ignorant statement, sorry. Some of the Metro apps are actually better than what would be their contemporary as an "program" on anythign else. Apps are no more substandard by default that any other coded piece of software. They load and run much faster and closing them is as simple as pulling the top of the screen down with the mouse. Does everything need to be an app? No. However, for the things that I saw in the Consumer Preview, I could see using those apps as they were faster and more specialized for what I wanted them for.
Heck, if a Metro app was created for Steam, it might actually be better. You can pretend to be uppity and purist as far as the PC goes, but really, people use them for what they need. Why do something a less efficient way just because you hate change?
No, that is a ridiculous statement. Metro apps are flawed by design because they have to be designed to run on a phone, a tablet, and PC, therefore not taking full advantage of either. Do you think full blown Photoshop could be a Metro app? No, it cant.That is an incredibly ignorant statement, sorry. Some of the Metro apps are actually better than what would be their contemporary as an "program" on anything else.
No, that is a ridiculous statement. Metro apps are flawed by design because they have to be designed to run on a phone, a tablet, and PC, therefore not taking full advantage of either. Do you think full blown Photoshop could be a Metro app? No, it cant.
The win8 strategy is clearly flawed.
That is one heck of a huge *if*. It took 5+ years for a beta-level Steam app to come to Android...and it still isn't feature-complete.
I second the notion that dammit, if I want gimped apps that don't go the whole 9 yards, I'll pull out my phone or my tablet. For a desktop, I want full featured programs.