7 ms·

Whenever someone talks about Windows 8, the question that pops up in my mind is: why include metro in the PC version? Why would I use anything but the Desktop

by learc83 14y ago

Whenever someone talks about Windows 8, the question that pops up in my mind is: why include metro in the PC version? Why would I use anything but the Desktop mode? I can already make apps fullscreen if I want, but I definitely don't want to be limited to only fullscreen mode. So what advantage does Metro have for a desktop user?

avolcano 14y ago
None. Zero. This is why I don't understand, say, the Verge's positive Windows 8 review. Sure, the desktop is still "usable." If you ignore Metro, it becomes an over-engineered full screen start menu. And somehow, having the most massive upgrade to Windows be, at best, ignoreable on desktops and laptops doesn't make Windows 8 instantly a massive failure?
- freehunter 14y ago
  The usability of Metro is there for the tablet market. The people who don't need a PC and have decided they will not use a PC anymore. PCs are complex and confusing to many casual users. We thought it would get better with education, but we still have millions of young adults who grew up with computers yet are completely unable to function with any slight change. It's easier for them, for one reason or another, to completely jump ship to a tablet. The Metro interface on a PC is designed to stem or reverse that trend. Why jump to a tablet when you can stay with the PC and use it like a tablet? Or better yet, when your tablet IS your PC, and your PC is a tablet. Metro is useful. Maybe not to me, maybe not to you, but we're a small subset of users. There are many who don't tolerate the desktop.
- hnriot 14y ago
  You are glossing over all the non-metro reasons like the security and performance.
  - jiggy2011 14y ago
    Is there a performance benefit to running metro apps over desktop apps? The security comes from the sandboxing model rather than the UI.
    - SkyMarshal 14y ago
      He was probably referring to work on power saving and system resource efficiency. Apparently Windows 8 uses less hardware resources than Windows 7, according to article.
      - jiggy2011 14y ago
        True, not really much to do with Metro though.
jiggy2011 14y ago
Perhaps it's more to do with application compatibility. If they create 2 separate OSs with different UI systems then you require developers to create 2 different versions of their applications if they want to target tablets and desktops. A big selling point of Windows has always been "use the same OS at home and at work". If MS are guessing that home users will largely go for WinRT devices over full on Windows 8 boxes they lose that advantage if there is too much fragmentation as you will have completely seperate app ecosystems for each. It is also an OS for hybrid devices such as the Intel based Surface tablet.
muuh-gnu 14y ago
> why include metro in the PC version? To leverage the Desktop monopoly to force users to get familiar with the interface of Microsofts mobile offerings, which had no success to gain user acceptance on their own. > Why would I use anything but the Desktop mode? Because the start menu will be removed to force you to switch to metro to start desktop applications. You will use it (and get familiar with it) whether you want it or not. > So what advantage does Metro have for a desktop user? Nobody claimed any such advantage in the first place.
- freehunter 14y ago
  To leverage the Desktop monopoly to force users to get familiar with the interface of Microsofts mobile offerings, which had no success to gain user acceptance on their own. FUD. Because the start menu will be removed to force you to switch to metro to start desktop applications. You will use it (and get familiar with it) whether you want it or not. FUD. Nobody claimed any such advantage in the first place. Incorrect. Edit - While you're downvoting me, I'd like to point out the statements that I quoted from the parent. They're a slippery slope argument at best, and patently false at the worst. There is no indication that Microsoft will be removing the desktop. There's no indication that Microsoft is trying to unconscionably leverage their desktop monopoly into the mobile world via Windows (any more than any other company hopes to). And yes, people have claimed (and I think successfully) that Metro is useful for end users. Ask yourself if you agree with his statements, and then if they're backed up by any actual facts. I believe he's spreading fear, uncertainty, and doubt just to settle a personal vendetta.
  - css771 14y ago
    > To leverage the Desktop monopoly to force users to get familiar with the interface of Microsofts mobile offerings, which had no success to gain user acceptance on their own. FUD. Not FUD. I agree with that statement the parent said. Why else would Microsoft think of including the Metro interface with the desktop. It doesn't make sense.
  - JohnsonB 14y ago
    >To leverage the Desktop monopoly to force users to get familiar with the interface of Microsofts mobile offerings, which had no success to gain user acceptance on their own. >FUD. I'm not sure how anyone could consider that FUD. There is pretty much no other justification for this metro/desktop mashup possible. I've never even heard pro-ms bloggers talk about one. Why else would they do away completely with the start menu for desktop use and force the start screen? It's certainly not a superior experience for desktop use. Additionally, you didn't provide an argument to support your "FUD" assertion.
joenathan 14y ago
I like the casualness of the Metro apps. It's easier and faster to click on the Netflix app than to open Firefox and then load the Netflix webpage. I also like some of the News apps, again it's fast and easy to catch up on some of the headlines, I also like the weather app, in two clicks(1.Hot corner start screen, 2.weather app) I can quickly see the forecast for the whole week. I also like some of the casual games. I am about as a hardcore Desktop user as it gets, I have a custom build pc with 3 screens, custom mouse & keyboard shortcuts, steam, Photoshop & Dreamweaver user, etc... I've been using Windows 8 since the Developer previews, and while some things have taken a while to get used to(like the hot corners), I'd have to say overall Windows 8 is a step up from Windows 7 in every way, I would hate to go back to 7. The Start Screen makes the Start Menu seem archaic. Some pics of my setup: http://i.minus.com/iqRDyV3Cdz4M3.jpg http://i.minus.com/iqRDyV3Cdz4M3.jpg http://i.minus.com/iUyzL0SkQgSD5.jpg http://i.minus.com/iUyzL0SkQgSD5.jpg http://i.minus.com/ibsaj7IkT3usDj.jpg http://i.minus.com/ibsaj7IkT3usDj.jpg http://i.minus.com/i2xfTeTriMwQ8.jpg http://i.minus.com/i2xfTeTriMwQ8.jpg
- jiggy2011 14y ago
  Couldn't you do those things in Windows 7 by docking applications or web shortcuts to your taskbar?
  - joenathan 14y ago
    Yeah but these are easier and fully featured/integrated(think for example notifications). Also given my heavy use of Firefox and Chrome, think 100+ tabs spread out in multiple windows & never ending sessions, it's many times easier with casual things to use a Metro app then open additional windows or tabs.
    - mertd 14y ago
      I'm not sure I follow. There is nothing preventing the desktop software from using a system-wide notification system. FWIW, metro apps are not fully featured but rather feature crippled. Take Chrome's metro version for example. It is just the forced-fullscreen version of the desktop one. You can still open insane amount of tabs.
akmiller 14y ago
I can only offer my opinion obviously, but I like the information that can be available at a glance. Launching my most often applications are also 1 click away instead of 2 or 3. However, that being said, my favorite part of Windows 8 (so far) is how keyboard friendly it is. I use OSX, Ubuntu, and now Windows 8 daily and I think they have all gotten to a state where if you like your hands to rarely leave the keyboard you can work within all 3 very well. Back to your original point though, I would suggest trying it out for a week or so. I was hesitant as well, but so far it seems very natural and fluid to me. Even scrolling sideways to see more tiles just feels very natural.
- SkyMarshal 14y ago
  >I use OSX, Ubuntu, and now Windows 8 daily and I think they have all gotten to a state where if you like your hands to rarely leave the keyboard you can work within all 3 very well. Yes, this. I love that all are converging on a keyboard-centric UI. This is sort an unreported event, overshadowed by the Metro and Unity rucus, and probably not important to the mainstream, but as a power user I'm really glad to see it finally happening.
sukuriant 14y ago
Microsoft employee here. I'm using various versions of Windows 8 on various machines: Release Preview at home and RTM at work. While most of my work is on the desktop, I have gradually reformed my start menu into groups of different concepts. The different groups I'm using, in order, from left-to-right: * The store, desktop and various super-commonly used tools such as remote desktop and web browsers. * A few "neat to look at 'real quick" live tiles, including Finance and Weather. * Development tools and communication programs, so Lync and Visual Studio and Fiddler. * Misc SDET specific tools * Another group with all of the repositories I work with * Windows 8 apps that I've bought/downloaded from the store for various reasons In all, I can see 41 app tiles without scrolling, both large and small, all of them are easily identifiable and relatively easy to reach. Since they are all large buttons (compared to your normal start menu shortcuts), I can swing my mouse over toward them, rather than dexterously follow a series of menus. It's different, but relatively easy. For my work, I would liken it to pressing [windows] + D to see the desktop, clicking on an icon and then having that different application load. Honestly, I've grown to like it.
- modarts 14y ago
  I'm still having a difficult time understanding why any user who has figured out how to hit the window key and start typing an application name would find browsing across oversized tiles to be a more efficient application launching experience on a desktop. Window Key + "Su" + Enter -> Sublime Text 2 is open vs. Mouse over on the bottom left of the screen + Click + Wait for Metro interface to pan into view + Wheel over a horizontally scrolling screen of tiles scanning for a "Development Tools" group + Find Sublime Text 2 + Click -> Sublime Text 2 is Open
  - sukuriant 14y ago
    I don't mouse over to the corner of the screen in all but my laziest moments; but sometimes I happen to only have one hand on they keyboard (perhaps I was just closing a tab in Firefox, or upvoting a comment on Hacker News?). It so happens I'm right-handed, and so my mouse is on my right side, leaving my left hand in the perfect position for the windows key. My common experience is to press the windows key and mouse around to click. While I proudly tout myself as a keyboard-primary user (and this is still the case. I use the keyboard as my sole tool in many more cases than some of my co-workers), I still happen to use the mouse from time to time and this is an example of it. Also, when you're using an interface that has such accessible buttons, you tend to learn the general area of buttons, so it's not so much "scanning" as it is "oh yeah, that one repository is about here on the screen, let me swing my mouse over there and click it". The large buttons, again, help make that easier;* so, I don't quite have the same experience.* * For my less-commonly used applications, I do follow the [windows key] enough text to load a program, usually the whole first word in its name because I type around 90-100 wpm and it's easier for me to type words than sub-sequences of letters [enter]; but it's rather surprising how much I've found myself actually adding apps to the start menu because I find clicking easier. Again, this is just from my personal experience, YMMV. * I'm not a usability engineer, but I've read an article or two that talks about how difficult actions are for a user, and precision vs speed comes up. edit: * * As an example of this experience in progress, you probably know where commonly-clicked icons are on your desktop, if you happen to use your desktop to hold frequently edited documents or shortcuts. If someone re-arranged your icons, you'd be slower because they would no longer be in their previous, familiar locations.
smacktoward 14y ago
why include metro in the PC version? Because Microsoft is getting ready for the future, where non-PC computing devices will be far, far, far more important to most peoples' lives than PCs. Windows 8 is the beginning of Microsoft's play to be on those devices. That means that design considerations to make it work nicely on "post-PC" devices take precedence over design considerations to make it work on PCs. Windows 8 isn't a PC operating system with device-friendly concessions bolted on. It's a device operating system with PC concessions bolted on. The idea presumably is that the PC desktop piece of it will get smaller and less important as time goes on, then eventually become completely redundant and easy to drop altogether. In other words, the plan is to do to the WIMP interface what they did with the CLI interface of MS-DOS. Its death will be slow, quiet, and (they hope) painless. But it is definitely going to die.
- morsch 14y ago
  Of course, CLI aren't dead and are in fact still going strong in certain areas. The same will remain true for WIMP in the forseeable future.
  - city41 14y ago
    The only people really using the CLI are developers and people in related fields, who will be writing the apps that everyone else will run on their tablets/car/fridge/etc. PCs will not be going away in the foreseeable future for the simple fact developers will need them.
JBiserkov 14y ago
You can 'snap' a metro app (music, IM) alongside a maximized desktop app. It's great. I've wanted that for some time now. http://biserkov.com/files/snap.png http://biserkov.com/files/snap.png
tallanvor 14y ago
Because Microsoft sees tablets as a type of PC, not an overgrown phone like Apple and Google. They want a unified experience. Also? With the "metro" interface as part of the core OS, they're basically forcing manufacturers to start including touchscreens in laptops and to start selling touchscreen monitors. Which isn't exactly bad for manufacturers since it means people will want to upgrade. Those are my opinions, at least. Personally, I agree that without a touchscreen, the new interface is annoying.
- shinratdr 14y ago
  > Which isn't exactly bad for manufacturers since it means people will want to upgrade. Just like people clamoured for 3D, right? You can't force consumers to appreciate a feature by just insisting it's better. Touch screens won't move laptops just like they don't move all-in-one desktops right now. Nobody wants to manipulate an upright screen with an outstretched arm. It's a completely unnatural thing to do, and the complete opposite of everything we've learned about the UX. Your hands need to resting when you're operating, or else all you're thinking about is when you'll be able to rest your hands.
  - numo16 14y ago
    > Nobody wants to manipulate an upright screen with an outstretched arm. It's a completely unnatural thing to do, and the complete opposite of everything we've learned about the UX. Hence why some OEMs are offering convertible laptops and all-in-ones, which actually look pretty nice and should complement the new interface nicely. [1] XPS 27 Touch All-in-one: http://www.dell.com/us/p/xps-one-27-2710-aio-t/pd http://www.dell.com/us/p/xps-one-27-2710-aio-t/pd [2] XPS 12 Convertible: http://www.dell.com/us/p/xps-12-l221x/pd?~ck=mn&~ck=mn&~ck=mn http://www.dell.com/us/p/xps-12-l221x/pd?~ck=mn&~ck=mn&#...
outside1234 14y ago
You kind of have to try it to see why. i like the new "start menu" in Metro - its easy to move things around to prioritize and search easily for apps by just typing the name of the app. I want to hate on it but its actually pretty good.
pedalpete 14y ago
You have to consider that not all desktop users are alike. Everybody uses internet, mail, and a few other apps, maybe skype, facebook, netflix, office, things like that. The metro UI is great for these tasks. It's easy to understand in the current tablet paradigm and those common uses across all users means Microsoft has actually simplified a large percentage of the use cases. Don't tell me you can look at a metro homescreen and not know what to do. Now, for those of us on HN (I suspect the majority are programmers or sysadmins, or somebody else who wants/needs to get into the guts of the OS), they've got the old familiar WIN32 based OS behind the Metro UI. Essentially, I suspect the challenge is that it will feel a bit like desktop stuff is virtualized, as I don't think you're running Metro & desktop apps side-by-side (but I don't know as I haven't used Win8 yet). The important thing to realize is that Microsoft won't be around in a few years if they only catered to those people who are comfortable with the old desktop. We're getting touchscreens on computers now, and Kinect interfaces I'm sure aren't far behind. The desktop will remain for the small percent of us that use it for work, but I wouldn't be surprised if I use metro much of the time. My concern is how am I going to feel jumping back and forth.

by learc83 14y ago

avolcano 14y ago

None. Zero. This is why I don't understand, say, the Verge's positive Windows 8 review. Sure, the desktop is still "usable." If you ignore Metro, it becomes an over-engineered full screen start menu. And somehow, having the most massive upgrade to Windows be, at best, ignoreable on desktops and laptops doesn't make Windows 8 instantly a massive failure?

freehunter 14y ago
The usability of Metro is there for the tablet market. The people who don't need a PC and have decided they will not use a PC anymore. PCs are complex and confusing to many casual users. We thought it would get better with education, but we still have millions of young adults who grew up with computers yet are completely unable to function with any slight change. It's easier for them, for one reason or another, to completely jump ship to a tablet. The Metro interface on a PC is designed to stem or reverse that trend. Why jump to a tablet when you can stay with the PC and use it like a tablet? Or better yet, when your tablet IS your PC, and your PC is a tablet. Metro is useful. Maybe not to me, maybe not to you, but we're a small subset of users. There are many who don't tolerate the desktop.
hnriot 14y ago
You are glossing over all the non-metro reasons like the security and performance.
- jiggy2011 14y ago
  Is there a performance benefit to running metro apps over desktop apps? The security comes from the sandboxing model rather than the UI.
  - SkyMarshal 14y ago
    He was probably referring to work on power saving and system resource efficiency. Apparently Windows 8 uses less hardware resources than Windows 7, according to article.
    - jiggy2011 14y ago
      True, not really much to do with Metro though.

jiggy2011 14y ago

Perhaps it's more to do with application compatibility. If they create 2 separate OSs with different UI systems then you require developers to create 2 different versions of their applications if they want to target tablets and desktops. A big selling point of Windows has always been "use the same OS at home and at work". If MS are guessing that home users will largely go for WinRT devices over full on Windows 8 boxes they lose that advantage if there is too much fragmentation as you will have completely seperate app ecosystems for each. It is also an OS for hybrid devices such as the Intel based Surface tablet.

muuh-gnu 14y ago

> why include metro in the PC version? To leverage the Desktop monopoly to force users to get familiar with the interface of Microsofts mobile offerings, which had no success to gain user acceptance on their own. > Why would I use anything but the Desktop mode? Because the start menu will be removed to force you to switch to metro to start desktop applications. You will use it (and get familiar with it) whether you want it or not. > So what advantage does Metro have for a desktop user? Nobody claimed any such advantage in the first place.

freehunter 14y ago
To leverage the Desktop monopoly to force users to get familiar with the interface of Microsofts mobile offerings, which had no success to gain user acceptance on their own. FUD. Because the start menu will be removed to force you to switch to metro to start desktop applications. You will use it (and get familiar with it) whether you want it or not. FUD. Nobody claimed any such advantage in the first place. Incorrect. Edit - While you're downvoting me, I'd like to point out the statements that I quoted from the parent. They're a slippery slope argument at best, and patently false at the worst. There is no indication that Microsoft will be removing the desktop. There's no indication that Microsoft is trying to unconscionably leverage their desktop monopoly into the mobile world via Windows (any more than any other company hopes to). And yes, people have claimed (and I think successfully) that Metro is useful for end users. Ask yourself if you agree with his statements, and then if they're backed up by any actual facts. I believe he's spreading fear, uncertainty, and doubt just to settle a personal vendetta.
- css771 14y ago
  > To leverage the Desktop monopoly to force users to get familiar with the interface of Microsofts mobile offerings, which had no success to gain user acceptance on their own. FUD. Not FUD. I agree with that statement the parent said. Why else would Microsoft think of including the Metro interface with the desktop. It doesn't make sense.
- JohnsonB 14y ago
  >To leverage the Desktop monopoly to force users to get familiar with the interface of Microsofts mobile offerings, which had no success to gain user acceptance on their own. >FUD. I'm not sure how anyone could consider that FUD. There is pretty much no other justification for this metro/desktop mashup possible. I've never even heard pro-ms bloggers talk about one. Why else would they do away completely with the start menu for desktop use and force the start screen? It's certainly not a superior experience for desktop use. Additionally, you didn't provide an argument to support your "FUD" assertion.

joenathan 14y ago

I like the casualness of the Metro apps. It's easier and faster to click on the Netflix app than to open Firefox and then load the Netflix webpage. I also like some of the News apps, again it's fast and easy to catch up on some of the headlines, I also like the weather app, in two clicks(1.Hot corner start screen, 2.weather app) I can quickly see the forecast for the whole week. I also like some of the casual games. I am about as a hardcore Desktop user as it gets, I have a custom build pc with 3 screens, custom mouse & keyboard shortcuts, steam, Photoshop & Dreamweaver user, etc... I've been using Windows 8 since the Developer previews, and while some things have taken a while to get used to(like the hot corners), I'd have to say overall Windows 8 is a step up from Windows 7 in every way, I would hate to go back to 7. The Start Screen makes the Start Menu seem archaic. Some pics of my setup: http://i.minus.com/iqRDyV3Cdz4M3.jpg http://i.minus.com/iqRDyV3Cdz4M3.jpg http://i.minus.com/iUyzL0SkQgSD5.jpg http://i.minus.com/iUyzL0SkQgSD5.jpg http://i.minus.com/ibsaj7IkT3usDj.jpg http://i.minus.com/ibsaj7IkT3usDj.jpg http://i.minus.com/i2xfTeTriMwQ8.jpg http://i.minus.com/i2xfTeTriMwQ8.jpg

jiggy2011 14y ago
Couldn't you do those things in Windows 7 by docking applications or web shortcuts to your taskbar?
- joenathan 14y ago
  Yeah but these are easier and fully featured/integrated(think for example notifications). Also given my heavy use of Firefox and Chrome, think 100+ tabs spread out in multiple windows & never ending sessions, it's many times easier with casual things to use a Metro app then open additional windows or tabs.
  - mertd 14y ago
    I'm not sure I follow. There is nothing preventing the desktop software from using a system-wide notification system. FWIW, metro apps are not fully featured but rather feature crippled. Take Chrome's metro version for example. It is just the forced-fullscreen version of the desktop one. You can still open insane amount of tabs.

akmiller 14y ago

I can only offer my opinion obviously, but I like the information that can be available at a glance. Launching my most often applications are also 1 click away instead of 2 or 3. However, that being said, my favorite part of Windows 8 (so far) is how keyboard friendly it is. I use OSX, Ubuntu, and now Windows 8 daily and I think they have all gotten to a state where if you like your hands to rarely leave the keyboard you can work within all 3 very well. Back to your original point though, I would suggest trying it out for a week or so. I was hesitant as well, but so far it seems very natural and fluid to me. Even scrolling sideways to see more tiles just feels very natural.

SkyMarshal 14y ago
>I use OSX, Ubuntu, and now Windows 8 daily and I think they have all gotten to a state where if you like your hands to rarely leave the keyboard you can work within all 3 very well. Yes, this. I love that all are converging on a keyboard-centric UI. This is sort an unreported event, overshadowed by the Metro and Unity rucus, and probably not important to the mainstream, but as a power user I'm really glad to see it finally happening.

sukuriant 14y ago

Microsoft employee here. I'm using various versions of Windows 8 on various machines: Release Preview at home and RTM at work. While most of my work is on the desktop, I have gradually reformed my start menu into groups of different concepts. The different groups I'm using, in order, from left-to-right: * The store, desktop and various super-commonly used tools such as remote desktop and web browsers. * A few "neat to look at 'real quick" live tiles, including Finance and Weather. * Development tools and communication programs, so Lync and Visual Studio and Fiddler. * Misc SDET specific tools * Another group with all of the repositories I work with * Windows 8 apps that I've bought/downloaded from the store for various reasons In all, I can see 41 app tiles without scrolling, both large and small, all of them are easily identifiable and relatively easy to reach. Since they are all large buttons (compared to your normal start menu shortcuts), I can swing my mouse over toward them, rather than dexterously follow a series of menus. It's different, but relatively easy. For my work, I would liken it to pressing [windows] + D to see the desktop, clicking on an icon and then having that different application load. Honestly, I've grown to like it.

modarts 14y ago
I'm still having a difficult time understanding why any user who has figured out how to hit the window key and start typing an application name would find browsing across oversized tiles to be a more efficient application launching experience on a desktop. Window Key + "Su" + Enter -> Sublime Text 2 is open vs. Mouse over on the bottom left of the screen + Click + Wait for Metro interface to pan into view + Wheel over a horizontally scrolling screen of tiles scanning for a "Development Tools" group + Find Sublime Text 2 + Click -> Sublime Text 2 is Open
- sukuriant 14y ago
  I don't mouse over to the corner of the screen in all but my laziest moments; but sometimes I happen to only have one hand on they keyboard (perhaps I was just closing a tab in Firefox, or upvoting a comment on Hacker News?). It so happens I'm right-handed, and so my mouse is on my right side, leaving my left hand in the perfect position for the windows key. My common experience is to press the windows key and mouse around to click. While I proudly tout myself as a keyboard-primary user (and this is still the case. I use the keyboard as my sole tool in many more cases than some of my co-workers), I still happen to use the mouse from time to time and this is an example of it. Also, when you're using an interface that has such accessible buttons, you tend to learn the general area of buttons, so it's not so much "scanning" as it is "oh yeah, that one repository is about here on the screen, let me swing my mouse over there and click it". The large buttons, again, help make that easier;* so, I don't quite have the same experience.* * For my less-commonly used applications, I do follow the [windows key] enough text to load a program, usually the whole first word in its name because I type around 90-100 wpm and it's easier for me to type words than sub-sequences of letters [enter]; but it's rather surprising how much I've found myself actually adding apps to the start menu because I find clicking easier. Again, this is just from my personal experience, YMMV. * I'm not a usability engineer, but I've read an article or two that talks about how difficult actions are for a user, and precision vs speed comes up. edit: * * As an example of this experience in progress, you probably know where commonly-clicked icons are on your desktop, if you happen to use your desktop to hold frequently edited documents or shortcuts. If someone re-arranged your icons, you'd be slower because they would no longer be in their previous, familiar locations.

smacktoward 14y ago

why include metro in the PC version? Because Microsoft is getting ready for the future, where non-PC computing devices will be far, far, far more important to most peoples' lives than PCs. Windows 8 is the beginning of Microsoft's play to be on those devices. That means that design considerations to make it work nicely on "post-PC" devices take precedence over design considerations to make it work on PCs. Windows 8 isn't a PC operating system with device-friendly concessions bolted on. It's a device operating system with PC concessions bolted on. The idea presumably is that the PC desktop piece of it will get smaller and less important as time goes on, then eventually become completely redundant and easy to drop altogether. In other words, the plan is to do to the WIMP interface what they did with the CLI interface of MS-DOS. Its death will be slow, quiet, and (they hope) painless. But it is definitely going to die.

morsch 14y ago
Of course, CLI aren't dead and are in fact still going strong in certain areas. The same will remain true for WIMP in the forseeable future.
- city41 14y ago
  The only people really using the CLI are developers and people in related fields, who will be writing the apps that everyone else will run on their tablets/car/fridge/etc. PCs will not be going away in the foreseeable future for the simple fact developers will need them.

JBiserkov 14y ago

You can 'snap' a metro app (music, IM) alongside a maximized desktop app. It's great. I've wanted that for some time now. http://biserkov.com/files/snap.png http://biserkov.com/files/snap.png

tallanvor 14y ago

Because Microsoft sees tablets as a type of PC, not an overgrown phone like Apple and Google. They want a unified experience. Also? With the "metro" interface as part of the core OS, they're basically forcing manufacturers to start including touchscreens in laptops and to start selling touchscreen monitors. Which isn't exactly bad for manufacturers since it means people will want to upgrade. Those are my opinions, at least. Personally, I agree that without a touchscreen, the new interface is annoying.

shinratdr 14y ago
> Which isn't exactly bad for manufacturers since it means people will want to upgrade. Just like people clamoured for 3D, right? You can't force consumers to appreciate a feature by just insisting it's better. Touch screens won't move laptops just like they don't move all-in-one desktops right now. Nobody wants to manipulate an upright screen with an outstretched arm. It's a completely unnatural thing to do, and the complete opposite of everything we've learned about the UX. Your hands need to resting when you're operating, or else all you're thinking about is when you'll be able to rest your hands.
- numo16 14y ago
  > Nobody wants to manipulate an upright screen with an outstretched arm. It's a completely unnatural thing to do, and the complete opposite of everything we've learned about the UX. Hence why some OEMs are offering convertible laptops and all-in-ones, which actually look pretty nice and should complement the new interface nicely. [1] XPS 27 Touch All-in-one: http://www.dell.com/us/p/xps-one-27-2710-aio-t/pd http://www.dell.com/us/p/xps-one-27-2710-aio-t/pd [2] XPS 12 Convertible: http://www.dell.com/us/p/xps-12-l221x/pd?~ck=mn&~ck=mn&~ck=mn http://www.dell.com/us/p/xps-12-l221x/pd?~ck=mn&~ck=mn&#...

outside1234 14y ago

You kind of have to try it to see why. i like the new "start menu" in Metro - its easy to move things around to prioritize and search easily for apps by just typing the name of the app. I want to hate on it but its actually pretty good.

pedalpete 14y ago

You have to consider that not all desktop users are alike. Everybody uses internet, mail, and a few other apps, maybe skype, facebook, netflix, office, things like that. The metro UI is great for these tasks. It's easy to understand in the current tablet paradigm and those common uses across all users means Microsoft has actually simplified a large percentage of the use cases. Don't tell me you can look at a metro homescreen and not know what to do. Now, for those of us on HN (I suspect the majority are programmers or sysadmins, or somebody else who wants/needs to get into the guts of the OS), they've got the old familiar WIN32 based OS behind the Metro UI. Essentially, I suspect the challenge is that it will feel a bit like desktop stuff is virtualized, as I don't think you're running Metro & desktop apps side-by-side (but I don't know as I haven't used Win8 yet). The important thing to realize is that Microsoft won't be around in a few years if they only catered to those people who are comfortable with the old desktop. We're getting touchscreens on computers now, and Kinect interfaces I'm sure aren't far behind. The desktop will remain for the small percent of us that use it for work, but I wouldn't be surprised if I use metro much of the time. My concern is how am I going to feel jumping back and forth.