News - Next Windows officially named Windows 8.1 - free for Win8 users

[dangel]

I would argue that the fact that we are having this argument/discussion proves that Microsoft has done nothing more than create another controversial OS, much like Vista or ME.

But that's hardly making a significant point now is it - I mean does anyone disagree on that? Nope.

MCE isn't so much of an issue because i prefer XBMC anyway. With DVD playback and all the other bits and bobs, i think i will always now look towards 3rd party apps that im familiar with, i can see why it might bother others although i cant actually remember the last time i played a DVD.

On DVDs I agree but XBMC sucks at recording TV and I'm a big fan of MC (with MediaBrowser which looks as good as XBMC anyway). I actually agree with their reasoning though as I understand very few users use it. I fear it's on the way out..

Shadow copy and backup facilities are of definite importance and they do baffle me a little bit, but in the case of most users and most of the kind of operation they would do day to day, they actually are not about the way people work. These are more superuser activities and the reason they haven't been complained about as much is because most people never used them in the first place, or at least didn't know they were using them.

Yup, most people aren't aware of 'backup' as a concept period - even less so that Windows offers such facilities. The rest of us probably use a paid for or free imaging/backup app-lication.

Recent documents is something i hadn't really noticed as its not something i personally used, i always tend to go to it from within the application I'm using or create shortcuts to the folders which contain my regular documents. With the versioning system i use at work, 'recent documents' doesn't really work for us anyway.

Agree here too - nearest I got to them is the method you described or jumplists the taskbar which are still there.

Otherwise yes, those features are THAT broken for me. In independence of each other they all don't seem like much, but as a whole when you add all the little things together, it results in a total package that feels cumbersome and un-intuitive. In my opinion, Its not an improvement in a user interface point of view.

Outside of MUI though? I love the multi-monitor support, am baffled by people want 7's bereft-of-any-buttons explorer back, like the new task manager and so on. I don't even miss glass - thought I would. Not that I disagree on the whole - I just don't think it's "THAT broken for me" because really it isn't, and even if it was I could easily change things to avoid MUI altogether.

Shaithis makes a fair point - all the angst is against the somewhat insignificant stuff - and that's a problem because if MS are convinced that fixing those small things will cause people to down pitchforks and have a sing song they're very wrong. I'd rather they completed the MUI control panels, fixed app closing, sorted out splitting or get into the much harder task of answering how apps are no longer Windows but rather just part of a split screen. That latter point worries me more - there's already a 3rd party solution effectively handling this and so MS must be aware of it. Let's face it a full screen start menu and the lack of the button to launch it are side issues - it's more fundamentally how applications work, dock, close or switch that's the issue on the desktop. The concept's there - I like the style personally, I like that they're designed to be ultra responsive, can be suspended, big, bold and modern looking I just don't like how I manipulate them on the desktop as much as I do on the tablet.

It is utterly weird that 'boot to desktop' is an issue though - because the first thing I do is launch an app(lication) which is exactly what the start screen does (and handily tells you some other information with live tiles - not a bad concept either and also open to improvement). But hey, it's big, in your face UI and that's controversial as you say..

[dangel]

If this tablet was based on WinMUI, I still would not accept MUI, as currently implemented, on my desktop. A consistent interface is not enough for put up with the nuisance to someone only interested in desktop mode on my PC desktop. And personally, having a consistent interface would be a tiny consideration in selecting my next tablet.

I think that's an attitude thing though - we're far more open to change on mobile platforms as people. I know plenty of people who moved from iOS to android and barely grumbled at a time when they're were perhaps more diverse. I'd consider WP for my next phone simply for a change - we all get bored of things too. MS' aren't just banking on familiarity though - it's also about one app ecosystem cross device.

Let's face it - Windows is supposed to be boring, it's supposed to be stuck in it's ways and MS aren't supposed to innovate. Then we're all supposed to lambaste them for it, right? I think Windows 8 is shocking - but not perhaps in the sense you do

[Biscuit]

But that's hardly making a significant point now is it - I mean does anyone disagree on that? Nope.

Well no-one would disagree with it, but i still think its relevant. Just the same as windows 7 was vista done right, i suspect that history will repeat itself and windows 9 will fix a lot of these controversial issues and become a very capable and fluid OS.
I could be wrong and MS could keep pushing their new system if they feel like banging a few more nails into the coffin containing their reputation.

On DVDs I agree but XBMC sucks at recording TV and I'm a big fan of MC (with MediaBrowser which looks as good as XBMC anyway). I actually agree with their reasoning though as I understand very few users use it. I fear it's on the way out..

Yeah TV recording is something im about to experiment with, but not something i actively do at the moment. Hard to complain about something i have never tried

Outside of MUI though? I love the multi-monitor support, am baffled by people want 7's bereft-of-any-buttons explorer back, like the new task manager and so on. I don't even miss glass - thought I would. Not that I disagree on the whole - I just don't think it's "THAT broken for me" because really it isn't, and even if it was I could easily change things to avoid MUI altogether.

No i like some of these features, just not enough to swing me in favour of forgetting the bits that im missing or enough for me to ignore the things that do my nut in. Again, i think adjusting the system and the way you work to avoid MUI is basically proving MS got it wrong. We shouldnt have to do this, it should be an integrated system, at the moment it almost feels like MUI is a virtual machine running on a stripped down desktop.

Shaithis makes a fair point - all the angst is against the somewhat insignificant stuff - and that's a problem because if MS are convinced that fixing those small things will cause people to down pitchforks and have a sing song they're very wrong. I'd rather they completed the MUI control panels, fixed app closing, sorted out splitting or get into the much harder task of answering how apps are no longer Windows but rather just part of a split screen. That latter point worries me more - there's already a 3rd party solution effectively handling this and so MS must be aware of it. Let's face it a full screen start menu and the lack of the button to launch it are side issues - it's more fundamentally how applications work, dock, close or switch that's the issue on the desktop. The concept's there - I like the style personally, I like that they're designed to be ultra responsive, can be suspended, big, bold and modern looking I just don't like how I manipulate them on the desktop as much as I do on the tablet.

I completely agree on all of the comments about app closing/splitting etc etc but i feel that if the environment between desktop and MUI became more integrated and syncronised, this would start to solve itself. I think the bigger point here is that its unfair to trivialize these so called 'insignificant' things. To people like us, if we really felt the need, we could work round them, learn the new way which would make them trivial. To the greater population who are not geeks that revel in learning new stuff and finding more efficient ways of working, its nothing more than a frustrating roadblock for them.
In some ways, if this is Microsoft's future, many corporations and even home users may quite rightly start to think; "why bother learning/training on new Microsoft products when there are better value (or even free) alternatives out there that would require equal training, save us money in the future and possibly end up working better for us?"

It is utterly weird that 'boot to desktop' is an issue though - because the first thing I do is launch an app(lication) which is exactly what the start screen does (and handily tells you some other information with live tiles - not a bad concept either and also open to improvement). But hey, it's big, in your face UI and that's controversial as you say..

But the task bar is equally capable of launching an application quickly and it doesn't need to take up the full screen or involve having to shift from one full environment to another. This whole shifting thing is part of what bugs me personally, its just awkward and cumbersome. You could have live that same live information integrated into you're background/wallpaper via a kind of improved W7 widget service, basically just overlaying the live tile over the desktop. Alternatively, going by the 'mini' MUI start screen that i suggested earlier, you could have a snapshot of this information visible on there and then when you start up to desktop, the start menu is open.
All this takes development, but if they wanted to avoid alienating normal people (and by this i mean both people like us and your average Susan working in a government or company office) whilst still providing an improved and more flexible system, its what they should have thought about, looking forward its what they need to do.

[dangel]

Well no-one would disagree with it, but i still think its relevant. Just the same as windows 7 was vista done right, i suspect that history will repeat itself and windows 9 will fix a lot of these controversial issues and become a very capable and fluid OS.
I could be wrong and MS could keep pushing their new system if they feel like banging a few more nails into the coffin containing their reputation.

I don't see those things as mutually exclusive - or am I reading what you said wrong? MUI as a platform is OK - just not here yet, lots to do etc. I don't doubt they'll keep pushing it. Especially now it's central to XBOX, WP, Tablet and 8. I think that's potentially both clever and unique.

We shouldnt have to do this, it should be an integrated system,

..but we do. It's imperfect but alternatives exist is it's a blocker for you was all I said.

I completely agree on all of the comments about app closing/splitting etc etc but i feel that if the environment between desktop and MUI became more integrated and syncronised, this would start to solve itself. I think the bigger point here is that its unfair to trivialize these so called 'insignificant' things. To people like us, if we really felt the need, we could work round them, learn the new way which would make them trivial. To the greater population who are not geeks that revel in learning new stuff and finding more efficient ways of working, its nothing more than a frustrating roadblock for them.

I think closing, manipulating, splitting etc are the big problems - a lack of start button simple isn't. To solve it they've got to look at the big stuff first - instead we'll see them fix what are (imho) trivial things to appease the noisy people. That worries me.

In some ways, if this is Microsoft's future, many corporations and even home users may quite rightly start to think; "why bother learning/training on new Microsoft products when there are better value (or even free) alternatives out there that would require equal training, save us money in the future and possibly end up working better for us?"

Well, you can hope (?) - but that's pretty much what linux fanatics pray for with each version of Windows and even Vista didn't affect that change. 8? No chance - and corporates won't be looking till a later version regardless of it's current state.

But the task bar is equally capable of launching an application quickly and it doesn't need to take up the full screen or involve having to shift from one full environment to another. This whole shifting thing is part of what bugs me personally, its just awkward and cumbersome. You could have live that same live information integrated into you're background/wallpaper via a kind of improved W7 widget service, basically just overlaying the live tile over the desktop. Alternatively, going by the 'mini' MUI start screen that i suggested earlier, you could have a snapshot of this information visible on there and then when you start up to desktop, the start menu is open.

For launching apps? It's doesn't bother me in the slightest - click, boom app opens. I even like the srubbishrubbishrubbishrubbishy effect. What you're describing it periously close to active desktop (yuk) and widgets etc on the desktop always had a simple problem - they get covered. So you end up doing Win+M (or show desktop) or organising things so they're not covered (which kinda wastes space potentially). Of course then I have restore my windows - another step. I don't really like it much - although I do use widgets now i'm making those concessions to use them. The concept of a launch screen with information that can be summoned and dismissed easily works in my eyes. I simply don't have the requirements to see lots of other windows when using it (for a few seconds). Now apps themselves - more of a problem them being full screen. I accept the duality of it is a problem for some but it's really broken when your workflow switches across two different contexts - i.e. control panel in MUI leads to control panel in desktop proper. That feels unfinished (it is) - but an app launcher's workflow ends with 'launch' and then is disappears.

All this takes development, but if they wanted to avoid alienating normal people (and by this i mean both people like us and your average Susan working in a government or company office) whilst still providing an improved and more flexible system, its what they should have thought about, looking forward its what they need to do.

Personally, IMHO etc - I think they have. 8's objective wasn't this though but that doesn't stop later revisions being so of course. Obviously MS roadmaps a good 5 years ahead if not longer and my pet theory is that given they knew corps wouldn't use it anyway and that for them the consumer market for 'new' devices is more important - they were willing to take the hit short term. Whether or not they underestimated the fall out is another matter - personally I don't think it's anywhere near Vista levels (which people bought anyway) - and the fact remains the core product is both solid and better than it's previous version if you can put up with it's UI foibles. Point revisions change the game - we're no longer 3 years from the next update so there's hope for improvements. We'll see

[Biscuit]

I don't see those things as mutually exclusive - or am I reading what you said wrong? MUI as a platform is OK - just not here yet, lots to do etc. I don't doubt they'll keep pushing it. Especially now it's central to XBOX, WP, Tablet and 8. I think that's potentially both clever and unique.

I probably should have said, 'they continue to try and push people away from desktop' rather than push their new system. My worry is that Microsoft will try and drive the move towards MUI instead of the public pulling it in, which seems to be whats happening so far.

..but we do. It's imperfect but alternatives exist is it's a blocker for you was all I said.

I don't understand this logic, i really don't, but we are in danger of going in circles. Essentially i don't think that 3rd party tools should be necessary to make an OS work the way it used to work.

I think closing, manipulating, splitting etc are the big problems - a lack of start button simple isn't. To solve it they've got to look at the big stuff first - instead we'll see them fix what are (imho) trivial things to appease the noisy people. That worries me.

First of all, all the discussions about it prove that it is not trivial, and by suggesting it is you are making the exact same mistake Microsoft did in the first place. But just for clarity, and forgive me for paraphrasing and twisting words slightly, but previously you have said its acceptable and reasonable to accept the available work-around of avoiding MUI all together (i assume you mean software such as Start8/Start is back/Classic Shell etc) but Microsoft giving people the straight forward ability to easily add this back in as a standard feature may result in them abandoning improvements in the features of MUI? To me, again, it just shows the lack of relevance and functionality that MUI really has at the moment. Despite what Microsoft might think, they are not Apple, they can't tell people it has worth and thrust it down their neck, you have to prove it has worth and let speak for itself. As this part of the software hasn't proven itself from the offset, they now have an even more difficult task of proving revisions of it have changed that, but before they do that they need to damage control.

For launching apps? It's doesn't bother me in the slightest - click, boom app opens. I even like the srubbishrubbishrubbishrubbishy effect. What you're describing it periously close to active desktop (yuk) and widgets etc on the desktop always had a simple problem - they get covered. So you end up doing Win+M (or show desktop) or organising things so they're not covered (which kinda wastes space potentially). Of course then I have restore my windows - another step. I don't really like it much - although I do use widgets now i'm making those concessions to use them. The concept of a launch screen with information that can be summoned and dismissed easily works in my eyes. I simply don't have the requirements to see lots of other windows when using it (for a few seconds).

Yes active desktop is pants and yes widgets are a bit pants, im not talking about using those features, im talking about a desktop friendly live tile type situation. How about a button that animates just those tiles containing information over your current applications then animates it away again? No awkward unsightly change to a different full screen environment, just a subtle flash of the info you want.
Hell, even on an MUI envoronment, an app takes up the whole screen so the info you want gets covered aswell. Going to and from the start screen is almost exactly the same as going too and from the desktop except on the desktop you know that it still works the way you expect it too, this argument is almost completely moot.
I would again favour my 'mini MUI start' option.

Now apps themselves - more of a problem them being full screen. I accept the duality of it is a problem for some but it's really broken when your workflow switches across two different contexts - i.e. control panel in MUI leads to control panel in desktop proper. That feels unfinished (it is) - but an app launcher's workflow ends with 'launch' and then is disappears.

I don't really see how doing it for one function classes as broken and the other function classes as not that much of a problem. I see both of them as as the exact same problem.

Personally, IMHO etc - I think they have. 8's objective wasn't this though but that doesn't stop later revisions being so of course. Obviously MS roadmaps a good 5 years ahead if not longer and my pet theory is that given they knew corps wouldn't use it anyway and that for them the consumer market for 'new' devices is more important - they were willing to take the hit short term. Whether or not they underestimated the fall out is another matter - personally I don't think it's anywhere near Vista levels (which people bought anyway) - and the fact remains the core product is both solid and better than it's previous version if you can put up with it's UI foibles. Point revisions change the game - we're no longer 3 years from the next update so there's hope for improvements. We'll see

Its certainly not another exactly the same as another vista, and i didn't intend on suggesting it was. The problems with vista is that it was slow and buggy so users had a bad experience allround. Windows 8 is that they have changed so much that people dont know how to and/or they don't like the new way of doing things, so people are having a bad experience with it.
Yeah its faster, visually smoother, more efficient yadayadayadayada, but aside from us, on the forums, who notices? UI is exactly what it says on the tin, the USER INTERFACE and that's all most people care about. I care about it more than some of you guys who are mostly coders/developers etc but its not all i think about, for everyone else that is ALL they care about.
I think MS over-estimated the popularity and damaged their reputation. My next large (above 5") mobile device probably wont be a Windows one, it will be Android. I don't see windows 8 as a complete system for mobile devices or desktops at the moment its nothing more than a poor attempt at merging the two. Ill probably cave in and stick Win 8 on my PC pretty soon, but my netbook will get relegated to my cupboard in favour of an Android tab with dockable keyboard.
Lets not count the popularity of mobile OSes out of the game completely, the amount of traction they have gained and kind of level the hardware is reaching, unless MS pull their finger out they might see ARM based OSes competing with them in more ways than they expected.

[Willzzz]

Whether the lack of start button is trivial or not, they are changing it, so why isn't everyone happy?

[Biscuit]

Whether the lack of start button is trivial or not, they are changing it, so why isn't everyone happy?

We don't know anything about the implementation of the button, do we? If its just a link that then opens MUI then it doesnt affect anything we have really discussed. Most people do not class the Start Screen as a decent alternative to a full Start Menu.

[Saracen]

Whether the lack of start button is trivial or not, they are changing it, so why isn't everyone happy?

The inference of that is that the objections are just "no start button". And that either signifies a cheap attempt to trivialise the objections, or an abject failure to read what people have said about the objections. It's a lot more than that.

[Agent]

The inference of that is that the objections are just "no start button". And that either signifies a cheap attempt to trivialise the objections, or an abject failure to read what people have said about the objections. It's a lot more than that.

You can add "people are just being lazy" to that which seems to be common.

[dangel]

I probably should have said, 'they continue to try and push people away from desktop' rather than push their new system. My worry is that Microsoft will try and drive the move towards MUI instead of the public pulling it in, which seems to be whats happening so far.

I see your point, but I'd also say they inevitably you have to push a new system because well, somebody has to. Users generally won't - well at least not until it's fully complete and with enough value to them. MS job (and I agree) is to pull them in sure but they can't do that without an established platform and developers actively building for it. Chicken an egg etc. Generally i'm loathe to support a new MS technology until it's actively shipping as it's hard to justify to your product manager making the (considerable) investment in learning and using it.

I don't understand this logic, i really don't, but we are in danger of going in circles. Essentially i don't think that 3rd party tools should be necessary to make an OS work the way it used to work.

I agree - circles - but I think I wasn't clear - it's more of a case of 'well here we are and these are the choices'. OTOH I disagree (personally) that MS should provide a 'legacy' mode for it, i'd rather they fixed the new stuff to be plain better for all - that's my opinion and so let's leave it at that. I'm perfectly comfortable with that.

First of all, all the discussions about it prove that it is not trivial, and by suggesting it is you are making the exact same mistake Microsoft did in the first place.

I tend to prioritise on perceived value - for me (and I can only speak for myself) I find it far more confusing trying to close, split or other manipulate MUI apps then to figure out how to launch the start screen due to a missing button. It's a mess - it's really difficult to do and much more frustrating. I discovered the 'start button' fairly easily by comparison. I'm not actively suggesting they shouldn't put it back (actually i'd prefer it) but the danger in my eyes is that it's far less important than the things mentioned earlier which make MUI a navigational nightmare for me (i.e. 'expert' user) let alone my mum.. ..and there's a danger that MS are persuaded that fixing the 'easy' (if you like the word better than trivial) stuff will fix MUI sufficiently for desktop. It won't. Read nothing more into it than that - we're not far apart on this I think.

Yes active desktop is pants and yes widgets are a bit pants, im not talking about using those features, im talking about a desktop friendly live tile type situation. How about a button that animates just those tiles containing information over your current applications then animates it away again? No awkward unsightly change to a different full screen environment, just a subtle flash of the info you want.
Hell, even on an MUI envoronment, an app takes up the whole screen so the info you want gets covered aswell. Going to and from the start screen is almost exactly the same as going too and from the desktop except on the desktop you know that it still works the way you expect it too, this argument is almost completely moot.
I would again favour my 'mini MUI start' option.

I wouldn't oppose them giving it to you - I just don't much care when it comes to the start screen myself. I'm not sure overlaid tiles that I summon really is that much better personally - it sounds like clutter compared to a clean break away from it all. Again, I think I just like the 'concept' here and you don't. I'm not opposed to full screen or MUI in principle and perhaps that's a difference of opinion - i'd add that i'm also not convinced that non resizable apps and the concept of 'windowing' should be abandoned and have said as much. I see a launcher quite differently though - but we'll get to that shortly.

I don't really see how doing it for one function classes as broken and the other function classes as not that much of a problem. I see both of them as as the exact same problem.

I don't. Perhaps I lack the prose to convey my point - but what I was getting at was the workflow is disrupted during control panel to-and-fro whereas the workflow end point of the launcher is 'launch'. I quite like the context switch in this case.
You don't like full screen period though and here we differ - but I think it's fair to point out that control panel items should be done all in one and not the other period. Even duplicating it in both would be better because mentally shifting focus middle of doing something (i.e. finding the setting you need) is far more distruptive (to me). I'm just not bothered by the size (or coverage) of the launcher (well so long as it's big enough really - 7's start menu had it's own issues) because the task i'm doing shifts to be 'launch that app x' and nothing else whilst doing it.

Its certainly not another exactly the same as another vista, and i didn't intend on suggesting it was. The problems with vista is that it was slow and buggy so users had a bad experience allround. Windows 8 is that they have changed so much that people dont know how to and/or they don't like the new way of doing things, so people are having a bad experience with it.
Yeah its faster, visually smoother, more efficient yadayadayadayada, but aside from us, on the forums, who notices?

Sorry - I wasn't suggesting you did - merely making the comparison myself. As to experience - well yes but watching/listening to non-expert users i'm seeing them struggle with getting back to the start screen, the desktop, closing apps etc. They seem to like the style and flashiness of it all and the concept of a store and slick UI has been hammered into them as desirable by Apple etc. so they like it. I do too, mostly - just wish it was easier to navigate. They notice alright - and so do I - and for info I work on user interfaces (including for touch thesedays) it's my area of interest.
I'm also a user of an Android phone and tablet, had an iPad and have a Win8 desktop and a Win8 tablet (not that they're all mine personally) for context. I'd consider WPx for my next phone (not yet though) and the tablet (W8) certainly makes me question the limitations of my Nexus 10 by comparison (although I don't miss the iPad 3 it replaced not by a long shot). I shift around between things quite regularly - either through bordom or, more often than not, personnel and professional curiosity as to what's it like on the other side of the fence. I'm always worried about missing out on something better

Lets not count the popularity of mobile OSes out of the game completely, the amount of traction they have gained and kind of level the hardware is reaching, unless MS pull their finger out they might see ARM based OSes competing with them in more ways than they expected.

Which really is exactly why MS are doing MUI. Just try doing something like it in WPF or another MS framework - it basically sucks ass. That they're doing it across multiple devices (including XBOX) has the potential to make it far more appealing to devs (and eventually consumers) - if they get it right. It's not even so much about ARM - that's just a means to long battery life - and I question it's relevance if intel really do have as good a chip as they make out shortly. It's about that mobile computing shift which MS are missing out on thus far - and to get into it they do need to be radical IMHO. I see why it's important for them, I don't appreciate the shortcomings it gives me right now though but I am at least glad to see they aren't abandoning 'legacy' entirely because they heaped a whole bunch of UI (and backend) features in there that made me happy. Then again i'm easily pleased with a billion hotkeys for everything and dual monitor taskbar support

Thanks for the views btw - sorry if i've frustrated you by being unclear i'm no World-class writer by any means

[Biscuit]

(i think we are getting to end of useful discussion now so i will try and cut replies to the barebones)

I see your point, but I'd also say they inevitably you have to push a new system because well, somebody has to. Users generally won't - well at least not until it's fully complete and with enough value to them. MS job (and I agree) is to pull them in sure but they can't do that without an established platform and developers actively building for it. Chicken an egg etc. Generally i'm loathe to support a new MS technology until it's actively shipping as it's hard to justify to your product manager making the (considerable) investment in learning and using it.

I agree - circles - but I think I wasn't clear - it's more of a case of 'well here we are and these are the choices'. OTOH I disagree (personally) that MS should provide a 'legacy' mode for it, i'd rather they fixed the new stuff to be plain better for all - that's my opinion and so let's leave it at that. I'm perfectly comfortable with that.

I think both of these comments come under my thought that it doesn't have to be completely legacy or completely new (like it is), they could have had a better segue system in place to comfort users into the new environment but that also that pushes the ecosystem forward.

I tend to prioritise on perceived value - for me (and I can only speak for myself) I find it far more confusing trying to close, split or other manipulate MUI apps then to figure out how to launch the start screen due to a missing button. It's a mess - it's really difficult to do and much more frustrating. I discovered the 'start button' fairly easily by comparison. I'm not actively suggesting they shouldn't put it back (actually i'd prefer it) but the danger in my eyes is that it's far less important than the things mentioned earlier which make MUI a navigational nightmare for me (i.e. 'expert' user) let alone my mum.. ..and there's a danger that MS are persuaded that fixing the 'easy' (if you like the word better than trivial) stuff will fix MUI sufficiently for desktop. It won't. Read nothing more into it than that - we're not far apart on this I think.

Ahhh i see, you mean trivial in an implementation sense rather than a user interface sense. Im curious though, if these things did become more apparent do you think you would use MUI as an actual day to day environment more?

I don't. Perhaps I lack the prose to convey my point - but what I was getting at was the workflow is disrupted during control panel to-and-fro whereas the workflow end point of the launcher is 'launch'. I quite like the context switch in this case.
You don't like full screen period though and here we differ - but I think it's fair to point out that control panel items should be done all in one and not the other period. Even duplicating it in both would be better because mentally shifting focus middle of doing something (i.e. finding the setting you need) is far more distruptive (to me). I'm just not bothered by the size (or coverage) of the launcher (well so long as it's big enough really - 7's start menu had it's own issues) because the task i'm doing shifts to be 'launch that app x' and nothing else whilst doing it.

I see what you mean i think, suppose here we are going back to the necessity of a 'container mode' so unite the two environments.
I mean, wouldnt it be great if you could pick up your dockable tablet and it automatically switched from desktop mode into a touch friendly tablet mode of the application with a simple way of snapping in some cool information into the side and the bottom of the window for whilst you are travelling on the tube/train? Many of the MS Office applications actually became more touch friendly purely from the use of the ribbon which introduced big chunky buttons.

Sorry - I wasn't suggesting you did - merely making the comparison myself. As to experience - well yes but watching/listening to non-expert users i'm seeing them struggle with getting back to the start screen, the desktop, closing apps etc. They seem to like the style and flashiness of it all and the concept of a store and slick UI has been hammered into them as desirable by Apple etc. so they like it. I do too, mostly - just wish it was easier to navigate. They notice alright - and so do I - and for info I work on user interfaces (including for touch thesedays) it's my area of interest.

Really? Everyone i have talked to has basically said, 'yeah im figuring my way round it but i prefer the old way' boot up times aside, i haven't heard anyone commenting on the speed of the OS or anything about the new features until i point them in the direction of a guide to using them.

Which really is exactly why MS are doing MUI. Just try doing something like it in WPF or another MS framework - it basically sucks ass. That they're doing it across multiple devices (including XBOX) has the potential to make it far more appealing to devs (and eventually consumers) - if they get it right. It's not even so much about ARM - that's just a means to long battery life - and I question it's relevance if intel really do have as good a chip as they make out shortly. It's about that mobile computing shift which MS are missing out on thus far - and to get into it they do need to be radical IMHO. I see why it's important for them, I don't appreciate the shortcomings it gives me right now though but I am at least glad to see they aren't abandoning 'legacy' entirely because they heaped a whole bunch of UI (and backend) features in there that made me happy. Then again i'm easily pleased with a billion hotkeys for everything and dual monitor taskbar support

I don't think that its just about achieving better battery life, it also gives the marketplace the benefit of more direct competition for intel, which is something that is becoming increasingly more important. This is relevant as its for the same reasons that i think MS need to be scared about the spread and increasing capabilities of other OSes. They have had dominance for too long!
I agree on the point about it being unified and i can see how and why it makes sense from that perspective, its just that they didn't get it right and it doesn't work... at the moment... but again circles i guess.

Thanks for the views btw - sorry if i've frustrated you by being unclear i'm no World-class writer by any means

I just appreciate having a proper discussion with someone who is at least trying to see the other side of the coin!

[dangel]

I think both of these comments come under my thought that it doesn't have to be completely legacy or completely new (like it is), they could have had a better segue system in place to comfort users into the new environment but that also that pushes the ecosystem forward.

Really the problem they've always faced was Windows didn't work for touch. It wasn't very pleasant on PPC and it plain sucked on the tablets of yesteryear. WinRT is the first time they've had something other than Win32 unpinning things and MUI is the first framework they've had that puts UI fluidity first and has proper boilerplate stuff in the framework to handle multitouch for developers. There's also no way of making legacy apps good for touch and i've had to accept that for our own products. MS have struck out in a new direction and i'm not clear on the future of other frameworks because of it. I suppose they could have tackled this differently but really I don't see a perfect solution other than by trial and error over several iterations and, as i've said, devs would of ignored it had it been a sidelined 'feature'.

Ahhh i see, you mean trivial in an implementation sense rather than a user interface sense. Im curious though, if these things did become more apparent do you think you would use MUI as an actual day to day environment more?

Yeah, I think we'll all might really - after all as you say people don't care about what's underneath. The PITA is moving in and out of it atm and the splitting is pretty useless too if you're trying to use legacy apps simultaneously. If an apps good, has some value then it'll get used. Personally I've seen some very slick looking apps even at this early stage. I'm only really using a few newreaders, the mail app and 'weather' - and mail probably the most by far right now.

I see what you mean i think, suppose here we are going back to the necessity of a 'container mode' so unite the two environments.
I mean, wouldnt it be great if you could pick up your dockable tablet and it automatically switched from desktop mode into a touch friendly tablet mode of the application with a simple way of snapping in some cool information into the side and the bottom of the window for whilst you are travelling on the tube/train? Many of the MS Office applications actually became more touch friendly purely from the use of the ribbon which introduced big chunky buttons.

It's all about reducing the workload for the devs tho - fancy features which have to be hand crafted are a pain but stuff that's baked in makes it easy. MS could do a lot there but it's not an easy problem to solve. Already MUI apps are a fair bit of work to learn to code versus traditional desktop apps - I don't have a mobile background so that could be colouring my opinion there though. The Ribbon (which I like) is certainly easier to click with a finger but it's far from touch friendly.

Really? Everyone i have talked to has basically said, 'yeah im figuring my way round it but i prefer the old way' boot up times aside, i haven't heard anyone commenting on the speed of the OS or anything about the new features until i point them in the direction of a guide to using them.

At the risk of flames consuming my soul - users will always grumble if things are different. I've used the word 'lazy' which gets people's backs up because it's a little misunderstood - it's really the path of least resistance thing, or the fact that you have to - as you point out - sell them on something before they see the benefit. Not everybody has the inclination or time to learn. Not always, but quite a lot. Total novices like a big button for news, one for facebook and one for email - the struggle I see is how they get from one to another without touching the keyboard. That's far too hard. OTOH the apps are bright, bold and easy to use - perhaps also not a bad thing. Over time I expect both the platform to improve and therefore the apps (and their depth) to also. You meet some interesting people in my line of work - we've a demonstrator in another country who claims 'he doesn't have time' to learn what's new in our software because he's too busy demoing it to customers. Yikes.

I don't think that its just about achieving better battery life, it also gives the marketplace the benefit of more direct competition for intel, which is something that is becoming increasingly more important. This is relevant as its for the same reasons that i think MS need to be scared about the spread and increasing capabilities of other OSes. They have had dominance for too long!
I agree on the point about it being unified and i can see how and why it makes sense from that perspective, its just that they didn't get it right and it doesn't work... at the moment... but again circles i guess.

I agree with all of that but Android and iOS are a World away from the capabilities of Windows as an OS. That they are and yet still so popular shows how important 'simple' is. I'm perplexed though, WindowsRT really is more capable than, say, iOS - and comes with office - and yet it's compared to full fat Win8 and not it's real competitors - it's a terrible marketing name though and that's a huge problem.
The only thing that will keep ARM going is the fact that intel charge an arm and leg for their stuff by comparison (if we assume battery life is even) and don't let people spin their own versions of it. ARM is clever because it's licensed out - people always prefer having more control over their product.

I just appreciate having a proper discussion with someone who is at least trying to see the other side of the coin!

I'm actually quite a reasonable chap - just ask my wife. On second thoughts..

[Biscuit]

EERRRGHHH MYYYY GAWWWDDDDDD

http://www.engadget.com/2013/05/23/m...comfort-mouse/



i cant think of anything worse

[Biscuit]

The verge have some leaked info about the supposed alterations to the start screen and button. Apparently the background you use for desktop is now the same as what will show as the backdrop on start screen. Fairly simple and I think it may help with the blending of environments but I still don't think it's close to enough. I'm interested to see the final release.