»

[Tripitaka]

Originally Posted by djrikki

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!

I guess it all comes down to usage. I do some things on my PC that touch screen just doesn't work well for (like typing this post) but my main PC usage is for art applications. Now, as a digital sketchbook the tablet is a wonderful tool and I could quite happily sit for hours without getting RSI. Will a tablet with added keyboard ever replace my desktop PC? It's only a matter of time I think.

[commodorejohn]

Originally Posted by Lurch

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.

If I'm overly-serious and irritable, it's because you're telling me (and Microsoft is telling me, by taking away the old interface) that I'm somehow wrong to want what I want. I was happy with XP; the designers had their new niche to play in, and the legacy interface worked just like I was used to from Windows 98. They started taking away the legacy interface in 7 (which is the main reason I haven't upgraded, aside from really having no need,) and now they're going even further with it. They're taking away the option that works best for me because they've decided for me that I no longer need it.

And to say something like "Advancements wouldn't be made if the human race stuck with the same thing" is naive. It's the kind of mindset that doesn't care where something is going as long as it's going. Change is only merited when the new thing is an improvement over the old thing (and even then, the hassle cost of switching has to be outweighed by the overall improvement.) Even stagnation is better than blindly endorsing a devolution of the user interface just because it's new.

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'm sorry, I really don't mean to be rude, but if you've actually looked into the Start screen and you honestly think it's an improvement in anything but a touchscreen scenario (and, I suspect, even then,) you're an idiot. Have you looked into this beyond the promo shots? It's not New Magic, it's a space-hog version of the existing Start menu - which means that every program that adds its own shortcuts will still be adding crap to the Start screen. It's not going to look like this, it's going to look like this; it's basically the Start menu if you auto-expanded every subfolder and put lots of padding in between entries. It's a waste of space and a stupid design. And you can't get rid of it.

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.

Again, I wouldn't care what they do if they'd just leave the legacy interface alone and untouched and confined their slipshod experiments to the new crap. But they aren't.

A year or two from now I predict most people will have a different view.

What are they going to do in a year or two? The thing that would most seriously improve Windows 8 (and people's reception of it) is to bring back the legacy interface; even the 7 Start menu would be an improvement. When the best thing that can be done for your design is to get rid of it, that says something.

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.

But this is basically the problem with nerfing legacy UI; sure, you might like the ribbon, and good for you with that. I despise it. It's not a case of not having used it enough, we've been stuck with Office 2007 at work for two years now. I still despise it; the spatial organization is bad, menu items that were easy to find in 2003 are a scavenger hunt now, and Office's always-problematic Toolbar Wasteland Syndrome has now expanded to a full-on mega-toolbar that you can't get rid of. It eats up screen space, it eats up time, and it eats up happiness. Saying "well I like it" is great, but it doesn't do anything to endear it to me, or any of the countless other people who hate it.

It's the same thing with Windows 8; if you somehow like to have your Start menu expanded into a wasteland of every entry every installer decided to put in there, with padding, scrolling across screens' worth of data just to find what you're looking for, then...well, you like it, but saying you like it doesn't change anything about it that others are objecting to.

[560SL]

Hope it has "Windows Classic" theme.

[Wolfe]

This thread is assuming they had smart guys to begin with . . . :LOL:

[psxphill]

Originally Posted by commodorejohn

I'm sorry, I really don't mean to be rude, but if you've actually looked into the Start screen and you honestly think it's an improvement in anything but a touchscreen scenario (and, I suspect, even then,) you're an idiot.

I like how you started the sentence apologising about how you don't mean to be rude but by the end of the sentence you are just being rude.

Vista wasn't as bad as everyone made out, but it will be interesting to see whether the hate campagin against 8 will have the same impact. I remember XP being unpopular & even the start menu being ridiculed when 95 came out.

[partycentralpartygirl]

Originally Posted by Wolfe

This thread is assuming they had smart guys to begin with . . . :LOL:

Looks like all the smart guys are still there:

http://www.alltouchtablet.com/touchs...tablets-17095/

iPads will remain in the clutches of hipsters tweeting about selling their "artwork" on ESTY while playing Cut the Rope in a rented townhouse while Windows Tablets will be adopted for Corporate Customers to avoid paying double "Apple Tax"

If you don't feel like reading the article MS is going to charge a fee to access Windows Machine's using virtualization. Companies will just issue Win8 tablets (which will cost less to begin with) and avoid the (extra) fee altogether.

Dirty move on MS's part, but it's a genius decision on their part, to maintain the stranglehold on their Corporate business.

[tone007]

Originally Posted by partycentralpartygirl

Dirty move on MS's part, but it's a genius decision on their part, to maintain the stranglehold on their Corporate business.

Oddly enough, federal customers seem to be leaning towards the iPad, and they've been hardcore Microsoft (but Blackberry for mobile) for as long as I can remember (haven't seen a single Mac.) If they're doing it, I'd have to expect plenty of corporate customers might be as well.

[SysAdmin]

@partycentralpartygirl

Your assuming they sell at least one Windows Tablet, which is assuming a lot. Windows Tablets have been available for over 10 years and customers always avoid them.

[Duce]

The Win 8 tablets will be fail from the get go. The ARM version of Win 8 (Win RT) does not support domains/Active Directory, and the Intel based ones will be too power hungry and too chunky to be adopted by enterprise. Win RT doesn't support x86 Win 8 apps, etc. Sure, it comes with Office built in, but that's about the only selling point IMHO. MS lost the tablet race 10 years ago, and back then they didn't even have a viable competitor - there's simply no getting past the iPad now.

Active Directory is a very, very big thing in the enterprise world.

[partycentralpartygirl]

Originally Posted by Transition

@partycentralpartygirl

Your assuming they sell at least one Windows Tablet, which is assuming a lot. Windows Tablets have been available for over 10 years and customers always avoid them.

My doctor (and his entire office) has been using a Windows Tablets for at least a decade. So he'll upgrade, so there is seven sale right there. MS will be very happy! Perhaps Bill will get enough money to finally cure Aids for good with those sales numbers.

The reason that MS will be able to sell at least some of these tablets is because these tablets are far far different than previous tablets under the Windows banner. Previous tablets were expected to run a general purpose operating system with 30 years of backward compatibility (to some degree) When I say that I mean that I run DOS programs under Windows and they work just fine. I have some 16 bit Windows apps that work fine under Windows 7. The crux of Microsofts problems is backwards compatibility. Not to mention they had to run CISC x86 processors to ensure all the old stuff would work, they ate batteries for breakfast, new RISC ARM chips will allow MS to get similar battery life and performance out of their tablets as anyone else.

It's apples to oranges to compare the previous XP offerings to the new Metro devices. Eliminating backwards compatibility with legacy apps will free Microsoft to re-invent the OS. Which they have done via the Metro interface. (to much negative fanfare)

In my humble opinion the new Windows tablets will have about as much in common to the old tablets as the iPad does to Apple's Pippin.

Though the Pippin is clearly better than the iPad as it runs a PPC chip, and has removable media, and hooks to a TV out of the box. So long story short once again Apple Pippin's win the feature war vs the iPad. Though to be fair iPad does have wireless networking. So the Pippin only wins by a hair.