12 ms·

Windows 8′s next victim: Microsoft kills the Start button

71 points by ukdm 15y ago

apg 15y ago
I've tried the initial Windows 8 developer preview, and I have to say it has been a jarring experience to switch back and forth between Metro and the "Windows Classic" desktop. The visual experience of Metro vs the Win7 style is so different that it feels slapdash and disjointed. This Windows 8 was just the initial developer preview though. I'm sure the next CTP will be worlds better - and I'm sure it Win8/Metro will be sweet on tablets. There was a mega post at the build windows blog justifying (rationalizing?) their decisions. It's interesting reading to slog through. They've certainly put a lot of resources onto this decision, and it feels like the future of Windows based desktop PC's is in the balance. It feels like a really risky bet. http://blogs.msdn.com/b/b8/archive/2011/10/11/reflecting-on-your-comments-on-the-start-screen.aspx http://blogs.msdn.com/b/b8/archive/2011/10/11/reflecting-on-... Ideally, MS would add a "Windows 7" mode that I can turn on and use my computer the way I've been accustomed to. I don't want to be learn more efficient with swipes/fewer clicks/etc - I've got a good thing going here. First thing I used to do with XP was switch it to the Windows Classic mode, so I'm probably not their target user. FWIW, I also dropped Ubuntu post-Unity (running Debian now) and haven't looked back. This dog is too old to want to deal with learning any cheese moving tricks.
- derleth 15y ago
  > I also dropped Ubuntu post-Unity (running Debian now) Why? If you're technical enough to run Debian, you're technical enough to run Ubuntu with Window Maker or some other non-Unity UI.
  - TylerE 15y ago
    Because Ubuntu has become, for the last 2 years or so, a game of "what will they break next". Started, arguably, with the not-even-halfbacked initial Pulseaudio implementation, and continuing on to Unity.
    - freehunter 15y ago
      Canonical seem to be playing the long game and tossing things out as they become available. It's like a waiter bringing you your meal as each piece gets done cooking. First he brings the sauce, then he brings the chicken, then he brings your beer, then he brings the beans. It might be a fantastic meal when put together properly, but piecemeal it's just an unappetizing mess. I have no doubt that Ubuntu 16.04 (or whenever they finish) will be amazing, but in the meantime I really wish they would just wait until they have everything ready.
      - rhizome 15y ago
        * It's like a waiter bringing you your meal as each piece gets done cooking.* And then when you complain, they say, "don't be a whiner, you received a three-course chicken cordon-bleu meal prepared by a trained French chef!" Nevermind that it was out of order and disassembled.
        TylerE 15y ago
        Not a bad analogy. I recently migrated my main desktop back from Windows 7 to Linux, and I actually ended up on Fedora. I've been pretty pleased with it overall. Sure, I ripped out Gnome 3 and dropped in KDE 4.8, but on the whole it really works quite well, including 3D (I recently replaced my old ATI card with an NVidia 560, which certainly helped). Surprised even me. My linux journey, going back 12 or so years, was more or less Mandrake -> Debian -> Gentoo -> FreeBSD -> Ubuntu - Slackware. I tried Debian recently, didn't really like where any of the distros fell - unstable was TOO bleeding edge, while even testing lagged annoyingly far behind. Arch is nice, and I like it on servers but too fiddly for a desktop. Fedora really seems to be right around the sweet spot where it's useable, pretty up to date, but more importantly it's very much "linux" as I remember it, not with lots of not-very-well documented magic going on.
        freehunter 15y ago
        See, I have a different story with Fedora (and maybe this is partly due to Gnome 3). I installed it on my desktop/home server. I've got 6 hard drives, and I couldn't manage to get SMART warnings to stop popping up because one of them had 6 reallocated sectors. Like, every 3 minutes SMART was screaming at me. Then I was trying to install Amahi and it required a package that was different than one that was installed by default. I could not figure out how to get yum to replace the current package with the one my software needed. The help from the developers? "--force is never a good option, so we don't offer it". Thank you, Microsoft, for protecting me from myself. I uninstalled the package, and it automatically uninstalled Network Manager and everything related to DHCP/networking. After that, I couldn't install the package I wanted because I couldn't configure a network connection. It really seems the only time I have to resort to using the command line is when the distro's "intelligence" breaks the GUI. Ubuntu doesn't not break things, but at least when it does I know the best recourse (since I partition /home on it's own drive) is to just reinstall. Wouldn't have fixed a thing in Fedora. I grew up on a command line, and I really hate being forced to go back to that just because the developers don't care enough make the GUI work properly.
  - MatthewPhillips 15y ago
    Ubuntu 11.04 is a few versions behind on node.js. So a lot of modules won't install. If they're behind there I'm sure they're also behind in other programming environments as well. You can always install these things from source, but for programmers a rolling release distro like Debian or Arch makes more sense.
- bo1024 15y ago
  > and I'm sure it Win8/Metro will be sweet on tablets Exactly. The hot trend right now is to throw desktop aesthetics and performance out the window and just build products for small touchscreens. Dumb.
  - kijin 15y ago
    They will learn that it was a dumb move when corporate customers with hundreds of thousands of installations refuse to upgrade because the eye candy does nothing to improve productivity on their (obviously non-touchscreen) workstations. Coming Soon: Windows 9 Business Edition with the Classic keyboard-and-mouse UI.
    - Luyt 15y ago
      I also hope KDE5 will be more like KDE3 than KDE4.
      - ChrisNorstrom 15y ago
        As soon as I "experienced" unity I RAN to gnome, screamed in horror, then ran to KDE and just cried a bit to myself. What the hell is happening to linux? Ever since the nearing of Steve Jobs' decline & death it's like every amateur designer in the world's been tyring to take his place. They're all trying to mimick his vision and design but without understanding it at all. I think this is why we keep ending up with all these heartless, sterile, Kindergarden UI designs.
        kijin 15y ago
        Try XFCE. Linus Torvalds said he uses it. Meanwhile, KDE isn't all that bad nowadays. I actually kinda like KDE 4.8, it's come a long way since the early days of KDE 4.
        bo1024 15y ago
        Mint is still using Gnome 2, or I think there is a new fork of it named something else. I agree though, although I blame the shift mainly on the tablet/smartphone mentality.
- nextparadigms 15y ago
  I don't think users will easily switch from the XP/7 experience to the Windows 8 "tile" one. And it seems all they are doing is forcing even more this new experience on them. Whether it's old Windows users, Mac users, or Linux users - the transition will definitely not come as easy for them as it was the transition from XP to Win7, which was also heavily helped by the fact that people were already very tired of XP.
- freehunter 15y ago
  Everyone hates change and would love to go back, until they actually do go back. The status quo is familiar and therefore seems more efficient. It's "muscle memory". The current desktop system is a metaphor that never really played out. Will Windows 8/Unity/Gnome 3 be better? Who knows. Will be it worse? Probably not. More than likely it will just be "different". Either way, if computing doesn't keep changing and evolving, we're going to be stuck in the barely-functional status quo forever. I'm willing to live through (and learn to love) the rough parts along the way until we reach the best we can possibly do.
  - Zancarius 15y ago
    > Everyone hates change and would love to go back, until they actually do go back. The status quo is familiar and therefore seems more efficient. It's "muscle memory". The current desktop system is a metaphor that never really played out. This is largely quite true. I was probably one of the few people among my peers who actually appreciated the new taskbar introduced in Windows 7. Although that's not to say that criticism of Windows 8 isn't important; I think one of the things Microsoft did learn with the Windows 7 betas and release candidates was that feedback from the user base can very occasionally be helpful. In some exceptional cases, monitoring user feedback can short-circuit certain disaster. The other thing to keep in mind is that change for the sake of change isn't always good--and likewise, it isn't always bad. Paradigm shifts will happen, things will change, and sometimes legacy designs will continue to persist for wont of familiarity. What I'm saying is this: Changing too much too drastically is a bold move. It might pay off; it might also be disaster. My personal preference is to agree with apg; the developer preview was less than stellar, but my expectations weren't terribly high. I don't really like the paradigm shift Microsoft is trying to force across the Windows brand as it exists for a desktop OS, but it might be great for what it was designed for--tablets and phones. It should be said that I also didn't care much for Unity even though I gave it an honest try for about two-three weeks. There were some things that it did well--and were equally quite handy--and there were others that felt too jarring and awkward. Metro feels somewhat similar in that regard. However, I'll reserve my full judgement until we're closer to a more finalized product so we can see what Microsoft's vision ultimately boils down to; thusfar, I'm not terribly impressed, but I admit they're making a decent effort. I do look forward to seeing the finished product even if I absolutely hate it. :)
- dacilselig 15y ago
  A lot of people who are complaining are most likely suffering from Baby Duck Syndrome. I haven't had the opportunity to try out Windows 8 yet, but I'm sure this is a calculated risk which can hopefully appeal to newer generations.
- danneu 15y ago
  This is how I feel about Unity and why I moved to Debian+Openbox. Unity might be incredible on a tablet when ctrl+space to bring up a launcher and typing "fir<enter>" to launch Firefox is slower than slapping an icon with my sausage finger. But on the desktop, Unity is a step backwards and adds nothing to me when my fingers are on home row all day. And trust me, I really tried to use Unity and I'm rather open-minded about new paradigms (Openbox was new to me). I haven't tried Win8 yet, but it sounds like a similar situation. But I don't feel like the future of Windows-based desktop PCs is under fire. As long as Windows has powerusers, there will always be a solution to what might be a step backwards in design.
cheald 15y ago
I've been using GNOME 3 for a few months, and I actually am on board with this decision; it feels better, and looks fine. It takes some getting used to, but a button press (win key) or mouse flick is a lot faster than "mouse mouse to the corner, position it over the start button, click". Does make me wonder how it'll work in multi-monitor setups, though. Presumably you can change the hot corner, but if that's not a launch feature there are going to be some severely annoyed users.
- codesuela 15y ago
  this is what ruined unity for me the launcher bar basically was stuck in the middle between screens the hack that makes it so you can move it somewhere else was only for x86 systems or something like that (found that out after it killed my X server). As for Gnome: on of my monitors is "2 larger and therefore I can trigger the shell by hovering over the left corner without "slipping" to the other one or click the icon. There is also a second hot corner on my other monitor (by default).
- deleted 15y ago
  [deleted]
- kijin 15y ago
  Hot corners are also a terrible experience when you're running the OS inside a non-fullscreen virtual machine. Sorry, your mouse just left the window instead of triggering the smart corner. But then, if you're targeting the tablet market, none of this would matter.
  - mrj 15y ago
    Yeah, that was my thought, too. Actually, I have a second monitor on that side, so trying to hit the corner would be a pain.
- Dylan16807 15y ago
  You don't have to position it onto the button. The button extends all the way to the corner. So it's a flick followed by a click. A flick alone will trigger the menu accidentally pretty often, and a flick followed by a hover is slower than a flick followed by a click.
zyb09 15y ago
So is the start menu gone completely? With Windows7 it was actually on the way to become something like Spotlight (just not as good yet). I can't believe they'd patch that out, instead of improving on it, Windows needs something like Spotlight IMHO.
- underwater 15y ago
  I recall reading that you can type at the start screen to search. So you should still be able to use the same keypresses to search or launch an app.
  - xpaulbettsx 15y ago
    This is right - Win8 for power users is, "Hit Start button on keyboard, type what you want a-la QuickSilver"
    - zyb09 15y ago
      ok that sounds good though
    - eropple 15y ago
      ...while the new Start-thingy takes over your entire screen. That, more than anything, is the deal-breaker for me.
      - freehunter 15y ago
        Are you actively using other windows while in the process of launching a new one? It's not like the start screen stays there forever, or the window you were looking at goes away. There are a lot of nit-picking curmudgeons in this thread.
        JoelSutherland 15y ago
        Yes. I'm reading the filename of a document in Gmail and typing it into search to quickly call it up.
CoughlinJ 15y ago
There needs to be a branch between the classic HID driven computing experience, and what is obviously an immersive, touch driven product. I feel like the Metro UI is what we'll be heading towards eventually, but I think some things just need to stay the same. A solid manipulative platform that is clean as it is elegant in its structure and its function is something I think a lot of us will need for the foreseeable future..
- bo1024 15y ago
  Agreed -- it's the difference between the keyboard/mouse and the touchscreen. They have different strengths and different use cases, so a one-size-fits-all approach is silly.
derleth 15y ago
So, is the corporate upgrade path still going to be from Windows 8 to XP?
- kijin 15y ago
  No sane corporation should allow itself to become a guinea pig for even-numbered Windows releases. Me (4?) was horrible. XP (5?) was OK. Vista (6?) was a bomb. 7 was OK. 8, meh. 9, maybe the tablet fad will pass by then. Stick to odd-numbered releases, they're like LTS.
  - freehunter 15y ago
    When I look at things like the Samsung Series 7 Slate, I don't think tablets are a fad. It's a laptop with a portable screen, or a tablet with a dock and a keyboard. It's running a full OS, with real hardware backing it. How many times have I wished I didn't have to undock my laptop and lug the bulky thing over to a coworkers desk to show them something when all I needed was the screen? Tablets and keyboards are the new laptops.
    - jeltz 15y ago
      Tablets may not be a fad, but I sure hope tablet style interfaces for laptops and desktops are. The UI should be adapted to input devices and screen size.
      - freehunter 15y ago
        Really I think the push is that desktops will be relegated to only the most power users. Already laptops are king even in business. Tablets are an extension (or evolution) of that. Desktops are those mainframes you run at home to store your movies and play your video games. Desktops will increasingly have to prove their value in the market. In a world of booming connectivity and mobility, desktops (and even laptops) are legacy technology. All hail gestures and keyboard shortcuts.
        15y ago
Raphael 15y ago
Terrible move. It doesn't save any space because the taskbar is still there. And most people use wide screens, so there is plenty of room for shortcuts horizontally.
smhinsey 15y ago
I wonder if this is going to bring us back to the days where you need to run a server version of the OS if you want an environment suitable for doing technical work. I can't imagine running this on my dual 30'' setup.
thyrsus 15y ago
I suppose the off button will be easier to find, since you won't have to know that to turn off you have to click "Start".
derekerdmann 15y ago
If there's anything we've learned from the Engineering Blogs, they don't make major changes like this unless they have some kind of data that supports it. I suspect we haven't even seen half of the things that will make this paradigm work, and I'd bet they have extensive Usability tests to back all of it up.
drivebyacct2 15y ago
Good. The variety of uber-usable menus in Linux for many, many years has spoiled me and I always wind up resenting almost every bit of the Start menu experience when using Windows. I love to espouse about Cardapio because it's that awesome. cardapio: http://i.minus.com/i9sRs.png http://i.minus.com/i9sRs.png I think it's going to be jarring to move between classic and Metro modes, but I don't think there's a clear way for Microsoft to alleviate that. I also don't think it's unreasonable to say that there is a tablet paradigm that can live alongside the regular desktop paradigm. I think there are some that expect Microsoft Office and a twitter app to be equally usable via a mouse and a finger and I'm not sure that's entirely reasonable. At the very least, the hacker in me has no problem with needing to break out a mouse and keyboard to really get things done.
- serge2k 15y ago
  that looks like it provides pretty much the same functionality as the start menu. Windows 8 is looking like such a failure.
  - drivebyacct2 15y ago
    Cardapio (in most major Linux distros) is almost always, at most, two levels deep, categorized by app, and doesn't include a per-app folder including 6 different shortcuts, readme, uninstaller, etc. It's much cleaner to skim through, it's much easier to find, say, an "Internet" application out of all of them installed, has search and favorite folders baked in. It might be the same functionality, but that's not really saying much. Linux and Windows fundamentally offer the same functionality.
- apg 15y ago
  I'm not so sure that the need for touch is really that great in a desktop environment. It's probably cool for someone looking over your shoulder and wanting to take control of your computer. But for sitting at the computer and making something happen... I don't think the usability needs to be 'equal'. And in the desktop world it should favor the keyboard/mouse. Here's an anecdote for touch vs. mouse/keyboard: Pretty sure I'm not - nor is my family setup - typical of a windows user. We have two touchscreen desktops in our house. I have a two year old that can work the touchscreen very proficiently. My 5 & 7 year old stick with the mouse and never use the touch, I almost never use touch, and my wife rarely uses it. Based on my personal observations, on the desktop, touch is good for very new users or those who lack the physical coordination to control the mouse and keyboard. Otherwise, mouse and keyboard wins. The Windows 8 mouse experience is really lacking at the moment. I expect that gets a major update in the next version.
contextfree 15y ago
interesting to see how much commotion this apparent change has caused, since it's almost purely cosmetic - the actual start menu itself was gone (or replaced) already in the DP.
scott_s 15y ago
It’s even worse for first-time users: There’s no visual cue at all for returning to the Metro interface. This mattered two decades ago. It does not matter now. Two decades ago, there was a large number of people who were just starting to integrate computers into their daily lives. This is no longer true. Computers are integrated into people's daily lives. The only people [1] who are "just starting" to integrate computers into their daily lives are the same people who are "just starting" to integrate using a toilet into their daily lives. From now on, people will grow up with computers, and I think we should design interfaces to reflect that. "But what about first-time users?" should no longer be an interesting question. [1] I'm sure someone can come up with specific counter-examples. I submit that those cases are rare enough that they shouldn't be a primary consideration for designing interfaces. Of course, there should be interface back-doors for disabilities and such, but that is not the same as primary considerations for most people.
- DarkShikari 15y ago
  It's not about new to computers, it's about new to your interface. If you have a new interface, especially one that works differently from the old interface in a notable way, you can't assume that everyone will instantly figure out your new interface without cues.
  - freehunter 15y ago
    I think it would be quite unlikely that the majority of users would be given a Windows 8 machine without some kind of tutorial. Windows has had a "Welcome to Windows" since at least Windows 95 (IIRC). Corporate users are generally given a brief documentation page on how to use their computer (we rolled out Windows 7 last summer with a 3-page document with screenshots of how to get around). There will be precious few who can never get the hang of it.
- mirkules 15y ago
  Even if there are no first-time users anymore, I think computing in general can benefit from User Interfaces being developed as if they are developed for first-time users, and the advanced options layered underneath. This is where OS X gets things right. In addition, computers may be integrated into daily lives, but I think this definitely does not mean the opposite - that people have learned how to operate them properly, despite them being so integrated. If level of integration into society means that user interface does not need to cater to beginning users, there would be no designers left to make designs - only engineers (perish the thought :) But seriously -- and forgive me for using a car analogy -- but the basic operation of a car is actually simpler, rather than more complicated. To be fair, some OS X advanced options are in hair-pulling places, which I believe only underlines how hard it is to market computers to the masses with differing layers of knowledge
timkeller 15y ago
8 is looking more and more like Vista Take2. And yes, that seems silly and inflammatory... but it has all the hallmarks of Vista's over-zealousness, last minute changes and disdain for Microsoft's core customers.
crististm 15y ago
I can't believe this started 17 years ago. It couldn't be _that_ long... Yep, it is... Looks like the desktop metaphor is back in business.
Skywing 15y ago
After reading the article and hearing that you activate the start menu by "flicking" the mouse to the bottom left, I instinctively tried it myself and noticed an issue. I'm running a dual monitor setup, where my second monitor is to the left of my main monitor. Flicking the mouse to the bottom left just causes it to go to the second monitor, if I'm not careful. Now, to enter the start menu, I am going to have to carefully move the mouse down to the bottom left, just as I do with the start button as it currently is. This just seems like it's more prone to issues than the start button, for not much gain. Of course, I am open to trying it, just like I have every previous Windows version.
LoneWolf 15y ago
From the few screenshots and videos I saw of windows 8 I cant make myself like it, the metro interface looks good for a tablet I agree with that, but for a desktop? I dont think so. Guess I will have to wait until I get my hands on it to know for sure.
yason 15y ago
If it activates from the corner like in Gnome 3 then this is much better than the Start button. The Start button was always a few pixels off the edges so you couldn't just shove your mouse to bottom-left corner and click. Instead, you had to find the corner and offset the mouse a notch towards up-right to hit the button.
- ppog 15y ago
  They fixed that in Windows XP. (Although in Vista they made the Start button circular so it no longer appeared to occupy the corner pixel, the entire bottom left corner did remain hot, and remains so in Windows 7.)
frio 15y ago
Out of interest: has Microsoft commented at all on whether this new UI will integrate with the Kinect for PC? While my screens are far enough away that a touchscreen would prove arduous, flicking and sliding through screens with gestures might tie well to the Metro experience.
RexRollman 15y ago
I've once used a program called "Start Killer" on my Windows 7 desktop, which removed the start menu button. I did this because I thought the desktop would look better without it. The Start menu would still come up when the Windows key was pressed, so that still worked, but I quickly found it annoying because there was no way to activate it with the mouse (which I did more often than I realized). As for Windows 8, I have high hopes for it because I like Windows 7, but I do think Microsoft is going to end up with a weird GUI mashup if they are not careful.
- danneu 15y ago
  Ever since I started using launchers to find programs/files/settings, I realized the pointlessness of a Start button. For Windows, I used Launchy. In Linux, I'm typing the program name into terminal. The average user uses the Start menu as a browseable library of their installed programs (which it isn't even good at), so I think a direct list of apps is better all around with an option to launch apps from an intuitive search bar.
Tichy 15y ago
I really dislike this trend in UI design. The reason is simple: I want a fair chance to discover how to do stuff on my computer. I don't want to read handbooks or worse, watch tutorial videos. The point of a good UI is to make a handbook superfluous.

71 points by ukdm 15y ago

apg 15y ago

I've tried the initial Windows 8 developer preview, and I have to say it has been a jarring experience to switch back and forth between Metro and the "Windows Classic" desktop. The visual experience of Metro vs the Win7 style is so different that it feels slapdash and disjointed. This Windows 8 was just the initial developer preview though. I'm sure the next CTP will be worlds better - and I'm sure it Win8/Metro will be sweet on tablets. There was a mega post at the build windows blog justifying (rationalizing?) their decisions. It's interesting reading to slog through. They've certainly put a lot of resources onto this decision, and it feels like the future of Windows based desktop PC's is in the balance. It feels like a really risky bet. http://blogs.msdn.com/b/b8/archive/2011/10/11/reflecting-on-your-comments-on-the-start-screen.aspx http://blogs.msdn.com/b/b8/archive/2011/10/11/reflecting-on-... Ideally, MS would add a "Windows 7" mode that I can turn on and use my computer the way I've been accustomed to. I don't want to be learn more efficient with swipes/fewer clicks/etc - I've got a good thing going here. First thing I used to do with XP was switch it to the Windows Classic mode, so I'm probably not their target user. FWIW, I also dropped Ubuntu post-Unity (running Debian now) and haven't looked back. This dog is too old to want to deal with learning any cheese moving tricks.

derleth 15y ago
> I also dropped Ubuntu post-Unity (running Debian now) Why? If you're technical enough to run Debian, you're technical enough to run Ubuntu with Window Maker or some other non-Unity UI.
- TylerE 15y ago
  Because Ubuntu has become, for the last 2 years or so, a game of "what will they break next". Started, arguably, with the not-even-halfbacked initial Pulseaudio implementation, and continuing on to Unity.
  - freehunter 15y ago
    Canonical seem to be playing the long game and tossing things out as they become available. It's like a waiter bringing you your meal as each piece gets done cooking. First he brings the sauce, then he brings the chicken, then he brings your beer, then he brings the beans. It might be a fantastic meal when put together properly, but piecemeal it's just an unappetizing mess. I have no doubt that Ubuntu 16.04 (or whenever they finish) will be amazing, but in the meantime I really wish they would just wait until they have everything ready.
    - rhizome 15y ago
      * It's like a waiter bringing you your meal as each piece gets done cooking.* And then when you complain, they say, "don't be a whiner, you received a three-course chicken cordon-bleu meal prepared by a trained French chef!" Nevermind that it was out of order and disassembled.
      - TylerE 15y ago
        Not a bad analogy. I recently migrated my main desktop back from Windows 7 to Linux, and I actually ended up on Fedora. I've been pretty pleased with it overall. Sure, I ripped out Gnome 3 and dropped in KDE 4.8, but on the whole it really works quite well, including 3D (I recently replaced my old ATI card with an NVidia 560, which certainly helped). Surprised even me. My linux journey, going back 12 or so years, was more or less Mandrake -> Debian -> Gentoo -> FreeBSD -> Ubuntu - Slackware. I tried Debian recently, didn't really like where any of the distros fell - unstable was TOO bleeding edge, while even testing lagged annoyingly far behind. Arch is nice, and I like it on servers but too fiddly for a desktop. Fedora really seems to be right around the sweet spot where it's useable, pretty up to date, but more importantly it's very much "linux" as I remember it, not with lots of not-very-well documented magic going on.
        freehunter 15y ago
        See, I have a different story with Fedora (and maybe this is partly due to Gnome 3). I installed it on my desktop/home server. I've got 6 hard drives, and I couldn't manage to get SMART warnings to stop popping up because one of them had 6 reallocated sectors. Like, every 3 minutes SMART was screaming at me. Then I was trying to install Amahi and it required a package that was different than one that was installed by default. I could not figure out how to get yum to replace the current package with the one my software needed. The help from the developers? "--force is never a good option, so we don't offer it". Thank you, Microsoft, for protecting me from myself. I uninstalled the package, and it automatically uninstalled Network Manager and everything related to DHCP/networking. After that, I couldn't install the package I wanted because I couldn't configure a network connection. It really seems the only time I have to resort to using the command line is when the distro's "intelligence" breaks the GUI. Ubuntu doesn't not break things, but at least when it does I know the best recourse (since I partition /home on it's own drive) is to just reinstall. Wouldn't have fixed a thing in Fedora. I grew up on a command line, and I really hate being forced to go back to that just because the developers don't care enough make the GUI work properly.
- MatthewPhillips 15y ago
  Ubuntu 11.04 is a few versions behind on node.js. So a lot of modules won't install. If they're behind there I'm sure they're also behind in other programming environments as well. You can always install these things from source, but for programmers a rolling release distro like Debian or Arch makes more sense.
bo1024 15y ago
> and I'm sure it Win8/Metro will be sweet on tablets Exactly. The hot trend right now is to throw desktop aesthetics and performance out the window and just build products for small touchscreens. Dumb.
- kijin 15y ago
  They will learn that it was a dumb move when corporate customers with hundreds of thousands of installations refuse to upgrade because the eye candy does nothing to improve productivity on their (obviously non-touchscreen) workstations. Coming Soon: Windows 9 Business Edition with the Classic keyboard-and-mouse UI.
  - Luyt 15y ago
    I also hope KDE5 will be more like KDE3 than KDE4.
    - ChrisNorstrom 15y ago
      As soon as I "experienced" unity I RAN to gnome, screamed in horror, then ran to KDE and just cried a bit to myself. What the hell is happening to linux? Ever since the nearing of Steve Jobs' decline & death it's like every amateur designer in the world's been tyring to take his place. They're all trying to mimick his vision and design but without understanding it at all. I think this is why we keep ending up with all these heartless, sterile, Kindergarden UI designs.
      - kijin 15y ago
        Try XFCE. Linus Torvalds said he uses it. Meanwhile, KDE isn't all that bad nowadays. I actually kinda like KDE 4.8, it's come a long way since the early days of KDE 4.
      - bo1024 15y ago
        Mint is still using Gnome 2, or I think there is a new fork of it named something else. I agree though, although I blame the shift mainly on the tablet/smartphone mentality.
nextparadigms 15y ago
I don't think users will easily switch from the XP/7 experience to the Windows 8 "tile" one. And it seems all they are doing is forcing even more this new experience on them. Whether it's old Windows users, Mac users, or Linux users - the transition will definitely not come as easy for them as it was the transition from XP to Win7, which was also heavily helped by the fact that people were already very tired of XP.
freehunter 15y ago
Everyone hates change and would love to go back, until they actually do go back. The status quo is familiar and therefore seems more efficient. It's "muscle memory". The current desktop system is a metaphor that never really played out. Will Windows 8/Unity/Gnome 3 be better? Who knows. Will be it worse? Probably not. More than likely it will just be "different". Either way, if computing doesn't keep changing and evolving, we're going to be stuck in the barely-functional status quo forever. I'm willing to live through (and learn to love) the rough parts along the way until we reach the best we can possibly do.
- Zancarius 15y ago
  > Everyone hates change and would love to go back, until they actually do go back. The status quo is familiar and therefore seems more efficient. It's "muscle memory". The current desktop system is a metaphor that never really played out. This is largely quite true. I was probably one of the few people among my peers who actually appreciated the new taskbar introduced in Windows 7. Although that's not to say that criticism of Windows 8 isn't important; I think one of the things Microsoft did learn with the Windows 7 betas and release candidates was that feedback from the user base can very occasionally be helpful. In some exceptional cases, monitoring user feedback can short-circuit certain disaster. The other thing to keep in mind is that change for the sake of change isn't always good--and likewise, it isn't always bad. Paradigm shifts will happen, things will change, and sometimes legacy designs will continue to persist for wont of familiarity. What I'm saying is this: Changing too much too drastically is a bold move. It might pay off; it might also be disaster. My personal preference is to agree with apg; the developer preview was less than stellar, but my expectations weren't terribly high. I don't really like the paradigm shift Microsoft is trying to force across the Windows brand as it exists for a desktop OS, but it might be great for what it was designed for--tablets and phones. It should be said that I also didn't care much for Unity even though I gave it an honest try for about two-three weeks. There were some things that it did well--and were equally quite handy--and there were others that felt too jarring and awkward. Metro feels somewhat similar in that regard. However, I'll reserve my full judgement until we're closer to a more finalized product so we can see what Microsoft's vision ultimately boils down to; thusfar, I'm not terribly impressed, but I admit they're making a decent effort. I do look forward to seeing the finished product even if I absolutely hate it. :)
dacilselig 15y ago
A lot of people who are complaining are most likely suffering from Baby Duck Syndrome. I haven't had the opportunity to try out Windows 8 yet, but I'm sure this is a calculated risk which can hopefully appeal to newer generations.
danneu 15y ago
This is how I feel about Unity and why I moved to Debian+Openbox. Unity might be incredible on a tablet when ctrl+space to bring up a launcher and typing "fir<enter>" to launch Firefox is slower than slapping an icon with my sausage finger. But on the desktop, Unity is a step backwards and adds nothing to me when my fingers are on home row all day. And trust me, I really tried to use Unity and I'm rather open-minded about new paradigms (Openbox was new to me). I haven't tried Win8 yet, but it sounds like a similar situation. But I don't feel like the future of Windows-based desktop PCs is under fire. As long as Windows has powerusers, there will always be a solution to what might be a step backwards in design.

cheald 15y ago

I've been using GNOME 3 for a few months, and I actually am on board with this decision; it feels better, and looks fine. It takes some getting used to, but a button press (win key) or mouse flick is a lot faster than "mouse mouse to the corner, position it over the start button, click". Does make me wonder how it'll work in multi-monitor setups, though. Presumably you can change the hot corner, but if that's not a launch feature there are going to be some severely annoyed users.

codesuela 15y ago
this is what ruined unity for me the launcher bar basically was stuck in the middle between screens the hack that makes it so you can move it somewhere else was only for x86 systems or something like that (found that out after it killed my X server). As for Gnome: on of my monitors is "2 larger and therefore I can trigger the shell by hovering over the left corner without "slipping" to the other one or click the icon. There is also a second hot corner on my other monitor (by default).
deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
kijin 15y ago
Hot corners are also a terrible experience when you're running the OS inside a non-fullscreen virtual machine. Sorry, your mouse just left the window instead of triggering the smart corner. But then, if you're targeting the tablet market, none of this would matter.
- mrj 15y ago
  Yeah, that was my thought, too. Actually, I have a second monitor on that side, so trying to hit the corner would be a pain.
Dylan16807 15y ago
You don't have to position it onto the button. The button extends all the way to the corner. So it's a flick followed by a click. A flick alone will trigger the menu accidentally pretty often, and a flick followed by a hover is slower than a flick followed by a click.

zyb09 15y ago

So is the start menu gone completely? With Windows7 it was actually on the way to become something like Spotlight (just not as good yet). I can't believe they'd patch that out, instead of improving on it, Windows needs something like Spotlight IMHO.

underwater 15y ago
I recall reading that you can type at the start screen to search. So you should still be able to use the same keypresses to search or launch an app.
- xpaulbettsx 15y ago
  This is right - Win8 for power users is, "Hit Start button on keyboard, type what you want a-la QuickSilver"
  - zyb09 15y ago
    ok that sounds good though
  - eropple 15y ago
    ...while the new Start-thingy takes over your entire screen. That, more than anything, is the deal-breaker for me.
    - freehunter 15y ago
      Are you actively using other windows while in the process of launching a new one? It's not like the start screen stays there forever, or the window you were looking at goes away. There are a lot of nit-picking curmudgeons in this thread.
      - JoelSutherland 15y ago
        Yes. I'm reading the filename of a document in Gmail and typing it into search to quickly call it up.

CoughlinJ 15y ago

There needs to be a branch between the classic HID driven computing experience, and what is obviously an immersive, touch driven product. I feel like the Metro UI is what we'll be heading towards eventually, but I think some things just need to stay the same. A solid manipulative platform that is clean as it is elegant in its structure and its function is something I think a lot of us will need for the foreseeable future..

bo1024 15y ago
Agreed -- it's the difference between the keyboard/mouse and the touchscreen. They have different strengths and different use cases, so a one-size-fits-all approach is silly.

derleth 15y ago

So, is the corporate upgrade path still going to be from Windows 8 to XP?

kijin 15y ago
No sane corporation should allow itself to become a guinea pig for even-numbered Windows releases. Me (4?) was horrible. XP (5?) was OK. Vista (6?) was a bomb. 7 was OK. 8, meh. 9, maybe the tablet fad will pass by then. Stick to odd-numbered releases, they're like LTS.
- freehunter 15y ago
  When I look at things like the Samsung Series 7 Slate, I don't think tablets are a fad. It's a laptop with a portable screen, or a tablet with a dock and a keyboard. It's running a full OS, with real hardware backing it. How many times have I wished I didn't have to undock my laptop and lug the bulky thing over to a coworkers desk to show them something when all I needed was the screen? Tablets and keyboards are the new laptops.
  - jeltz 15y ago
    Tablets may not be a fad, but I sure hope tablet style interfaces for laptops and desktops are. The UI should be adapted to input devices and screen size.
    - freehunter 15y ago
      Really I think the push is that desktops will be relegated to only the most power users. Already laptops are king even in business. Tablets are an extension (or evolution) of that. Desktops are those mainframes you run at home to store your movies and play your video games. Desktops will increasingly have to prove their value in the market. In a world of booming connectivity and mobility, desktops (and even laptops) are legacy technology. All hail gestures and keyboard shortcuts.
      - 15y ago

Raphael 15y ago

Terrible move. It doesn't save any space because the taskbar is still there. And most people use wide screens, so there is plenty of room for shortcuts horizontally.

smhinsey 15y ago

I wonder if this is going to bring us back to the days where you need to run a server version of the OS if you want an environment suitable for doing technical work. I can't imagine running this on my dual 30'' setup.

thyrsus 15y ago

I suppose the off button will be easier to find, since you won't have to know that to turn off you have to click "Start".

derekerdmann 15y ago

If there's anything we've learned from the Engineering Blogs, they don't make major changes like this unless they have some kind of data that supports it. I suspect we haven't even seen half of the things that will make this paradigm work, and I'd bet they have extensive Usability tests to back all of it up.

drivebyacct2 15y ago

Good. The variety of uber-usable menus in Linux for many, many years has spoiled me and I always wind up resenting almost every bit of the Start menu experience when using Windows. I love to espouse about Cardapio because it's that awesome. cardapio: http://i.minus.com/i9sRs.png http://i.minus.com/i9sRs.png I think it's going to be jarring to move between classic and Metro modes, but I don't think there's a clear way for Microsoft to alleviate that. I also don't think it's unreasonable to say that there is a tablet paradigm that can live alongside the regular desktop paradigm. I think there are some that expect Microsoft Office and a twitter app to be equally usable via a mouse and a finger and I'm not sure that's entirely reasonable. At the very least, the hacker in me has no problem with needing to break out a mouse and keyboard to really get things done.

serge2k 15y ago
that looks like it provides pretty much the same functionality as the start menu. Windows 8 is looking like such a failure.
- drivebyacct2 15y ago
  Cardapio (in most major Linux distros) is almost always, at most, two levels deep, categorized by app, and doesn't include a per-app folder including 6 different shortcuts, readme, uninstaller, etc. It's much cleaner to skim through, it's much easier to find, say, an "Internet" application out of all of them installed, has search and favorite folders baked in. It might be the same functionality, but that's not really saying much. Linux and Windows fundamentally offer the same functionality.
apg 15y ago
I'm not so sure that the need for touch is really that great in a desktop environment. It's probably cool for someone looking over your shoulder and wanting to take control of your computer. But for sitting at the computer and making something happen... I don't think the usability needs to be 'equal'. And in the desktop world it should favor the keyboard/mouse. Here's an anecdote for touch vs. mouse/keyboard: Pretty sure I'm not - nor is my family setup - typical of a windows user. We have two touchscreen desktops in our house. I have a two year old that can work the touchscreen very proficiently. My 5 & 7 year old stick with the mouse and never use the touch, I almost never use touch, and my wife rarely uses it. Based on my personal observations, on the desktop, touch is good for very new users or those who lack the physical coordination to control the mouse and keyboard. Otherwise, mouse and keyboard wins. The Windows 8 mouse experience is really lacking at the moment. I expect that gets a major update in the next version.

contextfree 15y ago

interesting to see how much commotion this apparent change has caused, since it's almost purely cosmetic - the actual start menu itself was gone (or replaced) already in the DP.

scott_s 15y ago

It’s even worse for first-time users: There’s no visual cue at all for returning to the Metro interface. This mattered two decades ago. It does not matter now. Two decades ago, there was a large number of people who were just starting to integrate computers into their daily lives. This is no longer true. Computers are integrated into people's daily lives. The only people [1] who are "just starting" to integrate computers into their daily lives are the same people who are "just starting" to integrate using a toilet into their daily lives. From now on, people will grow up with computers, and I think we should design interfaces to reflect that. "But what about first-time users?" should no longer be an interesting question. [1] I'm sure someone can come up with specific counter-examples. I submit that those cases are rare enough that they shouldn't be a primary consideration for designing interfaces. Of course, there should be interface back-doors for disabilities and such, but that is not the same as primary considerations for most people.

DarkShikari 15y ago
It's not about new to computers, it's about new to your interface. If you have a new interface, especially one that works differently from the old interface in a notable way, you can't assume that everyone will instantly figure out your new interface without cues.
- freehunter 15y ago
  I think it would be quite unlikely that the majority of users would be given a Windows 8 machine without some kind of tutorial. Windows has had a "Welcome to Windows" since at least Windows 95 (IIRC). Corporate users are generally given a brief documentation page on how to use their computer (we rolled out Windows 7 last summer with a 3-page document with screenshots of how to get around). There will be precious few who can never get the hang of it.
mirkules 15y ago
Even if there are no first-time users anymore, I think computing in general can benefit from User Interfaces being developed as if they are developed for first-time users, and the advanced options layered underneath. This is where OS X gets things right. In addition, computers may be integrated into daily lives, but I think this definitely does not mean the opposite - that people have learned how to operate them properly, despite them being so integrated. If level of integration into society means that user interface does not need to cater to beginning users, there would be no designers left to make designs - only engineers (perish the thought :) But seriously -- and forgive me for using a car analogy -- but the basic operation of a car is actually simpler, rather than more complicated. To be fair, some OS X advanced options are in hair-pulling places, which I believe only underlines how hard it is to market computers to the masses with differing layers of knowledge

timkeller 15y ago

8 is looking more and more like Vista Take2. And yes, that seems silly and inflammatory... but it has all the hallmarks of Vista's over-zealousness, last minute changes and disdain for Microsoft's core customers.

crististm 15y ago

I can't believe this started 17 years ago. It couldn't be _that_ long... Yep, it is... Looks like the desktop metaphor is back in business.

Skywing 15y ago

After reading the article and hearing that you activate the start menu by "flicking" the mouse to the bottom left, I instinctively tried it myself and noticed an issue. I'm running a dual monitor setup, where my second monitor is to the left of my main monitor. Flicking the mouse to the bottom left just causes it to go to the second monitor, if I'm not careful. Now, to enter the start menu, I am going to have to carefully move the mouse down to the bottom left, just as I do with the start button as it currently is. This just seems like it's more prone to issues than the start button, for not much gain. Of course, I am open to trying it, just like I have every previous Windows version.

LoneWolf 15y ago

From the few screenshots and videos I saw of windows 8 I cant make myself like it, the metro interface looks good for a tablet I agree with that, but for a desktop? I dont think so. Guess I will have to wait until I get my hands on it to know for sure.

yason 15y ago

If it activates from the corner like in Gnome 3 then this is much better than the Start button. The Start button was always a few pixels off the edges so you couldn't just shove your mouse to bottom-left corner and click. Instead, you had to find the corner and offset the mouse a notch towards up-right to hit the button.

ppog 15y ago
They fixed that in Windows XP. (Although in Vista they made the Start button circular so it no longer appeared to occupy the corner pixel, the entire bottom left corner did remain hot, and remains so in Windows 7.)

frio 15y ago

Out of interest: has Microsoft commented at all on whether this new UI will integrate with the Kinect for PC? While my screens are far enough away that a touchscreen would prove arduous, flicking and sliding through screens with gestures might tie well to the Metro experience.

RexRollman 15y ago

I've once used a program called "Start Killer" on my Windows 7 desktop, which removed the start menu button. I did this because I thought the desktop would look better without it. The Start menu would still come up when the Windows key was pressed, so that still worked, but I quickly found it annoying because there was no way to activate it with the mouse (which I did more often than I realized). As for Windows 8, I have high hopes for it because I like Windows 7, but I do think Microsoft is going to end up with a weird GUI mashup if they are not careful.

danneu 15y ago
Ever since I started using launchers to find programs/files/settings, I realized the pointlessness of a Start button. For Windows, I used Launchy. In Linux, I'm typing the program name into terminal. The average user uses the Start menu as a browseable library of their installed programs (which it isn't even good at), so I think a direct list of apps is better all around with an option to launch apps from an intuitive search bar.

Tichy 15y ago

I really dislike this trend in UI design. The reason is simple: I want a fair chance to discover how to do stuff on my computer. I don't want to read handbooks or worse, watch tutorial videos. The point of a good UI is to make a handbook superfluous.