12 ms·

> I’m going to avoid commenting on Metro on touch-based systems for now because Windows 8 is too far off in the future to know what the hardware is going to be

> I’m going to avoid commenting on Metro on touch-based systems for now because Windows 8 is too far off in the future to know what the hardware is going to be like. Instead, I’m going to limit my discussion to using the operating system on desktop and notebook systems. I think he roundly missed the point. Yes you scan over the screen and it might be hard to find the things you want on day one. That's how it was with our iPhone and Androids too on the first day we got them. You all know what happens. People rearrange to their taste or memorize the locations of the less-than-five applications that they commonly use. It's not as if the "where's waldo" game goes on indefinitely. I think he's being intentionally obtuse about this. Windows is trying to unify their UI among the XBox, Phones, Tablets and Desktops and he wants to focus on the one where it will be less useful than the others by complaining about a problem that literally every smartphone user has already solved by day three. Typing the name of the app you want is clumsy, you say? More clumsy than eyeballing a list that gets rather large? http://i.imgur.com/Z0pCc.png http://i.imgur.com/Z0pCc.png If you know what you want, typing is vastly easier than scanning a long startmenu list of items.

jrockway 14y ago
I disagree that he missed the point. People use Windows because they already use Windows. If a new version of Windows is as hard to learn as OS X or Linux, then there's not much point in continuing to use Windows. (The same goes for Office. People use Word and Excel because they know how to use Word and Excel. Otherwise, they'd be saving themselves the license fee and be using Libre Office or Google Docs.)
- rlu 14y ago
  Your Office point kind of loses traction since I'd say the Office 2007 was a bigger change from Office 2003 than Windows 8 is to Windows 7. Honestly Windows 8 doesn't change how people use computers that much. Most people use the start menu to ~search~ for a program. I.E. they hit start and begin typing. You can do the same exact thing with the Start screen. Aside from the start screen, Windows continues to work in basically the same way it always has.
  - Avshalom 14y ago
    >Most people use the start menu to ~search~ for a program. Is this true? I mean it might be but it seems like something MS would have numbers on.
    - jrockway 14y ago
      If only there was an OS where you typed what you wanted in an omnibox and it would just work...
      - blackspider 14y ago
        Are you talking about Alfred on Mac OS X?
        cdcarter 14y ago
        I'm gonna guess he's talking about ChromeOS.
        paupino_masano 14y ago
        I LOVE Alfred - it beats Spotlight hands down! The best equivalent I've used for windows is Launchy. Honestly Alfred has changed the way I use my Macbook :)
    - luxpir 14y ago
      I wonder if Microsoft's numbers (which we're assuming they have and use) aren't skewed by the usage patterns that they create, with users taking the path of least resistance for the given options, which are themselves sometimes paths of a-fair-amount-of resistance. For instance, I frequently switch windows in Win7 with Alt+Tab, but also dip into the task bar quite often to click the Word icon, then identify the correct Word document open, then move the mouse to the document... neither of which are particularly efficient. The only approximate solution I can think of would be having a touchscreen above my F-keys to select apps with. I can imagine MS have no data on how well that would work.
  - 14y ago
- jmpeax 14y ago
  People use Windows because it comes installed with the computers they buy.
- Me1000 14y ago
  The customer market for Windows is already slowly transitioning away from Windows. I think it's logically to say that if the consumer market goes, the corporate market will fall soon after that. Microsoft could have either ignore this, as Apple continues to sell more and more Macs and iPads or they respond with something to take on what Apple see's as the future of their consumer facing business: the iPad. Microsoft chose the action that might have a chance to actually turn this trend around… Time will tell if it works.
- ryanwaggoner 14y ago
  I'm no Windows fan (I can't imagine ever going back to Windows), but you've got to be kidding me if you think people only use it because they already use it. How about because it's far easier to use and less fiddly than Linux? How about because the software selection is vastly superior to both Linux and OS X? How about because almost any computer (including Apple's) can run Windows AND all your hardware will work just fine with it, while if you want to run OS X, you'll have to buy an expensive machine from Apple, and if you want to run Linux, you better pray there's decent driver support for your peripherals. The situation has gotten a lot better over the last decade for OS X and Linux users (though Windows has also improved a lot), but we're a FAR cry from a world in which the only valid reason to use Windows is momentum. I won't even bother trying to list all the reasons to use Word and Excel (especially Excel) over Libre and Google Docs. Google Docs is a child's toy compared to Excel.
  - malkia 14y ago
    Really, they use it because that's what they are used to. Or mainly that's what was forced at work. For example for years we've used Outlook Express, then people moved to Outlook. Everyone uses Excel, Word, etc. - because the company provides it, and people if they want to finish their work at home, would use whatever they learned. I for example learned so much P4Win (the discontinued Perforce client from years), that even if it's less performant (syncing for example, because it's done by 4096 bytes), I still use it more than P4V (the new client), because I simply know it all, so much that I feel P4V as step-back (it's not, but because of slower redraw it feels that way. P4V is way faster than P4Win, and multithreaded). So color me stupid, but since then, I'm using P4V for heavy tasks (after carefully, and consciously clicking here and there), and then for day to day things - changelists mainly - I'm with P4Win... Sorry for dragging into this, but I'm just showing an example. And at home for my projects I don't even consider perforce, never use it. (But if it was like office app, I might've). So why would I want for my productivity tools (which I don't have much fun, but more work) a change?
    - ryanwaggoner 14y ago
      You're a student. You don't really know much about computers. You need a notebook to type papers on. You have $500. What are you going to buy?
- makecheck 14y ago
  When the Ribbon first appeared (in a radical redesign of Office) I heard relatives and friends say they "didn't like the new Windows". They didn't even realize at the time that only Office had changed, not Windows. The upgrade was being forced on them by their workplace IT departments. That's what it boils down to: people don't like it when change is forced on them. It's one thing if you see a cool new product on a shelf, choose to buy it and are happy to try something new; it's quite another to have your existing products keep changing. This is human nature. And that's why Microsoft is insane to radically change Windows; they're going all "new Coke" on their cash cow. If they really wanted a new product then they should have created a new product: new name, new marketing, new everything, leaving the existing product alone! This problem isn't limited to Microsoft. I've been disappointed by several iPhone app purchases for instance, as companies keep "improving" their apps with updates and occasionally destroy the essence of the original that I liked so much (e.g. maybe they mess up the UI so it's not as good, or they add in-app-purchasing crap). That's not the way to treat existing customers. Sometimes products should just be left alone.
  - Karunamon 14y ago
    The thing is that Windows isn't Microsoft's cash cow.. in the consumer space. It is and mostly always has been the enterprise market.
    - chris_wot 14y ago
      I'm very curious to see whether they will use the Metro UI in their server OSes. My bet is, they won't, or if they do they'll either put out a new edition fairly quickly, or will roll it back even faster to the traditional UI.
      - bztzt 14y ago
        What is "Metro"? Server 2012 does use the new start menu, if you want to call that "Metro"
        deleted 14y ago
- w1ntermute 14y ago
  > (The same goes for Office. People use Word and Excel because they know how to use Word and Excel. Otherwise, they'd be saving themselves the license fee and be using Libre Office or Google Docs.) reply I can tell you that this is definitely not the case. I've used Word a lot in (non-software) engineering setting, and there are a large number of features used on a regular basis that simply are not available in LibreOffice or Google Docs. Things like citation support, text wrapping for images, and a good equation editor.
  - fl3tch 14y ago
    > Things like citation support http://download.zotero.org/integration/Zotero-LibreOffice-Plugin-3.5.2.xpi http://download.zotero.org/integration/Zotero-LibreOffice-Pl... I've written grant proposals and papers published in peer reviewed journals with LibreOffice and that plugin.
  - comm_it 14y ago
    I have to agree with this comment. As unglamorous as it is, Excel is great, and you can also create some _very_ powerful software rather easily with VBA.
    - pvidler 14y ago
      I hate excel. For some reason, it has become the standard for creating any grid-based documents, even though the table support in word would often be far superior when equations aren't needed. I hate the lack of smooth scrolling, especially when you have differing cell heights. I hate the lack of cell padding, leading to manually sizing every row. Most of all, I hate the total lack of focus. What sort of document is it aimed at creating, these days? The answer is certainly not what is was 10–15 years ago, but the basic interface hasn't changed much (ribbon aside).
      - comm_it 14y ago
        I agree with what you're saying, I've seen it used to write up a text document! Talk about missing the point... Often equations are needed, along with graphing. It's very expandable and customisable by a non-programmer with VBA. I'm not saying it's the best, but it's pretty good at what it does, and there's not a better spreadsheet application that I've found. As an aside, I've seen it be used for managing portfolios worth millions. Then you get a clever IT dept say 'oh no, you shouldnt be doing that on a spreadsheet' and so a new IT project is created to retire the spreadsheet and copy the functionality. Predictably, the project is late, over-budget and under-delivers, so the spreadsheet lives on. Tragic tale of far too many IT projects.
- bgilroy26 14y ago
  People will be skipping windows 8 just like they skipped Vista. Microsoft operates on an unspoken major version -- development version -- major version cycle that users are accustomed to.
- rbanffy 14y ago
  Don't forget people use Windows because that's what comes with their new computers. Almost nobody installs a fresh OS.
old-gregg 14y ago
But what stops you from re-arranging and placing the most often used application shortcuts on your desktop in Windows 95? And indeed, most users do just that. The reviewer correctly points out that this new UI doesn't really add anything, only takes things away. Shortcuts+search have been around for a while. Actually I have no opinion on Windows 8 because I have not seen it myself, but this review fits both Gnome Shell and Unity very well: it's like they all suddenly joined the iphone-as-a-desktop cult. Typing the application titles does not work for me. Because for frequently used apps I already have hotkeys or sidebar icons, but I never remember the names of rarely used apps: should I be typing "Monitor settings" or "Display" or "Desktop" or whatever, if I need to change the background or a screen resolution? Lastly, is that really the biggest problem with the modern desktops: finding apps? Seriously, of all things that could possibly be made better, why are they all trying to re-invent how we're launching applications?
- simonsarris 14y ago
  > but I never remember the names of rarely used apps: should I be typing "Monitor settings" or "Display" or "Desktop" or whatever, if I need to change the background or a screen resolution? Windows Vista and up automatically help you with this. Even typing things like "DPI" or "wheel" into control panel come up with a list of all possible relevant actions that could be taken, as opposed to just different panel screens. Here are a few examples of that in action: http://i.imgur.com/c9uN1.png http://i.imgur.com/c9uN1.png http://i.imgur.com/hZStY.png http://i.imgur.com/hZStY.png http://i.imgur.com/dQR9U.png http://i.imgur.com/dQR9U.png > why are they all trying to re-invent how we're launching applications? My comment said why! It's not a re-invention, just a unification of the look and feel with the rest of Microsoft's ecosystem (xbox, phones, tablets, PCs will all have the same "start" screens).
  - sesqu 14y ago
    I hate the wizardly control panel, incidentally. Just the other day, I was trying to remove a device. After maybe five minutes I decided it's not possible, until some time later accidentally finding the right button to press. It's very much not clear to me anymore what I can do, or how.
fpgeek 14y ago
From the article: "I’ve been following Windows 8 closely over the past few months, spending a lot of time not only with the official releases but also with a number of leaked builds, and I’ve had the chance to install the operating system on a variety of hardware platforms, both old and new." "You may think that after a while you will become immune to these annoyances the more you use Windows 8. I don’t know. All I can say is that I haven’t come to that point yet, and the depressing thing is that I don’t think I will." I don't know about you, but if I'd felt this way about the usability of anything (desktop, smartphone, whatever) after a few months, I'd have chucked it and moved on to something else (or gone back to whatever I'd been using before). Exactly how long should he keep beating his head against the wall until he's allowed to complain?
- suby 14y ago
  I've been using Windows 8 since they released the consumer preview. I hated it with a passion at first, but I wanted to see if it was just because it was different, or just because it was bad, so I kept using it. You definitely can get past most of the annoyances without too much trouble. For example, there's a start screen when you first load up the computer, a screen that comes before the screen where you type in your password. You have to hold down left click and flick your mouse up to get rid of it, which is annoying on a laptop without a mouse, which is what I'm using it on. That annoyed me for a good week or two before I figured out that you can press a key to get by that screen without the mouse gesture. There are still some things that make me curse, though. Anytime metro goes full screen because I hovered my mouse near the top left of my screen (I'll occasionally try to click on the options in firefox and go to metro instead), any time it reminds me that I can use an annoying full screen metro app to play videos when I open videos with VLC, anytime the charm bar appears (I've never used that thing once). I also wish there was an easier way to go to my computer, because that's what I use the start menu for 50% of the time, and now I have to right click where the start menu was and spend 10 seconds looking for 'windows explorer' on a small menu every time I want to do this. It's just a lot of little annoyances. I can live with it, but I really do hope that Windows 8 crashes and burns.
  - mark_integerdsv 14y ago
sliverstorm 14y ago
Typing the name of the app you want is clumsy, you say? It's a good thing nobody told me that, 'cause I've been using the search box in Win7's start menu heavily for years and I would never go back now.
- FixThisPOS 14y ago
  It's a shitty solution, often cited by apologists when excusing the shitty Start button. The idea that you're going to memorize the name of every application on your computer is a ridiculous strawman. And if you're going to have to TYPE the name of the program, why use a GUI at all? You're basically calling for a command-line interface. Fine. But don't defend shitty GUI design with it.
protolif 14y ago
They've unified their UI by making it suck everywhere. I'm still upset over the Xbox UI change. It's just terrible.
CamperBob2 14y ago
That's how it was with our iPhone and Androids too on the first day we got them Well, no, not really... not in the iPhone's case.
- guynamedloren 14y ago
  Oh really? You knew exactly where each app icon was located the moment you got your iPhone? And the settings, notifications, and everything else? There was zero learning curve? Come on. Sick of this Apple superiority fanboy bullshit.
  - CamperBob2 14y ago
    Um, yes. When I wanted to find the Settings menu on my new iPhone, it wasn't too much of a leap of faith to try pressing the icon labeled "Settings." The idea that you have to left-click and drag a certain unmarked area of the screen in Metro to reach the control panel is light-years distant from the iPhone/iPad UX. A good interface is one that is either highly intuitive, or highly discoverable. I haven't used Windows 8 yet, but from what I'm reading in this thread and elsewhere, it is neither. Don't shoot the messenger.
  - lovskogen 14y ago
    I'm not sure if I remember good enough, but I do think the first iPhone didn't have any folders or second screens of apps – just one.
    - freehunter 14y ago
      And a fresh install of Windows 8 comes with only one screen of apps, no scrolling required. It only starts to scroll when you install more than the one screen can display. So, moot point.
      - CamperBob2 14y ago
        How do you access the Control Panel under the Metro interface?
FixThisPOS 14y ago
Memorizing where stuff is? What if you install new programs fairly often? This is a lame workaround. What the article fails to state is whether you can create groups of applications on the desktop. This would pretty much eliminate the problem. The Start button was always a shitty idea, which violated Microsoft's own guidelines for cascading menus (no more than three levels). And it's a lot worse in Windows 7, with no way to organize your programs into groups that cascade (which you could in XP). The best solution was the first: folders of applications on the desktop, originally called Program Manager groups in Windows 3.1. I want my graphics apps together, my music apps together, my office-type apps together. This basic idea has been somehow "lost" by both Microsoft and software vendors, who think nothing of littering your system with shit without ASKING WHERE you want it to go. Talk about offensive. "There are too many hidden and invisible user interface elements in Windows 8." This is a tidal wave of incompetence that afflicts not just Microsoft but Apple as well. In a growing number of UIs, the user is apparently supposed to sweep the cursor across every pixel on the screen, looking for Easter eggs. Except they're not Easter eggs; they're critical functions. And they're not even taking up extra space when they're visible. Sheer stupidity.
malkia 14y ago
I think he talks about something else. When I installed Win8, and then cygwin, and all other tools that I use - then the Metro screen became full with lots of icons that you can't read the whole names easily, and all of them were the same. I don't even see some of these names in the Start Menu (or maybe i did not check, because I don't go for example to the menu for them). So the problem is that it flattens out the whole tree structure, and while I think this is good idea (I like the OSX dock), it's good idea only if you have few important things there. If it's get too cluttered easily, then it's not.
gurkendoktor 14y ago
> Yes you scan over the screen and it might be hard to find the things you want on day one. That's how it was with our iPhone and Androids too on the first day we got them. Most of my friends who use Windows haven't even bothered learning how to use a smartphone. Those who like to play around with gadgets have long left Microsoft land. There certainly are Windows power users out there, but most of this thread seems to skip over the rest: those who use Windows because they grew up on it, or because they've actually attended paid courses on how to use it. There's no way they will do it a second time. I think Windows 7 will become the new XP.
barrkel 14y ago
You know what they say about foolish consistency. Unification of UI makes sense where modalities are similar. But touch vs keyboard vs mouse are very different modalities. The first demands a few large areas with gestures; the second demands something very much like a terminal; the third, much more densely packed areas without gestures (because large mouse moves are far more imprecise). I have Windows 7. But I never use the start menu's search functionality, because I have a terminal; if I want to start an app by typing, I'll do it from the terminal. That way, I get completion for application arguments, I can write scripts to shorten more complicated launch sequences, etc. That's because the terminal (+ shell + friends) is set up for typing; a search box is laughably primitive in comparison. Meanwhile, my start menu doesn't look anything like yours. I'm running Classic Start Menu, with programs classified by function: Development, Work, Games, etc., just containing the main icon. I use these menu items when I'm being goal directed, but more importantly, it saves me the effort of having to remember any names at all. Menus are optimized for scanning lists of text; in this way, they're far superior to ribbons when looking for an unfamiliar command.
- bztzt 14y ago
  ? If I want to start Google Chrome, I can open the start menu, type "go" or "ch", wait half a second to see that it's the first result, and hit return. To do this from the terminal I need to switch to a terminal, know the name of the executable (not just the display name of the program), know what directory it's in (or make sure to put it in my PATH), etc. I don't agree with your characterizations. The mouse allows density but doesn't demand it - both more and less dense layouts have pros and cons for mouse and are appropriate in different contexts. A terminal is good for input but limiting for output - I would like to see a command shell that took a text command language, but produced graphical output.
  - barrkel 14y ago
    The only time I want to launch Chrome (it's not my main browser) is if I want to visit Facebook (which is blocked every which way in my main browser). Now, if I wanted to make visiting Facebook quick, I'd create a shell script called 'fb' which would start Chrome with facebook.com as the argument. But I don't, so I haven't. Switching to a terminal? I'm always in a terminal. I have 4 open on my desktop right now, not including the virtual terminals hosted in screen sessions. I'm pretty much never more than an Alt-Tab away from Cygwin in mintty. Less dense layouts don't work well with the mouse, in my experience - I'm talking about screen-sized layouts, the kind you see on phones and tablets, only scaled up to multiple 30" monitors[1]. Big mouse moves can cause you to lose track of the mouse altogether for a second. Graphical output? I'm not really sure what you're getting at. What kind of graphical output would you want, apart from starting graphical applications based on command-line arguments or piped output? I've written many of both. Most of the time all you want is to view a graph, picture or video. All are trivial to integrate to the command line with appropriate glue. [1] This is actually a bigger concern of mine over Windows 8. I'm normally multitasking across 6+ apps at all times: my custom notetaking app, vnc, several terminals, browser, documentation and two email clients. It's why I have multiple big monitors. Only being able to multitask with two applications at a time sounds like a bad joke.
periferral 14y ago
disagree with you on all point here. Yes you can arrange the icons on your phone the way you like it and yes you can do this on your laptop too. But when I dock my laptop, the screen resolution changes and now I have to find something. On the desktop, I use launchy. A simple keyboard shortcut, type and run. Simple. Overall I agree with most of the authors point. I do mainly agree on the point that users should have an option to have their standard desktop back as the default screen rather than metro.
- T-Winsnes 14y ago
  On a desktop, I use windows. Hit windows key, type and run. Simple :) I'm sure launchy has more functionality, but both the windows7 start menu and metro lets you press the windows key and type in partial names to open an application. I find it a lot quicker than using the mouse, and it's already built in.
jpswade 14y ago
> These Ribbon toolbars are packed with small user elements and are fiddly to use with a mouse, and even more fiddly — at times bordering on impossible to use — when driven with a finger. He contradicts himself, I stopped reading.
- phaemon 14y ago
  Where is the contradiction? He says they're difficult to use with a mouse and even more difficult to use on a touchscreen. Makes sense to me.
  - jpswade 14y ago
    > I’m going to avoid commenting on Metro on touch-based systems for now because Windows 8 is too far off in the future to know what the hardware is going to be like. Instead, I’m going to limit my discussion to using the operating system on desktop and notebook systems.
bconway 14y ago
Yes you scan over the screen and it might be hard to find the things you want on day one. That's how it was with our iPhone and Androids too on the first day we got them. When the iPhone was released, there was a single home screen. Everything that was available to you was visible from the start. What you see is what you get.

jrockway 14y ago

I disagree that he missed the point. People use Windows because they already use Windows. If a new version of Windows is as hard to learn as OS X or Linux, then there's not much point in continuing to use Windows. (The same goes for Office. People use Word and Excel because they know how to use Word and Excel. Otherwise, they'd be saving themselves the license fee and be using Libre Office or Google Docs.)

rlu 14y ago
Your Office point kind of loses traction since I'd say the Office 2007 was a bigger change from Office 2003 than Windows 8 is to Windows 7. Honestly Windows 8 doesn't change how people use computers that much. Most people use the start menu to ~search~ for a program. I.E. they hit start and begin typing. You can do the same exact thing with the Start screen. Aside from the start screen, Windows continues to work in basically the same way it always has.
- Avshalom 14y ago
  >Most people use the start menu to ~search~ for a program. Is this true? I mean it might be but it seems like something MS would have numbers on.
  - jrockway 14y ago
    If only there was an OS where you typed what you wanted in an omnibox and it would just work...
    - blackspider 14y ago
      Are you talking about Alfred on Mac OS X?
      - cdcarter 14y ago
        I'm gonna guess he's talking about ChromeOS.
      - paupino_masano 14y ago
        I LOVE Alfred - it beats Spotlight hands down! The best equivalent I've used for windows is Launchy. Honestly Alfred has changed the way I use my Macbook :)
  - luxpir 14y ago
    I wonder if Microsoft's numbers (which we're assuming they have and use) aren't skewed by the usage patterns that they create, with users taking the path of least resistance for the given options, which are themselves sometimes paths of a-fair-amount-of resistance. For instance, I frequently switch windows in Win7 with Alt+Tab, but also dip into the task bar quite often to click the Word icon, then identify the correct Word document open, then move the mouse to the document... neither of which are particularly efficient. The only approximate solution I can think of would be having a touchscreen above my F-keys to select apps with. I can imagine MS have no data on how well that would work.
- 14y ago
jmpeax 14y ago
People use Windows because it comes installed with the computers they buy.
Me1000 14y ago
The customer market for Windows is already slowly transitioning away from Windows. I think it's logically to say that if the consumer market goes, the corporate market will fall soon after that. Microsoft could have either ignore this, as Apple continues to sell more and more Macs and iPads or they respond with something to take on what Apple see's as the future of their consumer facing business: the iPad. Microsoft chose the action that might have a chance to actually turn this trend around… Time will tell if it works.
ryanwaggoner 14y ago
I'm no Windows fan (I can't imagine ever going back to Windows), but you've got to be kidding me if you think people only use it because they already use it. How about because it's far easier to use and less fiddly than Linux? How about because the software selection is vastly superior to both Linux and OS X? How about because almost any computer (including Apple's) can run Windows AND all your hardware will work just fine with it, while if you want to run OS X, you'll have to buy an expensive machine from Apple, and if you want to run Linux, you better pray there's decent driver support for your peripherals. The situation has gotten a lot better over the last decade for OS X and Linux users (though Windows has also improved a lot), but we're a FAR cry from a world in which the only valid reason to use Windows is momentum. I won't even bother trying to list all the reasons to use Word and Excel (especially Excel) over Libre and Google Docs. Google Docs is a child's toy compared to Excel.
- malkia 14y ago
  Really, they use it because that's what they are used to. Or mainly that's what was forced at work. For example for years we've used Outlook Express, then people moved to Outlook. Everyone uses Excel, Word, etc. - because the company provides it, and people if they want to finish their work at home, would use whatever they learned. I for example learned so much P4Win (the discontinued Perforce client from years), that even if it's less performant (syncing for example, because it's done by 4096 bytes), I still use it more than P4V (the new client), because I simply know it all, so much that I feel P4V as step-back (it's not, but because of slower redraw it feels that way. P4V is way faster than P4Win, and multithreaded). So color me stupid, but since then, I'm using P4V for heavy tasks (after carefully, and consciously clicking here and there), and then for day to day things - changelists mainly - I'm with P4Win... Sorry for dragging into this, but I'm just showing an example. And at home for my projects I don't even consider perforce, never use it. (But if it was like office app, I might've). So why would I want for my productivity tools (which I don't have much fun, but more work) a change?
  - ryanwaggoner 14y ago
    You're a student. You don't really know much about computers. You need a notebook to type papers on. You have $500. What are you going to buy?
makecheck 14y ago
When the Ribbon first appeared (in a radical redesign of Office) I heard relatives and friends say they "didn't like the new Windows". They didn't even realize at the time that only Office had changed, not Windows. The upgrade was being forced on them by their workplace IT departments. That's what it boils down to: people don't like it when change is forced on them. It's one thing if you see a cool new product on a shelf, choose to buy it and are happy to try something new; it's quite another to have your existing products keep changing. This is human nature. And that's why Microsoft is insane to radically change Windows; they're going all "new Coke" on their cash cow. If they really wanted a new product then they should have created a new product: new name, new marketing, new everything, leaving the existing product alone! This problem isn't limited to Microsoft. I've been disappointed by several iPhone app purchases for instance, as companies keep "improving" their apps with updates and occasionally destroy the essence of the original that I liked so much (e.g. maybe they mess up the UI so it's not as good, or they add in-app-purchasing crap). That's not the way to treat existing customers. Sometimes products should just be left alone.
- Karunamon 14y ago
  The thing is that Windows isn't Microsoft's cash cow.. in the consumer space. It is and mostly always has been the enterprise market.
  - chris_wot 14y ago
    I'm very curious to see whether they will use the Metro UI in their server OSes. My bet is, they won't, or if they do they'll either put out a new edition fairly quickly, or will roll it back even faster to the traditional UI.
    - bztzt 14y ago
      What is "Metro"? Server 2012 does use the new start menu, if you want to call that "Metro"
      - deleted 14y ago
w1ntermute 14y ago
> (The same goes for Office. People use Word and Excel because they know how to use Word and Excel. Otherwise, they'd be saving themselves the license fee and be using Libre Office or Google Docs.) reply I can tell you that this is definitely not the case. I've used Word a lot in (non-software) engineering setting, and there are a large number of features used on a regular basis that simply are not available in LibreOffice or Google Docs. Things like citation support, text wrapping for images, and a good equation editor.
- fl3tch 14y ago
  > Things like citation support http://download.zotero.org/integration/Zotero-LibreOffice-Plugin-3.5.2.xpi http://download.zotero.org/integration/Zotero-LibreOffice-Pl... I've written grant proposals and papers published in peer reviewed journals with LibreOffice and that plugin.
- comm_it 14y ago
  I have to agree with this comment. As unglamorous as it is, Excel is great, and you can also create some _very_ powerful software rather easily with VBA.
  - pvidler 14y ago
    I hate excel. For some reason, it has become the standard for creating any grid-based documents, even though the table support in word would often be far superior when equations aren't needed. I hate the lack of smooth scrolling, especially when you have differing cell heights. I hate the lack of cell padding, leading to manually sizing every row. Most of all, I hate the total lack of focus. What sort of document is it aimed at creating, these days? The answer is certainly not what is was 10–15 years ago, but the basic interface hasn't changed much (ribbon aside).
    - comm_it 14y ago
      I agree with what you're saying, I've seen it used to write up a text document! Talk about missing the point... Often equations are needed, along with graphing. It's very expandable and customisable by a non-programmer with VBA. I'm not saying it's the best, but it's pretty good at what it does, and there's not a better spreadsheet application that I've found. As an aside, I've seen it be used for managing portfolios worth millions. Then you get a clever IT dept say 'oh no, you shouldnt be doing that on a spreadsheet' and so a new IT project is created to retire the spreadsheet and copy the functionality. Predictably, the project is late, over-budget and under-delivers, so the spreadsheet lives on. Tragic tale of far too many IT projects.
bgilroy26 14y ago
People will be skipping windows 8 just like they skipped Vista. Microsoft operates on an unspoken major version -- development version -- major version cycle that users are accustomed to.
rbanffy 14y ago
Don't forget people use Windows because that's what comes with their new computers. Almost nobody installs a fresh OS.

old-gregg 14y ago

But what stops you from re-arranging and placing the most often used application shortcuts on your desktop in Windows 95? And indeed, most users do just that. The reviewer correctly points out that this new UI doesn't really add anything, only takes things away. Shortcuts+search have been around for a while. Actually I have no opinion on Windows 8 because I have not seen it myself, but this review fits both Gnome Shell and Unity very well: it's like they all suddenly joined the iphone-as-a-desktop cult. Typing the application titles does not work for me. Because for frequently used apps I already have hotkeys or sidebar icons, but I never remember the names of rarely used apps: should I be typing "Monitor settings" or "Display" or "Desktop" or whatever, if I need to change the background or a screen resolution? Lastly, is that really the biggest problem with the modern desktops: finding apps? Seriously, of all things that could possibly be made better, why are they all trying to re-invent how we're launching applications?

simonsarris 14y ago
> but I never remember the names of rarely used apps: should I be typing "Monitor settings" or "Display" or "Desktop" or whatever, if I need to change the background or a screen resolution? Windows Vista and up automatically help you with this. Even typing things like "DPI" or "wheel" into control panel come up with a list of all possible relevant actions that could be taken, as opposed to just different panel screens. Here are a few examples of that in action: http://i.imgur.com/c9uN1.png http://i.imgur.com/c9uN1.png http://i.imgur.com/hZStY.png http://i.imgur.com/hZStY.png http://i.imgur.com/dQR9U.png http://i.imgur.com/dQR9U.png > why are they all trying to re-invent how we're launching applications? My comment said why! It's not a re-invention, just a unification of the look and feel with the rest of Microsoft's ecosystem (xbox, phones, tablets, PCs will all have the same "start" screens).
- sesqu 14y ago
  I hate the wizardly control panel, incidentally. Just the other day, I was trying to remove a device. After maybe five minutes I decided it's not possible, until some time later accidentally finding the right button to press. It's very much not clear to me anymore what I can do, or how.

fpgeek 14y ago

From the article: "I’ve been following Windows 8 closely over the past few months, spending a lot of time not only with the official releases but also with a number of leaked builds, and I’ve had the chance to install the operating system on a variety of hardware platforms, both old and new." "You may think that after a while you will become immune to these annoyances the more you use Windows 8. I don’t know. All I can say is that I haven’t come to that point yet, and the depressing thing is that I don’t think I will." I don't know about you, but if I'd felt this way about the usability of anything (desktop, smartphone, whatever) after a few months, I'd have chucked it and moved on to something else (or gone back to whatever I'd been using before). Exactly how long should he keep beating his head against the wall until he's allowed to complain?

suby 14y ago
I've been using Windows 8 since they released the consumer preview. I hated it with a passion at first, but I wanted to see if it was just because it was different, or just because it was bad, so I kept using it. You definitely can get past most of the annoyances without too much trouble. For example, there's a start screen when you first load up the computer, a screen that comes before the screen where you type in your password. You have to hold down left click and flick your mouse up to get rid of it, which is annoying on a laptop without a mouse, which is what I'm using it on. That annoyed me for a good week or two before I figured out that you can press a key to get by that screen without the mouse gesture. There are still some things that make me curse, though. Anytime metro goes full screen because I hovered my mouse near the top left of my screen (I'll occasionally try to click on the options in firefox and go to metro instead), any time it reminds me that I can use an annoying full screen metro app to play videos when I open videos with VLC, anytime the charm bar appears (I've never used that thing once). I also wish there was an easier way to go to my computer, because that's what I use the start menu for 50% of the time, and now I have to right click where the start menu was and spend 10 seconds looking for 'windows explorer' on a small menu every time I want to do this. It's just a lot of little annoyances. I can live with it, but I really do hope that Windows 8 crashes and burns.
- mark_integerdsv 14y ago

sliverstorm 14y ago

Typing the name of the app you want is clumsy, you say? It's a good thing nobody told me that, 'cause I've been using the search box in Win7's start menu heavily for years and I would never go back now.

FixThisPOS 14y ago
It's a shitty solution, often cited by apologists when excusing the shitty Start button. The idea that you're going to memorize the name of every application on your computer is a ridiculous strawman. And if you're going to have to TYPE the name of the program, why use a GUI at all? You're basically calling for a command-line interface. Fine. But don't defend shitty GUI design with it.

protolif 14y ago

They've unified their UI by making it suck everywhere. I'm still upset over the Xbox UI change. It's just terrible.

CamperBob2 14y ago

That's how it was with our iPhone and Androids too on the first day we got them Well, no, not really... not in the iPhone's case.

guynamedloren 14y ago
Oh really? You knew exactly where each app icon was located the moment you got your iPhone? And the settings, notifications, and everything else? There was zero learning curve? Come on. Sick of this Apple superiority fanboy bullshit.
- CamperBob2 14y ago
  Um, yes. When I wanted to find the Settings menu on my new iPhone, it wasn't too much of a leap of faith to try pressing the icon labeled "Settings." The idea that you have to left-click and drag a certain unmarked area of the screen in Metro to reach the control panel is light-years distant from the iPhone/iPad UX. A good interface is one that is either highly intuitive, or highly discoverable. I haven't used Windows 8 yet, but from what I'm reading in this thread and elsewhere, it is neither. Don't shoot the messenger.
- lovskogen 14y ago
  I'm not sure if I remember good enough, but I do think the first iPhone didn't have any folders or second screens of apps – just one.
  - freehunter 14y ago
    And a fresh install of Windows 8 comes with only one screen of apps, no scrolling required. It only starts to scroll when you install more than the one screen can display. So, moot point.
    - CamperBob2 14y ago
      How do you access the Control Panel under the Metro interface?

FixThisPOS 14y ago

Memorizing where stuff is? What if you install new programs fairly often? This is a lame workaround. What the article fails to state is whether you can create groups of applications on the desktop. This would pretty much eliminate the problem. The Start button was always a shitty idea, which violated Microsoft's own guidelines for cascading menus (no more than three levels). And it's a lot worse in Windows 7, with no way to organize your programs into groups that cascade (which you could in XP). The best solution was the first: folders of applications on the desktop, originally called Program Manager groups in Windows 3.1. I want my graphics apps together, my music apps together, my office-type apps together. This basic idea has been somehow "lost" by both Microsoft and software vendors, who think nothing of littering your system with shit without ASKING WHERE you want it to go. Talk about offensive. "There are too many hidden and invisible user interface elements in Windows 8." This is a tidal wave of incompetence that afflicts not just Microsoft but Apple as well. In a growing number of UIs, the user is apparently supposed to sweep the cursor across every pixel on the screen, looking for Easter eggs. Except they're not Easter eggs; they're critical functions. And they're not even taking up extra space when they're visible. Sheer stupidity.

malkia 14y ago

I think he talks about something else. When I installed Win8, and then cygwin, and all other tools that I use - then the Metro screen became full with lots of icons that you can't read the whole names easily, and all of them were the same. I don't even see some of these names in the Start Menu (or maybe i did not check, because I don't go for example to the menu for them). So the problem is that it flattens out the whole tree structure, and while I think this is good idea (I like the OSX dock), it's good idea only if you have few important things there. If it's get too cluttered easily, then it's not.

gurkendoktor 14y ago

> Yes you scan over the screen and it might be hard to find the things you want on day one. That's how it was with our iPhone and Androids too on the first day we got them. Most of my friends who use Windows haven't even bothered learning how to use a smartphone. Those who like to play around with gadgets have long left Microsoft land. There certainly are Windows power users out there, but most of this thread seems to skip over the rest: those who use Windows because they grew up on it, or because they've actually attended paid courses on how to use it. There's no way they will do it a second time. I think Windows 7 will become the new XP.

barrkel 14y ago

You know what they say about foolish consistency. Unification of UI makes sense where modalities are similar. But touch vs keyboard vs mouse are very different modalities. The first demands a few large areas with gestures; the second demands something very much like a terminal; the third, much more densely packed areas without gestures (because large mouse moves are far more imprecise). I have Windows 7. But I never use the start menu's search functionality, because I have a terminal; if I want to start an app by typing, I'll do it from the terminal. That way, I get completion for application arguments, I can write scripts to shorten more complicated launch sequences, etc. That's because the terminal (+ shell + friends) is set up for typing; a search box is laughably primitive in comparison. Meanwhile, my start menu doesn't look anything like yours. I'm running Classic Start Menu, with programs classified by function: Development, Work, Games, etc., just containing the main icon. I use these menu items when I'm being goal directed, but more importantly, it saves me the effort of having to remember any names at all. Menus are optimized for scanning lists of text; in this way, they're far superior to ribbons when looking for an unfamiliar command.

bztzt 14y ago
? If I want to start Google Chrome, I can open the start menu, type "go" or "ch", wait half a second to see that it's the first result, and hit return. To do this from the terminal I need to switch to a terminal, know the name of the executable (not just the display name of the program), know what directory it's in (or make sure to put it in my PATH), etc. I don't agree with your characterizations. The mouse allows density but doesn't demand it - both more and less dense layouts have pros and cons for mouse and are appropriate in different contexts. A terminal is good for input but limiting for output - I would like to see a command shell that took a text command language, but produced graphical output.
- barrkel 14y ago
  The only time I want to launch Chrome (it's not my main browser) is if I want to visit Facebook (which is blocked every which way in my main browser). Now, if I wanted to make visiting Facebook quick, I'd create a shell script called 'fb' which would start Chrome with facebook.com as the argument. But I don't, so I haven't. Switching to a terminal? I'm always in a terminal. I have 4 open on my desktop right now, not including the virtual terminals hosted in screen sessions. I'm pretty much never more than an Alt-Tab away from Cygwin in mintty. Less dense layouts don't work well with the mouse, in my experience - I'm talking about screen-sized layouts, the kind you see on phones and tablets, only scaled up to multiple 30" monitors[1]. Big mouse moves can cause you to lose track of the mouse altogether for a second. Graphical output? I'm not really sure what you're getting at. What kind of graphical output would you want, apart from starting graphical applications based on command-line arguments or piped output? I've written many of both. Most of the time all you want is to view a graph, picture or video. All are trivial to integrate to the command line with appropriate glue. [1] This is actually a bigger concern of mine over Windows 8. I'm normally multitasking across 6+ apps at all times: my custom notetaking app, vnc, several terminals, browser, documentation and two email clients. It's why I have multiple big monitors. Only being able to multitask with two applications at a time sounds like a bad joke.

periferral 14y ago

disagree with you on all point here. Yes you can arrange the icons on your phone the way you like it and yes you can do this on your laptop too. But when I dock my laptop, the screen resolution changes and now I have to find something. On the desktop, I use launchy. A simple keyboard shortcut, type and run. Simple. Overall I agree with most of the authors point. I do mainly agree on the point that users should have an option to have their standard desktop back as the default screen rather than metro.

T-Winsnes 14y ago
On a desktop, I use windows. Hit windows key, type and run. Simple :) I'm sure launchy has more functionality, but both the windows7 start menu and metro lets you press the windows key and type in partial names to open an application. I find it a lot quicker than using the mouse, and it's already built in.

jpswade 14y ago

> These Ribbon toolbars are packed with small user elements and are fiddly to use with a mouse, and even more fiddly — at times bordering on impossible to use — when driven with a finger. He contradicts himself, I stopped reading.

phaemon 14y ago
Where is the contradiction? He says they're difficult to use with a mouse and even more difficult to use on a touchscreen. Makes sense to me.
- jpswade 14y ago
  > I’m going to avoid commenting on Metro on touch-based systems for now because Windows 8 is too far off in the future to know what the hardware is going to be like. Instead, I’m going to limit my discussion to using the operating system on desktop and notebook systems.

bconway 14y ago

Yes you scan over the screen and it might be hard to find the things you want on day one. That's how it was with our iPhone and Androids too on the first day we got them. When the iPhone was released, there was a single home screen. Everything that was available to you was visible from the start. What you see is what you get.