»

[itix]

Originally Posted by -BobW-

It's not just different. It's bad design. Removing the start menu and replacing it with a touch interface is just plain stupid.

Old start menu is something I would call bad design. It was good improvement in 1995 but since then it became one of most useless features.

[psxphill]

Originally Posted by -BobW-

It's not just different. It's bad design. Removing the start menu and replacing it with a touch interface is just plain stupid.

The metro start screen doesn't replace the start menu, all of the functionality that is currently part of the start menu is seperated out & you can use Windows 8 without ever using the start screen.

I don't think the start menu is that important, I spend very little time using it each day. So getting used to Windows 8 isn't going to be a huge leap for me. I lent my Windows 8 netbook to a teenage relative when they visited for the weekend and they never said a word.

I love some of the other ui improvements.

[commodorejohn]

Originally Posted by psxphill

The metro start screen doesn't replace the start menu, all of the functionality that is currently part of the start menu is seperated out & you can use Windows 8 without ever using the start screen.

That's not what I've read; if you could make the Metro Start screen go away normally, why would there be a third-party hack for it? Or did they change that in response to protest, finally?

I don't think the start menu is that important, I spend very little time using it each day.

Well, that's lovely for you, then. I do.

[Oldsmobile_Mike]

Holy h**l, Windows 8 - the choice for the ADHD generation? After watching that video, I'm left feeling like I know less about the operating system than I did before, and my brain hurts, to boot.

On the upside, I'm surprised it played in Opera (I do have Silverlight installed), was expecting it to only play in IE.

[-BobW-]

Originally Posted by itix

Old start menu is something I would call bad design. It was good improvement in 1995 but since then it became one of most useless features.

I'm not saying the old start menu was perfect. I just think the Metro replacement is crap.

Originally Posted by psxphill

The metro start screen doesn't replace the start menu, all of the functionality that is currently part of the start menu is seperated out & you can use Windows 8 without ever using the start screen.

Yeah, RIGHT clicking an invisible area in the lower left corner to get to some of the old start menu functionality is not intuitive.

Edit: Actually the metro screen does replace the start menu. It's labeled "Start" and if I hit the key to bring up the start menu Metro is displayed.

One of the most common things I do in Windows 7 is hit the left windows key and then start typing the name of the application I want. Makes it very easy to launch apps. Guess where that takes you in 8...

[jorkany]

Whether or not Windows 8 is any good I can't say - personally I don't think I'll ever use it.

But that video is horrible.


-Bobw-

One of the most common things I do in Windows 7 is hit the left windows key and then start typing the name of the application I want. Makes it very easy to launch apps. Guess where that takes you in 8...

I have no friggin clue. Could you just tell us?


Oldsmobile_Mike,

Holy h**l, Windows 8 - the choice for the ADHD generation? After watching that video, I'm left feeling like I know less about the operating system than I did before, and my brain hurts, to boot.

+1

[Duce]

Win 8 is entirely usable on a desktop once you get rid of any Metro traces. Sadly, that entirely defeats the purpose of what MS is trying to bring to the table, and I'm afraid they are simply too little too late on the tablet front.
The whole Windows on Arm (now called Windows RT) is going to be a debacle.

The kicker for guys like me is: I use Win 7, day in, day out. IMHO, best Windows version yet. If I have to gut Windows 8 and otherwise disable everything "new and innovative" in it to make it a productive desktop environment, why in Christ would I even buy it? I won't.

That being said, this time next year PC's will be coming with W8 on them from OEM's. That's always been the MS gag - they did it with Vista as well. Release a new OS, new PC's come with that, and call it "progress". My personal feelings are that Windows 8, unless radically changed is the next "Vista" in the making. I state this as a MCSE/MCSA. I dread the idea of having to support Windows 8.

I mean that in a public perspective aspect - Vista is widely seen as a complete turd, yet they still did move 10 million copies of Vista into the market every single month for 18 consecutive months, making money on each and every copy, whether it be OEM, VLK, or retail SKU's of Vista..

Does that make said product "good"? Hell no, but the way the show gets played out, the way the OS and OEM system vendor relationships work, they will move a lot of copies of W8.

[Nostalgiac]

I can't see the video so can't comment.

But I played with both sep2011 and the recent consumer test version...
- I have not found a way to get rid of the stupid metro start-screen (and neither have any sites I searched on except by installing 3th party replacements)
- .NET is (according to win8) no longer the future
- I really don't want/need a 30" phone :/
- I actually like Windows 7

so the future looks either Windows 7 till pc's no longer allow me to install it or jump ship...

Tom UK

[slaapliedje]

If it weren't for Netflix not supporting Linux, I would have already completely jumped ship. More and more games that I have are either on the Amiga, some other old platform, or simply work in wine, or even are native.

Literally the only reason I boot into Windows at all these days is to watch Netflix (which I'm probably canceling after I finish watching Deep Space 9 anyhow) and Video games.

Everyone I've talked to, even ones who love Windows 7, absolutely think Windows 8 is a joke.

Then of course there is the whole smart phone craziness with WP7 not being upgradeable to WP8 which is going to absolutely kill Nokia and any chance Microsoft had to get back into that space.

Unfortunately as most said, the OEMs will just eat it up and make their customers suffer through it.



slaapliedje

[Digiman]

Originally Posted by itix

Old start menu is something I would call bad design. It was good improvement in 1995 but since then it became one of most useless features.

Was better than Program Manager crap on Windows 1-3 but then DOS was better than that bullcrap. But the ideal is object oriented direct 1:1 file location mapping and shortcuts plus context sensitive menu for each icon types IMO.

[Lurch]

The start menu is still there but in a different form, actually after playing around with it for awhile it becomes second nature.
The desktop is still there and old fashioned apps still run fine.
The hidden menus one where the start menu use to be and others on the sides are great once you work out what to do (as with any new OS/application).
I think it was time for a shake up from the old outdated interface.

[commodorejohn]

Originally Posted by Lurch

I think it was time for a shake up from the old outdated interface.

I don't give a rat's ass if designers want to play with new concepts, but when they take away the tried-and-true fallback (or bastardize it,) that's going too far. I'm already perfectly happy with the old interface, thanks, I don't need some art student-turned-UI designer at Microsoft telling me what I should be interested in.

[Lurch]

Originally Posted by commodorejohn

I don't give a rat's ass if designers want to play with new concepts, but when they take away the tried-and-true fallback (or bastardize it,) that's going too far. I'm already perfectly happy with the old interface, thanks, I don't need some art student-turned-UI designer at Microsoft telling me what I should be interested in.

Wow, taking things a little serious I think. MS are not trying to tell you anything, there's nothing wrong with the "tried and true" but things have to change otherwise we would stay in the same place.

Advancements wouldn't be made if the human race stuck with the same thing. As for the tried and true that's still there, the old desktop remains for older applications and for people to still use.

The start menu is even there in an improved manner, just hover the mouse over where the start menu use to be and hello a newer version of one appears :-)

I think people need to remain open minded and give things a try. Change should not be feared or put down, wait for it to be released for awhile.

A year or two from now I predict most people will have a different view. I was around for the Windows 3.11 to 95 change and that was very much the same thing, same arguments as well but just look where the 95 start menu got us, XP/Vista (shudder horrible OS just slightly better than ME) and 7.

I love 7, but it needs to evolve like most things do. I use to hate the new ribbon menu in Office 2007/2010 but since using it for awhile going back to Office 2003 etc and the interface feels outdated and slow.

I look back at Redhat Linux, first edition I tried was 4.0 had to mount drives manually, no real wireless drivers that worked straight out of the box, sound card drivers that never really worked properly. Would boot straight to the shell and then it was a struggle getting xwindows working with your graphics card once it loaded it was a struggle with a buggy windows manager and I compare that with the new interface of Ubuntu completely different but would I go back to Redhat 4.0 don't think so. Ubuntu is starting to feel more uniform and the UI just works.

Anyway give MS a chance let the tech mature. No need for hostile attacks, after all we're all adults here. Take a deep breath, slow down and enjoy life, tech, family, friends etc :-)

[djrikki]

I have netbook with Windows 8 installed, no metro applications will even work because the low resolution is not even supported! Ha holy crap! Also very very very annoying to use with a touchpad as you can keep setting off the invisible right-hand sidebar thingy everytime you need to use the scroll bar.

I didn't know I could press the Windows start (I knew that part) and just start typing away the name of the application I want to run... that is pretty cool, shame installing it never told me that! Overall W8 is just W7 with a touch-screen interface provided, for me its not of any interest as I don't plan on ever buying a desktop PC because I only use this netbook to test websites work in versions of IE- another story altogether.

Yes I can see W8 being a complete flop at first, but ppl will soon succumb to it. And yes that Vendor/OEM relationship sucks bigtime. Perhaps one day the OEM's will turn around and say f you- our customers want X instead of Y.

I don't really get the point of touch screen desktops, its just another form of repetitive strain injury. How can anyone use one over an extended time is beyond me!

[spirantho]

It's videos and OSes like this that make me really glad my primary OS is an Amiga, not a PC. All I need my PC to do is to run a web browser and OpenOffice.org's Base application (I hope one day that we have Base on AmigaOS, then I can get rid of the PC for good at work).

That video truly is awful though, and I'm not saying that out of any bias. It completely overfills your brain with visual information and you just don't know what's going on. Compare that to an Apple advert where they do basically the same thing, and Apple wins hands down (and incidentally, I am far from an Apple fan).