"Sorry, Microsoft, but consumers just don't like you"

true.
but i've always tweaked my OSes to my liking.
skinning them or others.
which Windows 8 won't even let you do anymore because skinning your OS is 'illegal'.

i also think Metro is not very good for desktop users but anyway...
we've beaten that horse to a pulp already.

 

Well said - I agree!

 

"From cash registers, to ATMs, movie rental kiosks, airline check-in, and grocery checkout, touch is literally everywhere. To think that your PC would remain the single computing device you do not touch seems illogical."

And the whole industry was/is thinking this way, so...

I wasn't talking about Chrome OS alone. I was talking about ChromeOS + Android ("plus", not "and"). They are apparently merging and Android has a significant ecosystem of apps and developers, which makes it a real competitor.

 

Nobody said they should design exclusively for non-touch systems... They should accomodate both touch and non-touch properly by either developing separate OS's for each, or making the touch stuff optional on non-touch units. But instead, as Mman79 mentions, they shoved the hybrid junk on everyone indiscriminately, and said "live with it". That stinks... and that's what people hate about it

 

Interesting point of view. What antitrust cases do you consider insane and ridiculous exactly?
Do you consider integrating, let's say for arguments sake, a browser into an OS making Windows simply too good?
Is your opinion based on a disregard for antitrust laws in general or Microsoft-specific?

 

Yet not one single mention of home use, which is what I asked for Again, Windows 8 was aimed towards home users..whom, without tablets and smartphones taken into consideration, didn't have any use for "Metro". By the way, half the stuff you mentioned up there run on Linux. Hell, tablets and smartphones are almost exclusively Linux still. So, beyond the specialized areas and mobile..where again did you say there was a need or even a desire for Windows 8?

As far as that quote goes about it being illogical to think PCs wouldn't have touch, well, uh, hmm, no I don't think I really like the idea of reaching my arm out across a desk at home or work and swiping my fingers across 20+ inch screens. And, since it'll be your next argument I'm sure, if it's only for occasional touching...why the devil spend the extra money and effort on a giant touch screen you'll only occasionally touch? Windows 8 is simply MS trying to enter a market they failed at before and are trying way too late to get back into..mobile.

I think someone up there said we were beating a dead horse, but I think this horse has already gone to the stockyard, packaged up and sent to the supermarket

 

To much nonsense. I like this refreshingly down-to-earth article:

Windows Blue won't be the end of the Desktop UI, http://betanews.com/2013/03/27/windows-blue-wont-be-the-end-of-the-desktop-ui/.

 

Please stop this nonsense. Nearly every screen that people interact with is becoming touch-enabled.

Even Apple is already under fire with customers because they are being too slow to add touchscreens in some of their offers.

You Can’t Touch This - Why don’t Apple laptops have touch screens?
Part 1
Part 2

Don't fear the touchscreen MacBook

Occasionally touching is better than not being able to touch. It's an added feature, not an obligation, can't you understand it?

You don't need to use it all the time, it's a PLUS, one more input method, even one less thing to worry ("hey, don't touch the screen" transforms to "it's ok, touch the screen, it is immune to oil and fingerprints, and the GUI responds to your contact!").

I think you simply developed such an antipathy towards the idea of touching that your brain seems to be almost ignoring rational arguments.

As for money, well, the entire screen industry is adding touch to their offers. Sooner or later, you won't have to spend "extra money" in a touch screen, simply because every new screen will be touchable, lol. We are almost there, already.

First, Windows 8 is far more than the Modern UI. Second, only a Modern UI can effectively address the tech tendencies of the present and future, unlike the old one.

 

And yet you didn't offer any detailed explanation of what's exactly wrong with the mouse/keyboard interactions with the Modern UI.

 

There is a basic problem with trying to combine a touch and a non-touch interface into one OS. Touch means giant fingers are pointing and swiping and moving around the screen, so an appropriate interface needs to be used, usually something full screen and not very granular, after all those big fingers.. On the other hand, a non-touch device will use a mouse, and the mouse pointer is very small and quite granular. The two don't really work very well together, so MS's idea of a one size fits all OS trying to cover all possibilities is really pretty stupid. It just doesn't work very gracefully.

Look at the difference between the silly full screen Metro apps and the standard desktop where you can have multiple windows open at once, etc. Like night and day. Trying to do both on the same machine is a huge problem. And one which Windows 8 doesn't address very well.

And then there is the problem of many actions jumping the user from the desktop into Metro. Another huge inconvenience due to design error.

The one size fits all idea just doesn't work. The truth is, one size does NOT fit all. Not very well anyhow...

 

See:
US v. Microsoft: Antitrust in Action
Frequently Asked Questions on the Microsoft Antitrust Case

 

Metro apps are like little toys.... something a child of 5 might like or use. They don't belong on a serious desktop or laptop machine...

 

You didn't really answer his questions at all WH. What do you find insane and ridiculous?

 

"In Windows 8, you have the option of snapping one app to the left or right side of the screen, and running another app side-by-side. With Windows Blue, you can now run apps that are perfectly split in the middle, 50/50, much like Aero Snap on the Desktop. Alternatively, Windows Blue allows you to run up to four apps in portrait orientation side-by-side. In a tiny boost for multi-monitor setups, Windows Blue allows you to snap apps to the edge of any monitor."

Source.

Sincerely, if you plan to move forward with future Microsoft's solutions, you should really stop worrying about that and start worrying about how to help them improve Modern UI. As I said before, a Win32-centric Windows isn't going to happen again. Its time passed.... move on.


So cutting the conclusions and adjectives, all we have are these two arguments that seem to base everything else you typed. Seriously?

 

Metro apps are far better - or, at least, they have the potential for being far better.

They perform faster, they are beautiful, they are aesthetically pleasing, they don't have a myriad of confusing useless options, they save their state, they uninstall cleanly, they are cheap, they are verified, they are secure, they are sandboxed etc.

 

The answers are there. It's a bit irresponsible to simplify that matter IMO.

 

There's no point in arguing details WH, you are just coming from an altogether different place than most of us desktop/laptop users.. I think that pretty much sums it up, lol....

 

It just seems that you (and many others who despise Windows 8 and the Modern UI) didn't really try, test, research and experience it at all.

This is so backward.

 

If you think that, you would be thinking wrong.... Just admit that everyone sees things differently, and you'll be well on the way to accepting people's reactions to 8.

 

In trying to understand why you're seeing this differently, my conclusion is that it appears that you didn't really try, test, research and experience it at all..

It's not a question of accepting and admitting different views, I have no issues with accepting and admitting - I can read them and acknowledge their existence.

The question is about understanding them - this is where there is some trouble apparently.

 

It's official, there's literally no point in discussing it with you because you're regurgitating the same responses that don't answer the question and providing "proof" of customer dissatisfaction with links to one guy whose 2 year old doesn't get why the PC dad has doesn't work like a tablet, and the other to a guy who is basically wishing Macbooks will someday have touch.

I'm perfectly capable of listening to rational arguments when there is one to listen to. You're not being rational, you're simply showing your "No one's argument but mine makes any sense" side. You're showing it to just about everyone in the thread, lol. Stop your nonsense about believing people who see no point in touch on the desktop or don't like Windows 8 only got their opinion from some tech site or some stupid place and didn't actually test or try anything. I don't know how you managed to dig statements about Metro being all there was to 8 out of my previous post, but I honestly don't care anymore. You wouldn't change your opinion on the matter if Steve Ballmer whopped you upside the head with a Windows 8 box and told you himself that it sucked.