3 ms·

But they did make the hard decision-- they decided two combine two experiences on the bet that these two experiences and contexts will merge moving forward. You

But they did make the hard decision-- they decided two combine two experiences on the bet that these two experiences and contexts will merge moving forward. Your device should change in context with you, and you should control it. Why would I have two machines when one will suffice? I will have a surface pro, using both metro apps as well as desktop applications. I will flip the cover over when I want to really engage with my device and hold it intimately, at an angle, etc. When I get to a desk, I can plug in my peripherals and I have a fully functioning machine that can use all of the thousands of peripherals that the ecosystem has developed. As a side note, have you used metro apps on a desktop? They work well, and generally the simplicity and hard decisions made make the experience more visually engaging.

levifig 14y ago
A- "What do you want: a peach or a pear?" B- "I don't know. Both?" That's how I feel about Microsoft's decision. I've tried the metro apps and while they impress visually, they fail to help me remember them the next time I need to do something they exist for; they all look alike and lack distinction and uniqueness. This is obviously all subjective, but I believe we'll see some major changes in the next 2-3 years to the Metro UI: Windows on the desktop users won't use much of it (not the Metro look, the native Metro apps)… Put a non-tech person using Windows 8 and you'll get "huh?" and "where's A or B?" at an alarming rate. A new user to OS X (coming from Windows) will have less trouble finding what he/she wants than coming to Windows 8 IMO, and that's not good for Microsoft.