In answer to the thread question: if it had been a further development of Windows as we know it I would have upgraded when buying a new pc, seeing as my one-time top of the range laptop is creaking. But with Metro, Windows Store, 'Apps' and other iParroting I'll either downgrade to Vista or look for a non-Microsoft OS.
If you happen to hate Metro at first, try this guide: http://www.zdnet.com/blog/bott/the-metro-haters-guide-to-customizing-windows-8-consumer-preview/4610
I like that Windows 8 literally needs a guide to be less ugly and more functional (not to mention it will shipped with a tutorial to explain it's completely ridiculous UI).
I value your opinion on aesthetics. Your signature, for example, is so "beautiful" and indicate a really "good" taste.. Oh well.
+1 for personal attacks they show your maturity. My signature is based off of the signatures I saw in the What is your security setup these days? thread. Examples: djohn Jmonge Radeon101 Arcanex KelvinW4 LucidDream Easter If you need more I can easily find them. I made my signature based on what I saw in that thread and just randomly added color I didn't spend years making a horrible mistake (like Microsoft did with windows 8 ) P.S. At least my signature shows my security configuration as it's intended to and you don't have to click a button the size of my fist to take you to a full size app listing it.
There is no big mistake, there is a big bet that can result in a big win. Metro is fine, WinRT is fine, the several other improvements are fine and the desktop mode is still there as well as full backward compatibility. As for the reasoning behind your sig, sorry, I'm not really interested. Your sig provides some small evidence of your competence with design, that should be enough.
A big win or a big loss, I'll be betting on the latter. Opinion, Opinion, Opinion. But hey at least I'm not bashing you personally like you'd prefer Desktop is missing it's start button, and has been placed on the back burner as for full "Backward Compatibility" Windows 8 is basically Windows 7 with some Metro mutilation. You're right you don't seem to respond well to evidence and logic. It seems that no matter what is said you cling to your delusions. I have no desire to "Design" anything, I have a desire to create and build things that WORK not draw and paint things that are pretty. Why? Because, computers are not about being "Pretty" they're about being usable, and functional neither of which describe windows 8. Lets be big boys and stay away from personal attacks.
I welcome the freeing up of an extra slot on the taskbar. "Start" button: I couldn't care less about it. Old legacy of Windows 3.1 to help people learn to use the mouse. Has been dying since Windows 95 approximately (see the removal of the bouncing prompt in 98 and the "Start" label in Vista). It's silly to waste screen space on user interface gadgets that prompt us to do things we know how to do anyway. Rest in peace start button. Extending elements of the Metro aesthetic to the traditional desktop will help wed the two together. The upside to this is slicker, lighter user interfaces. Thanks Microsoft. I'm loving Windows 8. I don't care if this eventually turns out to be "us" vs "the world".
Wow, you actually said something I agree with. That's is the problem however, you have the big block-like metro that snaps into the screen (A feature hardly used in Windows 7/Vista) which completely ignores the sleek desktop. You want to do something in Metro? It's off to the start screen! Want to view a metro app? Off to metro! It's insane to expect people to switch between Metro and the Desktop on a regular basis they are just too different. In order for Windows 8 to truly be usable for Desktop users the DESKTOP needs to have its fair spot in the relationship. Metro in your desktop: As it stands Microsoft has attempted to duck-tape a standard Windows 7 installation to a tablet. This doesn't work for a Desktop OS, you don't need to be switching all over the place when your work is ON the desktop. In order to make Metro and Desktop happy together they need to implement Metro INTO the Desktop not the other way around. Example: As it stands In order to view an open Metro app you have to go into Metro's start screen. That's a PITA for desktop users, why? You now have two different sets of applications to close Metro Apps & Desktop Apps. This is not a good way of doing things. Metro Apps should have a taskbar space and window on the Desktop. Encapsulating the Metro App in a Windows style window (Title bar, minimize, maximize, close) would make it a Metro App on the desktop. This means to close it? X it out! Minimize, Maximize, as you would. Metro isn't "Married" to Desktop it's just stuck in a relationship with it. Desktop could work with Metro but Metro is too much in love with tablets to cooperate. Having Metro display itself within the desktop would make the two cooperate wither neither overtaking one another. If this is technically a problem then Metro was incorporated improperly. Some day there will be an OS capable of doing what Windows 8 was meant to do successfully but It'll be after Windows 8. That's okay, Somebody had to use WindowsME too
If you're primarily a desktop user then 8 works a lot like Win 7 once you realize the Start screen is just the Start Menu on steroids. I really don't think it takes that much effort to move a mouse pointer to the edge of a screen, as long as I don't have to be too precise in what I'm clicking. The apps still use OnMouseDown events, just with bigger targets. Moving a mouse pointer takes even less work than moving a finger (you only have to twitch the wrist). I don't think the interfaces are dramatically different either, as it's all the same computing paradigms. The only difference is how much detail/clutter/complexity your space affords you. Funny thing is Windows 8 actually contains far more keyboard shortcuts than Windows 7. Both in the Metro environment and the desktop and in Powershell. Seriously, take a look at the full list of commands once Win 8 is released. Anyways... if all a computer had to do was what the "power users" wanted to do, we'd still be using a command line.
But I don't "Switch" to my start menu it's there when I need it and gone when I don't. Want a program? Click my start menu and bam it's there. It doesn't need to be hanging around or showing me 300x300 tiles. Metro is more like after the steroids wore off and the Start menu was left all flabby. The more space between two objects the more of an annoyance it is to try and work between them. But a mouse is built for precision you don't need bigger targets. Look at the message screen when you go to post. Look at how much information is displayed and it's all small icons. They show you what you need to know and they aren't massive! They're built for precision, and I've never heard anybody on a PC say "Wow I'm having a really hard time clicking this button" why? Because you have a precision control, Tablets are mostly used with fingers which are NOT able to hit the little down arrow without say activating the box next to it by mistake. There is a dramatic difference, I don't have to scroll through three screens of start menu items (Horizontally of all things) even with the same number of apps on windows 7 I'd still be able to find them in the start menu with ease. Very rarely do I keep my hands on the Keyboard unless I'm working hard on a specific task such as writing in Visual Studio or typing a paper. On the contrary normally I use my mouse with one hand on the keyboard for the occasional Keyboard command to help save me a few mouse movements. Why should I let my PC act like the mouse is broken? Who really wants to memorize 300 new keyboard commands on top of the massive amount you already know. Not to mention they may not be the same in new versions of windows. I'm a power user and I have no problem with windows 7, Right Click "Command Prompt" in accessories choose "Pin to start menu" and BAM! I'm done. If you want to go further in like I have adding Context menu entries for elevated cmd prompts also work great. All of which is available right in windows (Though the context menu entries require a registry edit).
I think I have seen quite enough of pro windows 8 for awhile. Sir Peter Pan, you are certainly entitled to your own viewpoint. There is nothing wrong with it what-so-ever. And it is a good trait to stick with what you believe and not waffling back and forth to please others or like a babbling idiot. However Sir Peter Pan, you have, in MY OPINION, become so focused on YOUR OPINION that you have failed to see a thread full of others opinions, which like your own opinion, are just that, an OPINION. For some reason you seem to be trying to convince everyone else that your opinion is some sort of gospel truth. The facts here are quite simple really. Microsoft is creating a new version of windows, and they are doing a fairly radical facelift on the user interface. That much is true. Whether it is "better" or not is an opinion, not fact. There is no way it can be fact because "better" is not something you can quantify when it comes to a user interface. It depends on the user. You are not going to be successful, nor should you be, in convincing anyone that metro is better, because it doesn't change what your computer does, but only in how you go about doing it. And that is a preference, thus it is going to be different for everyone. If you were to omit metro, which is what most people who dislike win8 seem to have an issue with, then you can include fact. Does it offer better security or hardware support. Does it have more stability. If those things work with metro and whatever "start menu mode" it will have, then it is not a metro feature, but an OS feature. You cannot argue that metro has more keyboard shortcuts either, as that too is a preference. Heck, most normal people I know barely know what shortcuts to use for select all, copy and paste, which most of us use all the time. Besides, if shortcuts are what you want, every version of windows to date can be made to have shortcuts (in one manner or another) - but it is a preference. All that being said, what I would be interested to know, is of the X number of people who use windows, what % want a change. And further, after win8 is out, and people either try it or are forced into it with new machine purchases, I would love to know what % would like to have old start menu/desktop or the touch screen metro style. Either way Sir Peter Pan, I think from what I read in this thread alone, you taking such a hard line on an opinion is not being seen as logical nor factual. BTW, I am not trying to peeve you off or anything like that. I am simply voicing my opinion, hopefully it is positive for you and not negative. Sul.
I like what they're doing with the Start menu. I quite like the concept of live tiles. Making the Start menu a full-screen device allows for more spread out information, and larger UI elements. Yes, it's friendly for less-precise finger touch, but it also translates into an easier mousing experience, too. The mouse is precise, but as someone who uses the computer quickly, having to slow down to aim and click a 10x10 pixel box is effort that doesn't have to exist, and slows you down. Larger targets mean you can travel to and from UI elements faster with the mouse without having to worry about slowing down and aiming quite so much. The scroll wheel, ubiquitous on about all mousing hardware variants these days, replaces the need to swipe to scroll on a touchscreen, as it just scrolls the screen itself. The use of hot-corners (something I've missed since Windows 98's screen savers' hot corner triggers), makes a great alternate UI device to swiping with your fingers, as the screen corners are about the easiest thing to get to with the mouse--just push the mouse in a diagonal direction and you get funnelled into the correct spot. Overall, I think people are just afraid of change.
I am curious. Are you lol'ing because you also find that sig tacky (which is fine) or are lol'ing because it is purely a matter of personal opinion? I don't find it all that exciting myself, but then my sense of style is probably boring and droll comparatively. @Tomwa - whatever floats your boat you know - different strokes for different folks and all Sul.
I don't have any problem with his sig colors or style (Just look at mine, it's as colorful) or anything but he said he doesn't like those flashy tiles and his sig is kinda flashy and colorful too.
i gave it another try tonight and it wasn't as bad as i remembered it to be. if you open a Metro app by mistake it's just a matter Alt+F4 to close it. an example would be the Windows Updates which has a Metro flavor and a traditional desktop version as well. there's 2 hotspots; one at bottom left which reveal the new Start menu (aka Metro) and one in the bottom right corner to shut down the machine and other settings. i can see where this could be utterly confusing to a newcomer. it's different... the only problem i saw was that the image was 3 times the size of Windows 7 (32 bits). but i upgraded instead of doing a clean install so next time i will try a clean install to see if i can get the size down. if you give the demo a try i would recommend to turn Windows Defender so as to not slowdown the machine. unless you are used to the damn thing already.
The colors are less of an issue it's the big giant 300x300 buttons that agitate me. I can move straight to any button on my screen without flying past it it's not an issue for me I really don't need every UI element to become huge. I'd also like to say that a string of colorful text doesn't really compare to a literally full screen of nothing but random super bright tiles. As for my colors, as far as I'm aware of I actually never complained about the colors in windows 8.
