Adinnieken said:
dahuman said:
Adinnieken said:
You're not fully embracing the paradigm shift that is Windows 8. The Start Panel is to Windows 8 as the Desktop is to Windows 95-Windows 7. The desktop in Windows 8 is essentially a legacy. There for two reasons, one because the ability to do full-fledged desktop apps within the Metro UI just isn't possible without new controls, and for backward compatibility with pretty much every Windows app. In the future that goes away.
I don't find the category organization that difficult to work with. The major challenge are applications that create a bunch of shortcuts. Visual Studio 2012 is a great example of this. However, it sounds like if Microsoft augmented the UI so that either with a alternative mouse button click (Previous/Next thumb buttons), cycling through the categories of applications might offer a more workable solution. You don't need to scroll, just move your mouse to the edge of the screen and it automatically scrolls.
Win+I takes you quickly to the point where you can shutdown.
You apparently have used any previous version of Windows in a touch enviornment. Windows 8 was created based on their experience with touch interfaces and trying to integrate the Explorer UI. It hasn't worked. Windows Mobile was a CE-based Explorer UI, smartphones based on iOS and Android proved far more popular and resulted in a rapid loss of marketshared because the UI wasn't user friendly. Microsoft offered a tablet OS back in 2001 with Windows XP for Tablet PCs. When the iPad came out, the market for Tablet PC-based computers dried up.
Windows 8 isn't "anti-consumer". You don't know what "anti-consumer" is if you believe that. What do you believe "anti-consumer" means?
Windows Vista isn't any more or less bloated than Windows 7. Both OSes have EXACTLY the same system requirements. The only major difference between Windows Vista and Windows 7 is that Windows Vista managed memory differently and as I said this was intended to be inpreporation for WinFS, which was never released. The way it works with drivers is absolutely no different than the way Windows 7 does. None what so ever. The only difference between Windows Vista and Windows 7 as far as drivers go is that OEMs acclimated to the way device drivers were written with Windows Vista by the time Windows 7 came out.
|
Hey you asked, and I told you, you can take it or leave it. Metro UI is not a step forward nor backward, it went side ways so don't even try to make it sound like it's something worth embracing because I know what shit is when I see one. When the Zune failed, they should have already realised something was wrong, but they never got the message, so stop sounding like a shill and just take it for what it is because the adaption rate speaks louder than anything that you can come up with and they can only try to force it on people at this point which is exactly what they have been doing.
And really? where did I mention Windows 7 in that paragraph when I was talking about bloated or drivers? Where did I mention Windows 7 at all? So full of shit dood. I'm calling you out right now, do you work for Microsoft? If you do, then I'm actually fine with that, because no sane customer can advocate it that much, not even Dis does that, but if you are getting paid by MS, then it's all good because I actually know quiet a few people that work there in the main building.
|
The reason why I brought up Windows 7 is for the simple fact that Windows 7 uses the same exact Device Driver model as Windows Vista. They're not bloated drivers, as you suggested. Why do you think they're called mini-drivers? They actually represent less code that OEMs have to write, not more.
Zune's adoption rate had nothing to do with the UI, the UI was by and large one of it's best features. The Zune failed because Apple was moving at a hare's pace compared to Microsoft's. With the exception of the design and UI on the Zune HD, Microsoft was behind Apple in every other aspect. By the time the Zune HD came out, the iPhone had already established itself handily while Microsoft was still fumbling around with Windows Phone 6.5. Microsoft didn't have an answer to Apple, that's the reason why the Zune HD failed. So don't go and try pinning its failure on the UI.
I personally can see where Windows 8 has taken steps forward, steps back, and where it has parallels to Windows 7. That said, I can also see where both the industry as a whole and Microsoft are headed. Eventually, the age of the PC will end. Not because there won't be people that still use PCs, but because the majority of people will use small, portable devices instead. If not Gen 9, then likely Gen 10, your home gaming console will be a mobile device, for example. It'll still do everything a Gen 8 console will do, likely even more, but it'll also be mobile.
Like I said, the focus of the Metro UI is on the applications, not on the blank piece of real estate on your screen commonly referred to as the desktop. You want to focus on the desktop as a place for you to go to or get to, in Windows 8.x it isn't. In Windows 8.x the center point of the UI is the Start Panel. I don't disagree that the ease of use isn't entirely there. It isn't perfect, but again my opinion is that the Metro UI works and just needs to be improved. Yours is that it doesn't work because of where Windows 8 doesn't offer parallels to previous versions of the OS in terms of ease of use. The logical conclusion is then that if Microsoft bridged those gaps in usability, the chasms you spoke of, would be bridged and Windows 8.x would be just as sound as Windows 7 or earlier.
But somehow, I get the feeling that isn't the case. You hate Windows 8 because of the Metro UI. You don't see the Start Panel as one (Metro) UI and the Desktop as a separate (Explorer) UI, you see the Start Panel as a function/feature of the UI, in general. They are not. Windows 8 is a bridge between the Explorer UI (where Microsoft has been for more than 10 years) and the Metro UI (where Microsoft is headed). The day will come, when access to the file system is an advanced feature, not a common feature. The day will come when you won't care about the under pinnings, you'll only care about the applications. The reason Microsoft is headed that way isn't because Microsoft is full of geek or nerd-hating shirts, it's because that's where consumers are headed.
I work with people and their computers every day. I'm asked how I can look at a set of programs running on a device I've never seen before and know which ones should be there and which ones shouldn't. The average consumer doesn't want to know what I know to make their computer work. They don't want to have to know how, six ways from Sunday to fix their computer, or to access it. They just want it to work.
Why was Windows XP so popular? Do you know? It wasn't because "it just worked", it was because Windows XP was the first consumer OS (not enterprise) from Microsoft that took away MS-DOS completely. Many of the issues with Windows Me and Windows 9x all boiled down to MS-DOS being the core OS underneath. Microsoft knew this, that's why Windows Me existed. Windows Me tried to hide the layer between the Explorer UI and MS-DOS. However, it was shackled with all the problems of a DOS-based OS. Subsequently, Windows XP, despite the lack of MS-DOS compatibility, became one of the most popular OSes ever offered by Microsoft, preciesly because it took away MS-DOS.
Even Windows XP and every OS since has tried to shield users from the core OS. Windows XP even built in the capability to automatically restore core OS files if users did deleted them. A feature that still exists today. Microsoft isn't doing this because it wants to take away your access to the OS, it's doing this because consumers want stability. They want an OS to work and they want an OS to be robust. They don't want to be nerds, or geeks. They don't want to have to know what files are what and where they belong. They don't want to know what processes are or their relationship to services and applications or even what services and processes are. They just want that when they power up the device it works, and that when they go to use their application it works.
So regardless of whether or not it's mouse-based or finger/gesture-based, that's why the Metro UI and the Start Panel exist. To further separate users from the underpinnings of the OS, to give them access to exactly what they want in a device.
You mentioned that in Windows 8, in order to shut down, you have to go to the charm menu, click the Settings charm, click the Power icon, and then click what Power option you want (Shut down in your example). But you never mentioned what you have to do to access your applications. See, every time you use an application in Windows 7 you either have to click the Start button and then click the application, OR you have to click the Start Button, click All Programs, click the sub-group or application group folder, then possibly click on the application icon. And you probably do that repeatedly throughout the day. In Windows 8 no matter what, an application is, at the most three clicks away, but on average two. One to access the Start Panel, one to click the App icon. If the application isn't on the Start Panel, then three clicks are necessary to access the Start Panel, click the All Programs icon, and then click the application icon.
So you bemoan the fact that you're forced to take extra steps to shutdown your computer, but the fact that Windows 8 saves steps to access your applications you disregard.
Finally. No, I'm not a shill for nor am I an employee of Microsoft. I don't sell Microsoft products nor do I make any money whether Microsoft is successful or not. Nor am I paid by Microsoft. The correctness of my opinion, has nothing to do with my personal opinion of Microsoft. It has everything to do with knowing where the company began, where it has gone, seeing the changing tide of consumer expectations, and seeing where it wants to go.
|
