Is the Desktop needed?

[michail71]

Other than keeping change fearing people happy is there a need for the desktop in Windows 10?

As far as I can tell everything would function normally if the Start screen always showed. Traditional apps can just window into a empty desktop with the wallpaper. Then go back to the Start screen view once all apps on the desktop are minimized or closed.

 

[Jazmac]

Other than keeping change fearing people happy is there a need for the desktop in Windows 10?

As far as I can tell everything would function normally if the Start screen always showed. Traditional apps can just window into a empty desktop with the wallpaper. Then go back to the Start screen view once all apps on the desktop are minimized or closed.

You mean like some google chromebook type thing. Nahh, Not happening. But then, that is the beauty of Windows. You can customize it until you don't have a desktop at all or so those of us who still require the organization you can only get on the desktop, you can get that too.

 

[Mainer82]

98% of the time I'm in the desktop while on Windows 8.1 and Windows 10.

 

[michail71]

You mean like some google chromebook type thing. Nahh, Not happening. But then, that is the beauty of Windows. You can customize it until you don't have a desktop at all or so those of us who still require the organization you can only get on the desktop, you can get that too.

I'm not saying do away with the desktop altogether, my title is a little misleading. I'm just saying it doesn't need to be there without any programs or apps present on the UI. At that point show the start screen.

I even like the new multiple desktop feature. It just needs a faster way to cycle. Much like pages in the old RT environment.

 

[mikewp]

The *only* reason I visit the Start screen is to access the sports app from time to time and I have a couple games. My laptop logs in to my desktop and switches there automatically once a Start screen app is closed. Since there are next to no other apps available that I need, I use my laptop almost strictly as a productivity device and my Android tablet for apps I actually need.

Myself...I'm very open to change. I tried to work within the Start screen framework and I have given iPhone, Android phones and tablets (tried to use it as a true desktop replacement!) an honest chance. Just doesn't work...Several steps backward for the most part. For productivity, I absolutely need a dedicated and flexible desktop area.

Personally, I want Microsoft to survive and thrive. What the OP is asking for has been a big reason (no apps as apps become more important is another) why users are upset with Windows and why some (many?) have moved on and why business haven't upgraded.

 

[Tschonatschan]

I think that it would be pointless, if you have desktops but you cant place anything on it. for me its a place where i can place files i just need temporarily. for apps and stuff i use the startscreen exclusively.

but the big advantage of the desktop is drag'n'drop.
therefore it would have been better (in my opinion) to make the desktop the homescreen with tiles (live or not live, files or apss or whatever). so just the other way around what you suggested

 

[dkediger]

Yeah, there will be Win32 apps out there for years to come. Its not so much fear of change as its inertia within the installed app base.

That said, I think running those apps in a Parallels Coherence style-like presentation like on the Mac would be a very nice intermediate step that MS should implement.

 

[michail71]

I think that it would be pointless, if you have desktops but you cant place anything on it. for me its a place where i can place files i just need temporarily. for apps and stuff i use the startscreen exclusively.

but the big advantage of the desktop is drag'n'drop.
therefore it would have been better (in my opinion) to make the desktop the homescreen with tiles (live or not live, files or apss or whatever). so just the other way around what you suggested

It's sort of the exact same thing I'm saying, lol.

But the start screen does lack the ability to add files.

 

[dkediger]

I think that it would be pointless, if you have desktops but you cant place anything on it. for me its a place where i can place files i just need temporarily. for apps and stuff i use the startscreen exclusively.

but the big advantage of the desktop is drag'n'drop.
therefore it would have been better (in my opinion) to make the desktop the homescreen with tiles (live or not live, files or apss or whatever). so just the other way around what you suggested

There is also this. Any casual glance at peoples PC desktops reveals "piles" of folders and files like their real, physical desktops...

 

[michail71]

Personally, I want Microsoft to survive and thrive. What the OP is asking for has been a big reason (no apps as apps become more important is another) why users are upset with Windows and why some (many?) have moved on and why business haven't upgraded.

They were different environments in 8. Now it's the same environment with taskbar and all. All I'm saying is there could be an option to use the start screen in place of the desktop. It wouldn't change a single thing as far as multitasking goes in Windows 10.

I keep all the typical desktop stuff in my OneDrive.

All I have on my desktop is the recycle bin. Anything critical can be pinned to the task bar and works from either screen.

 

[Wevenhuis]

The only two apps I need the desktop environment for are windows movie maker and microsoft ICE. All else the start menu and apps suffice.

 

[Keith Wallace]

You're talking about having programs open to a blank desktop. If that's the case, what's the problem of just having the desktop? You can already set the Start Screen as the default PC destination (I changed it to the desktop), so I guess the question is where the benefit comes from, should you take it away.

 

[michail71]

You're talking about having programs open to a blank desktop. If that's the case, what's the problem of just having the desktop? You can already set the Start Screen as the default PC destination (I changed it to the desktop), so I guess the question is where the benefit comes from, should you take it away.

I haven't seen that option. There appears to be very little customization.

Benefit would be one less click to get to the start screen as it's always there without a foreground application running in the UI. One would have to give up using the desktop as a dumping grounds but it could still be there in app form.

It would really just be a subtle change but one that I'd like to have an option for.

 

[BackToVoid]

98% of the time I'm in the desktop while on Windows 8.1 and Windows 10.

So am I. The WP user is very few for now.

 

[michail71]

You're talking about having programs open to a blank desktop. If that's the case, what's the problem of just having the desktop? You can already set the Start Screen as the default PC destination (I changed it to the desktop), so I guess the question is where the benefit comes from, should you take it away.

Where is the option? I can't find it. I had it set to desktop on 8.1. Start was too jarring on a desktop in 8 because of the different environments but now they are the same.

 

[Exosoul]

For people interested into something akin to digital 3D modeling or drawings, the desktop is the best interface that we can use though for 3d Modeling, it's kind of mandatory.

 

[tom5]

Desktop is very needed and it is a logical interface for desktop PCs with mice and non-touch screens.

 

[michail71]

I'm not sure if people aren't reading anything I said or just not getting it?

It has nothing to do with non-touch interfaces or 3D modeling. All I'm talking about is merging the start menu into the desktop. The current desktop is nothing more than a folder showing icon view. It would have zero impact on those things. Hell, I often have a few dozen windows open over multiple monitors when I'm doing software development.

There would still be canvases for windowed applications.

 

[lamdfer]

sure,great!I will try

 

[Don Geronimo]

It will be very difficult to get rid of legacy desktop support in the near to mid future, especially in the enterprise realm, where a refactoring of an internal program would be expensive (in time and money). In addition, the Desktop paradigm is still an important workflow for people who do a lot of computer-intensive work.

I can see future applications written as Universal Apps, but even when legacy apps finish the end of their life, a Desktop mode would still exist to give people the power to work how they like.