Why do people hate Windows 8.?

[link68759]

All of those properties result from being tied to the metro runtime environment, which in turn is tied to the metro UI. I agree that all those properties are desirable. I agree that those properties should also be available/enforced for desktop software. However, I don't think the metro UI should be a necessary part of that. Basically, I disagree that you wanting those properties in affect for your software should make you prefer a certain type of UI design language! None of those properties have anything to do with UI design. More importantly, both UI design languages have their place. Neither can replace the other, but they are good at addressing the specific user interface challenges they were designed to overcome. It wouldn't make sense to invalidate a relatively successful UI design language, due to a host of things that have absolutely nothing to do with the software interface design.

If it is those properties you want (I do too), then IMHO you shouldn't be advocating for metro apps on the desktop. Instead you should be advocating that a new and scrubbed version of the Win32 API be released that imposes that level of tidiness, simplicity and security on all Windows software. IMHO this is long overdue. IMHO it is time for MS to break with the past. We don't just need a new metro runtime environment. We also need a new Windows desktop environment.

I didn't mean to imply that I think the ModernUI runtime must go hand in hand with these benefits- I only meant to say that the idea has a bright future. I don't disagree that the current implementation leaves some desired improvement, I just disagree with people who don't understand the benefit, think the whole thing is stupid and should be scrapped.

However, I don't think we need to worry. You want a revised win32API? I don't think that's going to happen. ModernUI will continue to evolve to fill some feature gaps, and Win32 will continue to be developed in parallel, but MS will never do anything to jeopardize compatibility with older software. The win32 desktop will, for the foreseeable future, continue to operate in much the same way. But running windowed ModernUI apps is coming, and with that will come [better] dynamic resizing of UI elements, and the API will be expanded to have more features and freedom and so on. "We also need a new Windows desktop environment"
ModernUI will be this new environment in time.

 

[a5cent]

"We also need a new Windows desktop environment" ModernUI will be this new environment in time.

I'm sceptical. I just don't see a single UI paradigm being equally capable in both touch and traditional desktop environments at the same time. I'm not saying it's impossible, but it doesn't seem obvious to me how that would be achieved. I really think these are two separate UI paradigms that just don't mix. If metro applications were to cloak themselves in a different UI when running on the desktop, then okay. IE already does this to a degree. Maybe that is where this is headed.

You want a revised win32API? I don't think that's going to happen. ModernUI will continue to evolve to fill some feature gaps, and Win32 will continue to be developed in parallel, but MS will never do anything to jeopardize compatibility with older software.

No. I wasn't suggesting breaking compatibility. MS could however do the same thing they did with Metro. Just add a new version of the Win32 API that runs alongside the old. Both APIs would use the same implementation, but software using the newer Win32 API would require installation through the app store, support live tiles, have no knowledge of the registry, be unable to read/write anywhere except to local storage except through user controlled file load/save dialogs, etc, etc, etc

I'm suggesting this because I think it would be a more practical way of getting existing software onto a more modern track. I think that is more likely to succeed than trying to get Adobe to write a metro aware version of Photoshop. I think the properties you mentioned are extremely important. I just don't see the Windows ecosystem ever getting to that state if the metro track is the only route that leads there.

 

[link68759]

I'm sceptical. I just don't see a single UI paradigm being equally capable in both touch and traditional desktop environments at the same time. I'm not saying it's impossible, but it doesn't seem obvious to me how that would be achieved. I really think these are two separate UI paradigms that just don't mix. If metro applications were to cloak themselves in a different UI when running on the desktop, then okay. IE already does this to a degree. Maybe that is where this is headed.



No. I wasn't suggesting breaking compatibility. MS could however do the same thing they did with Metro. Just add a new version of the Win32 API that runs alongside the old. Both APIs would use the same implementation, but software using the newer Win32 API would require installation through the app store, support live tiles, have no knowledge of the registry, be unable to read/write anywhere except to local storage except through user controlled file load/save dialogs, etc, etc, etc

I'm suggesting this because I think it would be a more practical way of getting existing software onto a more modern track. I think that is more likely to succeed than trying to get Adobe to write a metro aware version of Photoshop. I think the properties you mentioned are extremely important. I just don't see the Windows ecosystem ever getting to that state if the metro track is the only route that leads there.

But what you described *is* ModernUI with a different skin. Why would they start a third separate API/runtime? That's just a bad move.

I'm not necessarily saying what I think they should do. I'm saying this is what they are going to do. This is where the ModernUI path leads; perhaps a decade away, but it will go there. As for things like photoshop, when ModernUI matures a bit and gains more adoption, I don't think anyone would have to "get adobe to write" it. They'll want to. And with the high level of code portability, it won't be that hard.

Now to do some speculation. Look at iPhone and iPad. You make one app, and you can have that app present a different UI depending on which device it is being run on. What's to say ModernUI won't eventually have something like that? It could even change on the same device, when switching from fullscreen to windowed mode. Or, the same layout could be kept, but with improvements such as intelligent restraints and resizing of UI elements, the ModernUI style we have today could remain ostensibly unchanged but for the ability of apps to be resized to smaller rectangles and the content shrinks with it.

 

[Steve Itman]

I think that is a very poor analogy. Just the fact that software is far more malleable and multi-functional than kitchen appliances invalidates it. A fridge will never be anything but a volume of cooled air used primarily to preserve food. That severely limits the extent of possible innovation. Compare that to computing devices, which are used for a thousand different things (from entertainment to bookkeeping to scientific simulations), by billions of people with thousands of different professions, each of which have different and unique requirements. The possibilities for innovation are endless. The OS should support as many of those scenarios as possible. The computing device is literally the most configurable device ever invented by man. With that flexibility comes some complexity however, part of which is more frequent change and adaptations. That is simply unavoidable

If the kitchen appliance analogy held any weight, we'd be using our smartphones by typing in DOS boxes or running shell scripts, because for someone who never experienced anything beyond a command prompt, todays graphical user interfaces would also be a completely unrecognizable. The only way the kitchen appliance analogy makes sense, is if you truly believe that graphical user interfaces have been perfected, and that from this point onwards, any innovation can only make things worse. I doubt we are anywhere close to having perfected the graphical user interface.

I think it is a great analogy. I would argue the OS is just a dumb appliance. It's a place where apps are installed and used and provides the base level of the 4 C's (control, context, continuity, conveyance) that should permeate through the apps. I would argue Microsoft Windows biggest threat is one of the Linux GUI (I tried Ubuntu's recently and was impressed) or OSX. The only thing keeping it back is Microsoft Office since it will not run on the other OS's (except OSX). If it weren't for that, businesses would have no need to install Windows.

Microsoft's proper play would be to just make their OS the "premium" one that costs a little more. They should have focused on real productivity gains, making things work that don't like how Windows never remembers your folder view preferences.

I think it's great you don't like the Start Menu and have your own way. I love the start menu and find it one of the most convenient features ever, everything I need is under that structure. The majority of Windows users agree with me hence all the swirl about taking it out and dozen or so apps now to put it back. It's an ivory tower play, which never goes well.

 

[Steve Itman]

Which Cisco VPN client? I use Cisco AnyConnect on my Windows 8.1 system at home all the time, it works flawlessly.

The Cisco VPN not anyconnect. Basically I have to use freeware Shrewsoft for my commercial clients who use Windows 8 to connect to their Rackspace environments.

 

[Steve Itman]

What are you even talking about?

The mouse doesn't suddenly behave differently anywhere. You point and click. What's unintuitive here?

It does not right-click anymore. That is what is unintuitive. The mouse works correctly in desktop mode but the useless metro/fullscreen mode it does not do anything anymore (open useless fullscreen PDF viewer and right click, tell me what happens). One of the most useful, most ergonomic features created on the mouse and Microsoft disabled it because there is no right-click on a Windows phone. Brilliant!

 

[Steve Itman]

Installed Classic Shell, and never had one single crash or issue.
It's perhaps the best Win version MSFT ever did in terms of stability.

Exactly. If you turn off the useless Metro interface, useless charms bar, useless fullscreen apps, and then install a third party software designed to make Win 8 look like Win 7, then it works great! I hesitate to call it stable. I almost never get a blue screen on Win 7. Win 8 has been frequent, in addition to the "limited network connectivity" bug. I get that a couple times a week with no cure other than reboot. Tried updating all the drivers, turned off auto power controls etc... No dice. Not more stable.

 

[Steve Itman]

So welcome be the classic menus. You can keep going with the modern UI. Peace

Classic menus = make it look and work just like Windows 7. I don't know how that can be praise for windows 8.

 

[Steve Itman]

...you know that you can download and use the regular Skype desktop app, yes?

In nothing but fullscreen mode right?

 

[Steve Itman]

Even if you just ignore the start screen, there are many new features that make life much easier. I'm not even going to bring them up because everyone that's here and reading this stuff either knows what these things are or they are just here to hate anything MS does.

My career delivering Microsoft based software solutions so I definitely do not hate Microsoft just Windows 8. I am still waiting to hear about all those "many new features that make life easier". I've used Win 8 everyday for a year now. I do not use the useless Metro. I also have a Win 7 PC. I can fathom no advantage Win 8 gives me. Boot up times have almost imperceptible differences (except for the fact Win 8 blue screens all the time so I get to see that boot a lot - partly my fault as I have refused to update to 8.1).

 

[Steve Itman]

I'm sceptical. I just don't see a single UI paradigm being equally capable in both touch and traditional desktop environments at the same time.

There's really no point to having one that can do that. Another writer mentioned Microsoft's consolidation move is about as important to users as having matching socks and underwear. They are completely different usage scenarios with very different hardware and user interfaces. Microsoft did it simply to train us to like Windows phones/tablets.

 

[Steve Itman]

I've noticed that the people I know who like Win 8 are people whose career involves significant desktop support. Anyone else hates it. (except for kids who have the computer to play). Is this over-generalizing?

 

[a5cent]

But what you described *is* ModernUI with a different skin. Why would they start a third separate API/runtime?

Not a third separate API, but a newer version of the Win32 API that is purged of all the outdated concepts that exist purely for compatibility's sake. The idea would be to make it as easy as possible to port Win32 based applications into a cleaner, more secure environment that jives well the concepts introduced by WinRT, without forcing developers to sacrifice one or two decades worth of investments in Win32 software. IMHO that is not something Windows Store apps can achieve, because the differences between WinRT and Win32 are insurmountable.

I don't think anyone would have to "get adobe to write" it. They'll want to. And with the high level of code portability, it won't be that hard.

Where do you see this high level of code portability between Win32 and WinRT? I see zero.

Now to do some speculation. Look at iPhone and iPad. You make one app, and you can have that app present a different UI depending on which device it is being run on. What's to say ModernUI won't eventually have something like that?

Nothing. I just wouldn't call that "ModernUI". I'd call that WinRT with support for multiple UI paradigms. One being touch centric (ModernUI) the other being the traditional desktop UI. Like I said, IE is already doing something like that.

Either way, our differences are small compared to what others here think. I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you either. I'm just extremely sceptical that MS will ever get companies with large investments in desktop software to port those applications over to WinRT. It's too different, it doesn't perform as well as Win32, and more than everything else, I think it's far too costly.

I think this is an interesting debate, but I'll let you have the last word on this since we're probably getting a bit off topic. ;-)

 

[a5cent]

One of the most useful, most ergonomic features created on the mouse and Microsoft disabled it because there is no right-click on a Windows phone. Brilliant!

Don't understand. I can right click all over the place on the start screen. Works fine for me. In W8.0 the RMB really wasn't that useful, but the reason wasn't because there is no right-click on a Windows Phone. It's because your finger can't touch the screen in a left-click or right-click kind of way. It's been improved in W8.1

...you know that you can download and use the regular Skype desktop app, yes?

In nothing but fullscreen mode right?

Of course not. You can use it just like you always used Skype on the desktop. Are you sure you are using Windows 8?

I've noticed that the people I know who like Win 8 are people whose career involves significant desktop support. Anyone else hates it. (except for kids who have the computer to play). Is this over-generalizing?

Probably. I can only speak for myself and I certainly don't fall into the desktop support category. A job like that would kill me.

 

[Steve Itman]

Don't understand. I can right click all over the place on the start screen. Works fine for me. In W8.0 the RMB really wasn't that useful, but the reason wasn't because there is no right-click on a Windows Phone. It's because your finger can't touch the screen in a left-click or right-click kind of way. It's been improved in W8.1



Of course not. You can use it just like you always used Skype on the desktop. Are you sure you are using Windows 8?



Probably. I can only speak for myself and I certainly don't fall into the desktop support category. A job like that would kill me.

Go to useless Metro Interface. Open the useless PDF viewer, you know the one that will force a PDF doc to fill your entire 27" monitor and not allow you to window it like approximately 99% of users would want. Try to right-click somewhere. What happens? For me nothing. I get no context menu, one of the most useful things ever put into Windows. Using Win 8. (have not "upgraded" to 8.1 yet)

 

[a5cent]

Go to useless Metro Interface. Open the useless PDF viewer, you know the one that will force a PDF doc to fill your entire 27" monitor and not allow you to window it like approximately 99% of users would want. Try to right-click somewhere. What happens? For me nothing. I get no context menu, one of the most useful things ever put into Windows. Using Win 8. (have not "upgraded" to 8.1 yet)

Argg ;-)

Look... that is not W8. That is Microsoft's PDF viewer for metro! It's just an app that is shipped with the OS. The only "metro like" thing that belongs to W8 is the start screen. The reason you are disappointed is because you expect to use a touch centric app as if it were desktop software. Not everyone here is going to agree with me, but IMHO that is a ridiculous expectation. I don't think those two usage models can ever be combined under a single UI design language, and expecting that seems ridiculous to me. It may work in some cases, but it will never work for every piece of software. If you want to open a PDF document on the desktop, and you are a heavy mouse/keyboard user, then use desktop software. There are more than enough choices. Why must you use precisely the touch centric app that is least suited to your desktop use-case?

 

[link68759]

Not a third separate API, but a newer version of the Win32 API that is purged of all the outdated concepts that exist purely for compatibility's sake. The idea would be to make it as easy as possible to port Win32 based applications into a cleaner, more secure environment that jives well the concepts introduced by WinRT, without forcing developers to sacrifice one or two decades worth of investments in Win32 software. IMHO that is not something Windows Store apps can achieve, because the differences between WinRT and Win32 are insurmountable.



Where do you see this high level of code portability between Win32 and WinRT? I see zero.



Nothing. I just wouldn't call that "ModernUI". I'd call that WinRT with support for multiple UI paradigms. One being touch centric (ModernUI) the other being the traditional desktop UI. Like I said, IE is already doing something like that.

Either way, our differences are small compared to what others here think. I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you either. I'm just extremely sceptical that MS will ever get companies with large investments in desktop software to port those applications over to WinRT. It's too different, it doesn't perform as well as Win32, and more than everything else, I think it's far too costly.

I think this is an interesting debate, but I'll let you have the last word on this since we're probably getting a bit off topic. ;-)

I only have one comment, because I agree with you that we're basically talking about the same thing from different angles

I'm under the impression code portability is very high. For example, putty was ported to WP8, and according to the developers, "all the original putty code is untouched, we only adapted the UI for mobile in ModernUI style." WP development isn't that far from RT development; once again it's mostly UI differences.

Obviously anything that is deeply rooted in working with Windows desktop internals (such as VPNs which create network adapters and so on) will not be as easily portable, but for anything that's simple I/O and doesn't much around to much in the system components, porting it shouldn't be hard.


Steve Itman, your incessant negativity isn't making us see your side of things. So far, you've made sweeping statements and backed them up with minor and almost irrelevant examples, all the while hatred seething from every sentence. I don't think your irrational distaste for ModernUI is really contributing to our otherwise constructive discussion.

 

[anon(5445874)]

My career delivering Microsoft based software solutions so I definitely do not hate Microsoft just Windows 8. I am still waiting to hear about all those "many new features that make life easier". I've used Win 8 everyday for a year now. I do not use the useless Metro. I also have a Win 7 PC. I can fathom no advantage Win 8 gives me. Boot up times have almost imperceptible differences (except for the fact Win 8 blue screens all the time so I get to see that boot a lot - partly my fault as I have refused to update to 8.1).

Here are just a few examples that made my life way easier the other day. MS exchanged my Surface Pro for a Surface Pro 2. Out of the box, all I had to do was log in, and most of my settings and things were all in place. My desktop synced, my lock screen synced. Windows 8 also syncs your favorites, usernames, passwords, WiFi passwords and more. Also, I have an external HD with ISO's on them for the programs I install often (which is really handy since the surface has no dvd drive), without having to install 3rd party software, I can right click an iso to mount the disk image In the past I would have to go install some other software first. Also, I love the group copy/move boxes, and you can now pause them. that comes in really handy if you need to hurry up and do something else because pausing frees up your system recourses. And the folder up button in explorer is nice too. There are many more things too. Maybe perhaps since you didn't know of all these wonderful things, you should be in a non tech field. And if you don't see any of these things as super nice, than perhaps you don't really use computers.

 

[TonyDedrick]

Here are just a few examples that made my life way easier the other day. MS exchanged my Surface Pro for a Surface Pro 2. Out of the box, all I had to do was log in, and most of my settings and things were all in place. My desktop synced, my lock screen synced. Windows 8 also syncs your favorites, usernames, passwords, WiFi passwords and more. Also, I have an external HD with ISO's on them for the programs I install often (which is really handy since the surface has no dvd drive), without having to install 3rd party software, I can right click an iso to mount the disk image In the past I would have to go install some other software first. Also, I love the group copy/move boxes, and you can now pause them. that comes in really handy if you need to hurry up and do something else because pausing frees up your system recourses. And the folder up button in explorer is nice too. There are many more things too. Maybe perhaps since you didn't know of all these wonderful things, you should be in a non tech field. And if you don't see any of these things as super nice, than perhaps you don't really use computers.

Or the poster has a different idea of what is useful than you do.

 

[anon(5445874)]

Or the poster has a different idea of what is useful than you do.

This is one of the most useless posts I've ever seen.