Why is Microsoft backtracking on its vision

ininjam

New member
Nov 26, 2013
34
0
0
Visit site
I don't really get your point (clearly I'm not in this so called 'intelligence class'). What is it not a good example of? I don't see this as "complaining for complaining's sake". I see it as complaining because a new product is worse than an old product, and I now spend much more time using Linux and iOS rather than Windows because of it. And as I said before, the PDF viewer is just one example of this behaviour - it happens in so many situations. Nice one Steve!
But as I'm not a member of your intelligence class, no doubt this is just my ignorance and stupidity. If my mind was as developed as yours, no doubt I would love jumping between the desktop and metro all the time.
My point was that before Microsoft didn't even offer a baked-in pdf viewer, and now they do, and if it's in the style of their vision for their platform, that's completely fine, and there's a zillion other alternatives that you can look at and choose the most suitable one for you out of. As with all the other softwares (your 'many situation' I presume), no one forces you to use the out-of-box softwares, and as someone has said above, customizing the user experience to one's choosing has always been what everyone has been doing since the dawn of time, regardless of the OSes, or anything for that matter, of their choosing.
And since it's a thread I started, I apologize if its contents have offended you, even though I was not the one who mentioned the 'intelligence race', nor do I think it is true. However, I think since none of us has ever mentioned it after the comment but you, bringing it out to spark discontent and to separate yourself from the group is not constructive and does not make you special. I also hope you can be less spiteful in your future comments, we are all human, we can sense it, and a sour discussion only leaves a bad taste in everyone's mouth.
 
Last edited:

anony_mouse

Banned
Aug 10, 2013
1,042
0
0
Visit site
Actually I found the 'intelligence class' (not race) comment particularly interesting and outrageous. I was extremely surprised no-one else responded to it as it seems fascinating from a psychological perspective. Clearly any comments I made about it were aimed at the original poster of that comment, not others in the forum. I hope that would be obvious.
I'm now quite bored of the 'PDF viewer' discussion. If no one else thinks it's a problem, then good for you. I'll make my choices and you can make yours. But I am interested in views, as I said above, about dumping the desktop altogether. What is your opinion of this?
 

ininjam

New member
Nov 26, 2013
34
0
0
Visit site
Actually I found the 'intelligence class' (not race) comment particularly interesting and outrageous. I was extremely surprised no-one else responded to it as it seems fascinating from a psychological perspective. Clearly any comments I made about it were aimed at the original poster of that comment, not others in the forum. I hope that would be obvious.
I'm now quite bored of the 'PDF viewer' discussion. If no one else thinks it's a problem, then good for you. I'll make my choices and you can make yours. But I am interested in views, as I said above, about dumping the desktop altogether. What is your opinion of this?
In this matter, my view is that Metro is more suitable for touch screen devices, desktop is of course for desktop computing, and it would be more functional if, instead of getting rid of one or the other, Microsoft make Windows 'adapt' to each user use case, which I believe Microsoft is finally doing with its Update 1. I made the thread out of frustration at the initial report as I thought Microsoft was not 'adapting', but the more I read about it, the more I think Microsoft is doing the right thing.
 

jmshub

Moderator
Apr 16, 2011
2,667
0
0
Visit site
Ok, let's try this from a different angle.
1. What advantage is it for me to use metro rather than the desktop on my PC? Please bear in mind that I don't like metro.
2. What advantage is it to Microsoft to dump me back in metro so regularly? Please once again bear in mind that I don't like metro, and that alternative OS's are available.

1 - You don't need to use Metro. You never have to use any metro apps, you can use desktop applications to perform every task that you can in Metro.

2 - As I said before, the defaults out of the box will send you to metro apps. Change the default. You only need to do this once, and it takes like two minutes. Then you never have to see metro again ever if you don't want to. You are making an enormous mountain out of a molehill. Update 1 for 8.1 is rumored to open metro apps in the desktop to avoid this behavior. I don't know, as I haven't seen it yet, but this may solve your problem. It may not, and you may be happier with Linux. If that is the best solution for you, then go for it. You're not going to upset anyone here. And to continue to argue the philosophy of the dual UI when solutions have been offered to your issue is straight up trolling.
 

anony_mouse

Banned
Aug 10, 2013
1,042
0
0
Visit site
1 - You don't need to use Metro. (etc)

As I said above, I see this as a problem as it happens in so many situations. If you don't, then that's good for you. BTW, I don't have to stick with Linux - Windows 7 is also possible.
Interestingly, when I did try to use metro, I found the opposite problem - I would regularly get dumped back in the desktop. This happened a lot, especially when performing more "technical" tasks. It gives the whole thing a rather "unfinished" feel.
Anyway, arguing about the philosophy of dual UI solutions seems perfectly valid. Isn't that the point of this thread?
And just to warn you, accusing another member of 'trolling' is against Forum guidelines.
 

Mike Gibson

New member
Apr 17, 2013
192
0
0
Visit site
The Win8 "dual UI" was an idiotic choice by MSFT (by "dual UI" I mean Metro and the RT API effort together). There was absolutely no reason to fragment Windows that way. The result:

1. MSFT threw 1.5 billion existing users and who knows how many billions of hours of user experience in the toilet. When people see the Metro UI on a machine at BestBuy they think, "where's *my* Windows?". At this point, if they're going to have to learn a completely new UI they might as well look at the alternatives to Windows. Chromebooks are the serious threat here from the consumer side. Businesses are simply waiting out MSFT to see where to go next -- Apple being the big threat there.

2. MSFT threw thousands (hundreds of thousands?) of ISVs under the bus by tossing the well known/battletested Win32 API in trash and replacing it with the critically limited and incompatible RT API. And worse, they didn't even implement the RT strategy properly! To fully support Windows, ISVs have to create three completely separate source code trees: one for Win32 (which pays the bills), one for WinRT, and a third for WinPRT. In addition, MSFT takes 30% of sales for the RT programs. So, if you're a small ISV, are you going to triple your work just to support MSFT's RT disaster and give MSFT 30% of sales? I don't think so. It's all pain and no gain.

3. MSFT isn't immune from item #2 either. Look at the confusion over Office on WinRT and WinPRT. They had to give themselves an exclusion so that Office would run in Desktop mode on the SurfaceRT. Even MSFT's own app teams didn't want to take on the extra work to produce RT versions of their programs!

Fragmenting Windows like MSFT did with Win8 is, without a doubt, the biggest blunder I've ever seen in my decades in the tech world. Most companies would be bankrupted by it. MSFT will continue on for a decade by simple inertia and their huge cash pile before becoming completely irrelevant. The fix is completely obvious to anyone with a brain:

a. Define a secure subset of the existing Win32 API. Throw out old, obsolete APIs.
b. Implement a simple, scalable UI API in Win32. Call #1 and #2 together "Win32X".
c. Implement a Win32X shell that scales with the display size. Windowed mode on large screens, fullscreen on small displays.
d. Implement a Win32X Store but only take a 10% cut of sales.
e. Backport Win32X to Windows 7.

Item (e) is critical because it means that ISVs can switch their programs to the new Win32X system while maintaining compatibility with existing users. That eliminates the need to have multiple, incompatible source trees for development. With proper dev guidance from MSFT, a single source tree could run on phones, tablets, laptops, desktops, and even XBoxOne.

Users would be happy with a Win32X system because the "Desktop" remains a desktop on their large screen PCs. Win32X apps would run in a window on large screen devices like always ... and when they run it on a small screen device, the app would adapt to the available space (which is the same as running in a small window on the Desktop, anyway).

The Win32X concept is so obvious that they have to have considered and then rejected it. The top two people responsible for that decision are gone. Now's the time for the new CEO and Board to root out all the others responsible for the WinRT disaster.
 

jmshub

Moderator
Apr 16, 2011
2,667
0
0
Visit site
Mike, I think you make some good points, but I don't entirely agree either. Right off the bat, you say that Microsoft had no reason to add the Metro UI to Windows. I think this is an important distinction, because Microsoft was vastly behind on mobile and tablet. They needed something for the ipad / android tablet market. I do like having a "real" operating system on a tablet instead of an intentionally limited os like android or ios. I will concede that the two UI approach wasn't perfect, and there are times it definitely isn't as polished as I'd like. When I get pushed to the desktop to make configuration changes to my Dell V8P, or needing to use Metro apps on my 15" non-touch laptop, it's not a perfect experience, but I think Microsoft has been making the process better with 8.1, and the pending Update 1.

Your point #1 however, I disagree with completely. Chrome OS is basically useless. It's a netbook OS at best. It may get better. It may be a serious challenge to Windows over time. That time isn't soon. So, nobody is buying Chrome, and they aren't buying it to replace Windows PCs. At best, they are using them as a second PC for basic browsing or whatever.

Likewise, business does not use Apple. OSX doesn't work in the enterprise, and Apple has backed away from that even further. Even with any possible pains that Windows 8 may have, it's still Windows. That makes it fully compatible with Active Directory. There is no computer management tool for enterprise that can even come close to AD.
 

T Moore

New member
Jan 21, 2013
1,410
0
0
Visit site
On my Surface RT the UI the machine boots up to is my choice. All that is being changed is the default bootup UI. The user selection will still be there.
Why the flap over one checkbox?
 

anony_mouse

Banned
Aug 10, 2013
1,042
0
0
Visit site
On my Surface RT the UI the machine boots up to is my choice. All that is being changed is the default bootup UI. The user selection will still be there.
Why the flap over one checkbox?

I have never used Windows RT, so please correct me if I'm wrong - but doesn't Windows RT have only the metro UI, plus, a crippled version of the desktop that only supports Office? What choice do you have when booting Windows RT?
 

anony_mouse

Banned
Aug 10, 2013
1,042
0
0
Visit site
So, nobody is buying Chrome, and they aren't buying it to replace Windows PCs. At best, they are using them as a second PC for basic browsing or whatever.

I am confused by your statement. On the one hand, nobody is buying Chrome (books - I assume). On the other, they are buying them as a second PC. Which is it? Certainly, the first statement is wrong - see Chromebook Sales Surge in 2013 to 21% of All Notebook Sales | TechnoBuffalo (or many other sources).

I used to agree with you about Chromebooks, but I had one on loan recently and it completely changed by mind. It's not a replacement for a Linux or Windows desktop/laptop, but it is a very fast, no maintenance web browser (+ a bit) with keyboard attached. Like tablets and smartphones, I found it reduced even further what I use a PC for.
 

ohgood

New member
Aug 20, 2011
1,016
0
0
Visit site
1 Microsoft was vastly behind on mobile and tablet. They needed something for the ipad / android tablet market.
2 I do like having a "real" operating system on a tablet instead of an intentionally limited os like android or ios.
3 I will concede that the two UI approach wasn't perfect, and there are times it definitely isn't as polished as I'd like.
4 When I get pushed to the desktop to make configuration changes to my Dell V8P, or needing to use Metro apps on my 15" non-touch laptop, it's not a perfect experience, but I think Microsoft has been making the process better with 8.1, and the pending Update 1.

5 Your point #1 however, I disagree with completely.
6 Chrome OS is basically useless. It's a netbook OS at best.
7 It may get better. It may be a serious challenge to Windows over time. That time isn't soon.
8 So, nobody is buying Chrome OR surface rt and they aren't buying it to replace Windows PCs, Linux PCs, androids, or Mac desktops/laptops... see 9
9 At best, they are using them as a second PC for basic browsing or whatever..

1 )
wp = not a real desktop os
rt ditto
iOS ditto
android ditto
chrome ditto

2) they are mobile, not desktop OS's, agreed
3) hundreds of millions agree
4) yes, killing off metro would be a start see 3
5)...
6) like iOS, rt, android, cobal, when compared to a full office suite?
7) I've seen chrome books in the wild on campuses. lots if them. lots of androids and iPads too. never once have I seen a surface. surface is looking for a small sliver of the market place to be, not android, iOS, chrome. they're doing fine.
8) fixed
9) how they are used doesn't really matter, if it racks up another sale
 

Ian Too

New member
Jun 19, 2012
350
0
0
Visit site
I have never used Windows RT, so please correct me if I'm wrong - but doesn't Windows RT have only the metro UI, plus, a crippled version of the desktop that only supports Office? What choice do you have when booting Windows RT?

Your attitude to the Modern UI would be better if you appreciated exactly what it offered. As a user of a Surface RT, I'm in a better position to judge.

Firstly, as a touch or gesture interface, the traditional desktop is a non-starter. It isn't just that the buttons are too small, one advantage of a mouse is that it can give extremely fine control, finer than your fingers. The trouble with a mouse though is that it ties you to a real desktop as well as a computer one. It is near impossible with a traditional computer to sit on your settee and browse the internet - yes you can use the track pad on your laptop, but that's painfully slow and clumsy. The Modern UI makes it easy for tablet users to free themselves from the tyranny of desks (and who wants a desk in their home anyway?) and consume media. Whats more, I can even use the handwriting recognition built in to do work on the settee, in bed or even out in the real world with no fuss - taking notes with One note or writing something more substantial with Word.

I believe people who insist on Windows Pro on their tablet are making mistake, because although Win Pro can run their legacy software, they have to go back to a desk to do it, which negates the point of a nice light tablet.

Another thing the Modern UI gives is instant real time information. On my start screen I have local weather, my calendar, local train times(and whether they're running late) and news being presented to me. Once you have access to this type of information, it's very hard to do without it and it is all synchronised between my PCs so it doesn't matter which one I'm using.

Modern UI apps are better than traditional ones in that. like in iOS, they are vetted before becoming available in the store. This means that one day, we will not have to waste money, memory and processor power running anti-virus software.

You are right, the desktop in RT is limited to running just a few programs. This is because the vast majority of legacy software will not run on ARM processors and I knew this before I bought the Surface, so I'm not going to complain or accept it as a criticism, because every Modern UI app will run irrespective of whether the processor is ARM or Intel. I look forward to the release of touch optimised versions of Office and the demise of the desktop in RT.

Right now, Windows is in transition and its easy to understand why many people are unhappy, especially f they are naturally resistant to change, but iOS/Android/Chrome offer no conceptual advantages and can't match what Windows already offers. People talk as if iOS/Android are somehow optimal, but is the best you can come up with, really?

In the future touch or gesture will be the rule rather than the exception, voice and handwriting recognition will be so good that no one will type anything and the mouse will be a specialist tool like a graphics tablet. Then the desktop will be seen as the quaint and inefficient shell it is.

Microsoft could have copied Apple's static icons the way Google did, but instead they innovated to a dynamic UI which provides useful information. They should be applauded for their bravery instead of this constant mealy-mouthed, narrow minded Luddite hypocrisy that we have to endure on forums like this and from the press.

Microsoft has the clearer vision and it will pay off in the end.
 

angusdegraosta

New member
Jul 1, 2013
151
0
0
Visit site
Desktop IE is great for running web-based Spotify... the music will play in the background while using apps. RT is a solid, stable OS. I am looking forward to Update 1 on my touch laptop and Surface 2. Microsoft is simply making design changes that make sense for non-touch users as well.
 

AndyCalling

New member
Apr 15, 2013
1,483
0
0
Visit site
Win 8.1 is useful on a tablet though (not so sure about the need for Pro). The advantage is that you can install whatever third party drivers you need. You can also install desktop apps which have the advantage that they can be installed to the SD card. Metro apps are limited to the internal boot drive, which can be quite small on a 32gig tablet after space is grabbed by Windows & Office. Using a stylus means desktop apps can be used pretty well, though having a Logitech Anywhere Mouse to hand makes using such a breeze, even from the sofa. RT is actually good for my old Dad, but a bit restrictive for me. With 8.1 I can install my TV tuner software and watch TV whilst in hotels without the pain of limited hotel TV selections and rubbish hotel WiFi.
 

UncleGrandpa

New member
Nov 20, 2013
112
0
0
Visit site
Business users of Windows software, which make up a huge part of the Windows legacy...MUST HAVE an operational OS that runs legacy windows applications , furthermore a touchscreen is useless using legacy software. It will take YEARS before business apps conform to native Windows 8 apps. Hell, we are still using XP on lots of computers. By trying to combine a mobile OS written for touchscreens with a desktop OS that must be able to run legacy business apps, Microsoft has made a huge mistake. They should have kept the desktop and Metro completely separate OSs ...and not combined them into a hybrid demon.
 

anony_mouse

Banned
Aug 10, 2013
1,042
0
0
Visit site
I'm not sure who some of these points were aimed at as they don't seem relevant to any of my posts, but as my text is quoted, I will respond.

Your attitude to the Modern UI would be better if you appreciated exactly what it offered. As a user of a Surface RT, I'm in a better position to judge.

I've used Windows 8 and Windows Phone so I have some experience of metro and I appreciate what it offers. I haven't used Windows RT so I can't and didn't comment directly on that - hence my question.

Firstly, as a touch or gesture interface, the traditional desktop is a non-starter. It isn't just that the buttons are too small, one advantage of a mouse is that it can give extremely fine control, finer than your fingers. The trouble with a mouse though is that it ties you to a real desktop as well as a computer one. It is near impossible with a traditional computer to sit on your settee and browse the internet - yes you can use the track pad on your laptop, but that's painfully slow and clumsy. The Modern UI makes it easy for tablet users to free themselves from the tyranny of desks (and who wants a desk in their home anyway?) and consume media. Whats more, I can even use the handwriting recognition built in to do work on the settee, in bed or even out in the real world with no fuss - taking notes with One note or writing something more substantial with Word.

Fully agree with your first point. Traditional desktops offer a poor experience on a touchscreen. I have never personally had a problem with trackpads, but indeed a tablet is much nicer for web browsing, etc on a sofa. But for typing a significant amount of text or doing many other kinds of work, a desk is much more convenient.

I believe people who insist on Windows Pro on their tablet are making mistake, because although Win Pro can run their legacy software, they have to go back to a desk to do it, which negates the point of a nice light tablet.

Another thing the Modern UI gives is instant real time information. On my start screen I have local weather, my calendar, local train times(and whether they're running late) and news being presented to me. Once you have access to this type of information, it's very hard to do without it and it is all synchronised between my PCs so it doesn't matter which one I'm using.

Widgets/live tiles can be useful, but personally I can't say I miss them on my iPad. For me, they are a 'nice to have' rather than essential. But that's just my opinion. I would certainly welcome Apple adding something similar to iOS. On a desktop/laptop, I find tiles much less useful as I don't want to see metro.

Modern UI apps are better than traditional ones in that. like in iOS, they are vetted before becoming available in the store. This means that one day, we will not have to waste money, memory and processor power running anti-virus software.

You are right, the desktop in RT is limited to running just a few programs. This is because the vast majority of legacy software will not run on ARM processors and I knew this before I bought the Surface, so I'm not going to complain or accept it as a criticism, because every Modern UI app will run irrespective of whether the processor is ARM or Intel. I look forward to the release of touch optimised versions of Office and the demise of the desktop in RT.

I don't think I made any statements about Windows RT so I assume that is aimed at someone else. Regarding the 'app store' approach, personally I prefer Android, which my default limits you to installing software from the official app store, but allows you to install apps from other sources (at your own risk) if you like. Of course, there's nothing to stop Microsoft creating an 'app store' for desktop software. Apple have this already, and Linux distributions have had something similar since the 1990s.

Right now, Windows is in transition and its easy to understand why many people are unhappy, especially f they are naturally resistant to change, but iOS/Android/Chrome offer no conceptual advantages and can't match what Windows already offers. People talk as if iOS/Android are somehow optimal, but is the best you can come up with, really?

Again, I assume that's not aimed at me, but I will respond anyway. As far as I can tell, iOS, Android, WP and RT all offer a fairly similar set of features and capabilities. Broadly speaking, they are as optimal (or not) as each other. Chrome OS is a bit different and better dealt with another time. My comments above were aimed at Windows for desktops/laptops, where, even after reading this thread, I still find metro intrusive and not useful - but again, that's just my opinion.

In the future touch or gesture will be the rule rather than the exception, voice and handwriting recognition will be so good that no one will type anything and the mouse will be a specialist tool like a graphics tablet. Then the desktop will be seen as the quaint and inefficient shell it is.

That I do not agree with. Typing is actually very efficient if you need to enter a significant amount of text. But I do agree that future devices will likely support many different input methods. That's good, because it means we can all choose to work the way that we prefer.
I actually think the desktop is rather efficient for a 'full PC', especially for professional use. You might argue that for basic home use, it's unnecessarily complex, but people are familiar with it and metro (and iOS/Android) is limited in comparison.

Microsoft could have copied Apple's static icons the way Google did, but instead they innovated to a dynamic UI which provides useful information. They should be applauded for their bravery instead of this constant mealy-mouthed, narrow minded Luddite hypocrisy that we have to endure on forums like this and from the press.

1. Have you heard of Android widgets?
2. I think you should be a bit more tolerant of other people's opinions.
3. I would like to see Microsoft (or Linux or Apple) find ways to make the desktop more dynamic. I just don't think that the full screen metro UI is a good way to do this on a laptop or desktop.

Microsoft has the clearer vision and it will pay off in the end.

We will see. My concern with Microsoft's vision is that it assumes 'one size fits all'. I think that their current products suggest this isn't the case, and that more variation between UIs is needed to support smart phones, tablets and laptops. And, as I often say on these forums, perhaps the biggest problem is that Microsoft have nothing to address other types of device - smart watches, TVs, ... - and makers of those devices are increasingly turning to Android. Microsoft are in serious danger of missing the boat again on whatever new types of product emerge in the coming years. Flexibility, and giving more control and opportunity to others should be the first aim for the new CEO.
 

AndyCalling

New member
Apr 15, 2013
1,483
0
0
Visit site
Win8.1 is perfect for business desktops. Win8.1 on a desktop combined with a Logitech T650 touch pad (or a touch monitor if you prefer, not my thing on a desktop though) together with a mouse allows both macro and micro control, making long periods of computer use less wearing, more efficient and productive and more flexible (can take it away from the desk on your tablet). If you use Win8.1 on a desktop without the right hardware then you're doing it wrong, and you will get the wrong impression. Win8.1 does a great job of bringing the desktop and the touch worlds together to make something better than either.
 

dkediger

New member
Aug 29, 2013
671
0
0
Visit site
TLDR?

Wall of text is super effective.

We've been here before....It took XP two years and two service packs to become accepted. Granted, we have a complete order of magnitude more PCs in front of people these days, and alternative computing devices like tablets and smartphones. But the transition has seldom been smooth. Even Apple stumbles along the way.
 

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
326,309
Messages
2,248,170
Members
428,473
Latest member
lysterao