12 ms·

Fixing Windows 8 (2013)

145 points by JoshGlazebrook 13y ago

dec0dedab0de 13y ago
Linux is a usability nightmare the second you get out of the fake easy-to-use illusion layer they added with the new GUIs. Unless you’re a coder, don’t even think about it. Do you think he really believes this? Maybe I'm too far in a bubble or something, but that sounds completely dishonest.
- norswap 13y ago
  You would say the "unless you're a coder" part is wrong, but otherwise it has the ring of truth based on my experience. Configuration when not using UIs is hell because each application has its own format, settings file location (if it uses settings file at all -- you might be required to run a curses console program) and generally its own idiosyncracies. For a single logical concept (e.g. sound, ditto for display), a plethora of layers are involved and they all clash heavily, both in term of settings and abstractions.
- copx 13y ago
  I do not just believe it, I know it. When something does not work in Linuxland the answer is still "open the terminal, enter a bunch of cryptic commands" and/or manually edit text-based config files. I can do that easily, I grew up with DOS. We had to tweak the parameters of the memory manager and make custom boot disks with just the right set of drivers to get games working as kids. It is just that I am not willing to do that stuff anymore. This is the 21st century and my time has value. Recent examples of my Linux "user experience": - (Fedora) Internet went down while the package manager (OMG I hate those!) was busy updating the system. This left the package manager in a corrupted state. I could no longer use the GUI to install/update anything, only gave me a "please fix me somehow" type error message. I could easily google the solution. Four cryptic terminal commands later it was good to go again. But as I said: unacceptable for a modern desktop OS. - (Ubuntu) Getting my wifi to work. Do I even have to start? I ended up having to download a kernel module .tarball from somewhere, had to integrate that into the kernel, and edit some config files by hand. Again, no problem, Google is magic. However it wasted one hour of my life: unacceptable. On Windows getting the wifi to work required.. clicking on setup.exe.
  - mikegioia 13y ago
    I haven't had wifi issues with Ubuntu for over 5 years. What computer did you have these problems with, where you needed to install a new kernel module? You hate package managers? I don't have experience with Fedora's and I don't know why it entered an inconsistent state, but OSX/iOS use a package manager. Android uses a package manager. What problem could you possibly have with package managers? Do you enjoy manually updating software one app at a time? The answer in "Linuxland" may still be to open the terminal and enter commands but the times a regular user needs to do that are becoming few and very far between. I have the majority of our (albeit small) office running Ubuntu 13.10 and I've yet to encounter anything like what you've described.
    - speeder 13y ago
      I think he is not angry at the package manager, he is angry that the package manager failed, and he had to use the terminal to fix it. And it IS not acceptable, I use Fedora myself, and every time this happened I got REALLY, REALLY upset, if I am using a GUI package manager, why the hell I should need to use console to fix it when it breaks? Why there is no option on the GUI to do that? Also I had a machine that I had to install a kernel module to put sound on it... Linux still have some serious issues with some hardware (mostly audio and radio-based communications, I've heard printers are problematic too, but it is years that I don't own a printer)
    - copx 13y ago
      >I haven't had wifi issues with Ubuntu for over 5 years. No surprise there. Some wifi hardware is supported out of the box and will just work. That is not the problem. The pain starts when something does not just work. >What computer did you have these problems with, where you needed to install a new kernel module? Given that I am a major nerd I have multiple ones and admin even more ones. I think that particular episode happened with an Asus Eee Box B202 and an older version of Ubuntu. > but OSX/iOS use a package manager. I do not use anything Apple but if I recall correctly OS X uses self-contained .app bundles i.e. the apps usually include all their dependencies except those present on a particular OS X version by default. It is the "dependency management" done by Linux package managers which I hate. Namely that every app becomes a tangled web of dependencies with unlimited potential for pain. Apps should be self-contained, the OS should be a stable, well-defined platform to run them. I.e. "requires Window XP or newer" or "requires Mac OS X 10.6 or newer" is okay, "requires [long list of packages]" is not. That model will cause problems sooner or later. "I updated X and suddenly Y no longer works" etc. As a programmer I find the concept of simply automatically updating libfoo 2.1.x to libfoo 2.1.y because "the developers say it does not break compatibility" scary. Software is written by people, developers accidentally break compatibility all the time, or write software which depends on buggy behavior, behavior which later gets fixed by other developers, thus breaking said software. Thus all common Linux package managers are themselves broken by design. They are only acceptable if you accept that occasionally some things will just stop working after a system update. >Do you enjoy manually updating software one app at a time? I do not often have to update any software and when I do it I can usually try the new version without uninstalling the old one easily and I know that its installation will not affect any other apps on my system. Yes, I enjoy that. >the times a regular user needs to do that are becoming few and very far between. No disagreement there, but as I said, personally I am not willing to put up with an OS where this happens, no matter how rarely it happens - unless I have to.
- GFK_of_xmaspast 13y ago
  I've been using linux for literally 20 years now. The first ten I did all my own sysadminning, the next ten I used it exclusively in organizations with professional administrators to complain to, and now in my current job I'm back to having to do things myself, and I can assure you it's just as much of a pain to do things in 2014 as it was back in 2002. They gave me a new monitor at work and it took me literally six hours to figure out the right magic to get the resolution in a mode that wouldn't cause instant headaches, and I still can't run KDE applications without the X server segfaulting.
  - dman 13y ago
    What graphics card are you using?
  - n1ghtmare_ 13y ago
    Yep that's pretty much mu experience with Linux. By the way I really like Linux (I used to use Ubuntu before they added Unity), however the constant fiddling with drivers and all kinds of stuff is just annoying.
  - Zardoz84 13y ago
    What distribution are you using ? And what graphics card? I remember some issues with the first version of KDE 4, but since then I run it on Intel, AMD and NVIDIA cards, with open and proprietary drivers without big problems (AMD sometimes have glitches..)
    - GFK_of_xmaspast 13y ago
      Ubuntu (13.04 and 13.10) and a recent nvidia, don't have the model number here. My best guess is that it's some kind of font issue, plotting in R also segfaults the server but I can see the non-text part of the plot come up. I try to leave well enough alone because (a) I get paid to do work not to troubleshoot linux and (b) there's no guarantee that anything I do will result in a usable system.
- HeroesGrave 13y ago
  I can understand him saying that if he used, say, Arch. But distros like Mint are arguably easier to use than Windows. And then they have the advantage that they don't have to be 'fixed' like Windows 8, which destroys the point of the post.
- Zigurd 13y ago
  I'm sure someone still hates Unity, but I use it every day. It's a conservative design that evolves slowly. I wish the Ubuntu Touch UI had already been integrated with mainstream desktop Ubuntu so I could get a PC tablet as my day to day coding machine. It is very difficult to evolve a non-touch UI into a back-compatible touch UI. But the conservative approach Ubuntu Touch is taking might turn out to work better than what Microsoft did to Windows.
  - Joeri 13y ago
    I have a windows 8 tablet / laptop hybrid as my hobby coding machine (asus t100), and i have to say that the bad rep windows 8 got does not match my experience. I've found the touch ui easy to use, and i even configured it to launch my ide in full screen mode, so i can go back and forwards between that and my browser without seeing a desktop in between. I've also noticed that i'm touching the screen quite often even while coding, and that's with an ide completely not optimized for touch (webstorm). The whole thing has convinced me that touch is an added value for any use case, even for programming.
    - scholia 13y ago
      As far as I can tell, the "bad rap" is mostly from people who haven't used it at all, or haven't used it for very long. (Typically XP users who are extremely averse to change.) The Windows 8 users I know personally like it a lot, though that doesn't stop them from complaining about the parts they don't like....
taylorlapeyre 13y ago
Brilliant work all around. I hope Microsoft sees this talent and picks this guy up like they did with Andrew Kim.
pbhjpbhj 13y ago
I like how he used the Ubuntu logo for "sharing" ... TBH it didn't look especially revolutionary - offer users the paradigm they want, appropriate to their hardware. The desktop version just looks like a candy skinned version of KDE to me.
- gyufgyfigyugy 13y ago
  Microsoft actually employs a very Ubuntu-esque icon as their sharing symbol, baked into Windows 8. This guy isn't responsible for it, didn't try to invent anything, re-invent it, or borrow it, or co-opt it. That's the very icon that Microsoft actually uses within current versions of Windows.
shadowmint 13y ago
Quick link to the designs: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/4855031/Windows%208.2%20Prototype%20by%20Jay%20Machalani.zip https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/4855031/Windows%208.2%20... Particularly the redesigned start menus and stuff about the charms bar are spot on, that really made me sit up and pay attention.
01Michael10 13y ago
Use Windows 8 if like it on your phone or tablet. PC? Install Windows 7 or Linux. Fixed...
CompleteMoron2 13y ago
I took a look at this. Excellent work on his part! I still use windows and Metro is just forced full screen apps that dont even work with the desktop classic . One thing apple got right was not to mixed iOs with MacOS (or whatever it is you guys call it) - Microsoft once again tried to stuff the kitchen sink into one OS. I'd actually like to - corny as it sounds - literally just have a smart widows logo floating around. It pops up when I hit the windows button on the keyboard, and it always finds an empty blank spot on the desktop to appear in to be ready. When i click on it this floting windows logo has literally four flyouts from it that contain a way to access apps, documents, email, and yuch - social feeds. (maybe its configurable so its for settings) - might work well for touch screens too. Of course these flyouts would be configurable to be a palette of your choice. Of course I'm not a designer and have terrible ideas - so into the ether with this rant and Prepare for downvote!
UnoriginalGuy 13y ago
So he splashed some new colours onto things, added back in a new Start Menu that is less usable than both the full screen metro one but also the old Windows 7 one, and then made the metro interface even more convoluted? Meh. As they say, it is very easy to criticise someone else for at least trying something and very hard to solve it yourself. I will fully admit that I have no better ideas for how to both keep the classic desktop but also integrate the new touch screen "metro" elements into it. I really do have to say that I think Apple has the "best" solution right now. iOS for touch devices (iPad, iPhone, iPod) and OS X for desktop. Then they get to sit back and make an absolutely wonderful user experience for both scenarios without worrying about the potential crossover. If I was in charge of Windows that is likely what I would do. Make Windows for Desktop and Windows for Touch, with starkly different UIs and designs, but with some emulation layer so people can run a touch app on the desktop (in like a sandbox window). Frankly Windows Desktop has a LOT of crust on it. Go look at Control Panel. They have UIs unchanged since Windows 9x (Mouse, Keyboard, etc), then they have UIs added in XP (Firewall), then different ones added in Vista (Action Centre, etc), and now in 8 we have "Change PC Settings" which is another UI concept again. If you've ever used OS X for any amount of time, the thing is just polished and consistent from top to bottom. I mean go compare OS X "Preferences" to Control Panel on Windows 8, and Apple manage to get that kind of consistent polish all over the place. Microsoft cannot kill the Windows Desktop as much as they might wish, so for the love of god go through from top to bottom and modernise it. Control Panel = Gone. Folder Options = Gone. Device Manage = Gone.
- cpleppert 13y ago
  >>If I was in charge of Windows that is likely what I would do. Make Windows for Desktop and Windows for Touch, with starkly different UIs and designs, but with some emulation layer so people can run a touch app on the desktop (in like a sandbox window) Emulation layers don't work; if your operating system needs to emulate needed applications no one is going to use it. Microsoft already has a touch optimized OS: Windows Phone, just port it to tablets. Easy. Done. Of course then it has to compete with iOS and Android on its merits and not because it has Office and can interface with the windows ecosystem and can kinda run desktop applications.
greenwalls 13y ago
He says "Apple showed the world how awesome a central managed application store is". As a developer I feel like the worst thing about iOS and Android are their app stores. Could Bitcoin, Bittorrent, Napster, Chatroulette, or any new and fun applications or websites exist if they were forced to appear in an app store? No way! Do we want some giant company deciding what new technology developers can come up with in the future? I hope we don't do that to ourselves. App stores are garbage.
- roryokane 13y ago
  I think he was advocating optional app stores, not a sole-provider app store like on iOS. Even though OS X and Android have app stores, they also let you install any “unapproved” apps you want and open whatever web apps you want, after changing a one-time setting. The proposed Windows 8.2 would probably be the same. As long as app stores remain optional, I think they are a good thing. It is a lot simpler for users to browse one place for apps and install all apps in the same simple way. An app store is a reassuringly simple way to install software for those who aren’t very confident with modifying their computers.
  - scholia 13y ago
    There already is a good app store for Windows, and has been for a couple of years: http://allmyapps.com/ http://allmyapps.com/ You can download apps directly without using the installer, but the installer will update apps for you as well. There's also Ninite, of course, but AllMyApps has over 16,000 apps.
ronreiter 13y ago
Microsoft, hire this guy and pay him a lot of money!
- dxfdfd 13y ago
  Nothing unique here. Like the images but experience is still very much the same. Hire someone from Apple instead!
ljoshua 13y ago
The biggest improvement here is subtle, yet important. He made the desktop experience separate from the touch experience, and the touch experience separate from the desktop. Similar to what one would think of with Ubuntu on the desktop versus the touch version that would go on phones. Not providing the unoptimized experience would go a long way. And the comment on Windows RT being renamed Windows Lite... good idea.
contextfree 13y ago
Kudos to Jay Machalani for a great demonstration of the concept, but I have a couple of big problems with it, or in general any design that splits the current unified tablet/PC design we see in Windows 8 into two strictly separated modes (of course, having two totally separate SKUs or OSs can be thought of as an even more extreme version of this): 1. It breaks useful cross-mode windowing scenarios. Having a strict modal separation between the two windowing models breaks a bunch of IMO not terribly uncommon scenarios where mixing them in some way is useful. * Can't have a different mode on each monitor - if one is touch/a tablet and the other isn't, for example. * Can't snap an app beside the desktop and have the system automatically manage the use of the remaining space. There are actually some desktop apps that have hacked a custom implementation of this - OneNote for example - so I don't think it's a contrived scenario. * Sometimes I like to use the availability of desktop and immersive windows to express a "work versus play" (or, more precisely, "continuing part of ongoing persistent task versus transient digression") distinction. That way I can use the "transient/play" apps without worrying about them cluttering the taskbar, slowing down the PC, interfering with what I'm doing, etc. Modal separation breaks that. * Some apps just work better with one or the other windowing model - e.g., part of what I really like about Tweetium is how clicking on a link will automatically shrink the Tweetium window down to a narrow strip and open a browser window in the remaining space. That of course depends on the immersive windowing APIs. Other apps such as calculators or "sticky notes" work better in desktop windows. So it would be nice to have apps like this automatically open in the right kind of window, or at least allow the user to set this per-app, rather than requiring an obnoxious global mode switch that potentially messes with everything else. 2. Desktop apps inherently clash with the immersive app model and UX. While running immersive apps in desktop windows seems like it could probably work well, I'm really leery of the reverse. There are a few potential problems with running desktop apps in immersive windows that I see: * Desktop apps can open multiple windows and draw outside of their window. Some apps (ab)use this quite a bit for dialogs, palette windows, etc. This could get pretty awkward to map to immersive windowing - do we put each in its own "strip"? Do we make each "strip" a little virtual desktop where the app can put additional windows? Do we try some mix of the two approaches, and if so, how does the OS decide which is which? * A goal of the immersive app model was that the user wouldn't have to worry about closing apps or which apps were/weren't running - indeed that the concept of "running apps" wouldn't exist for most users. The system UI was designed around that - no "X" to close, no taskbar to show what's open. But desktop apps can do anything in the background, so closing them and knowing what's running is important. And when you switch modes back into the desktop, which apps should even be kept open? Since "metro" mode blurs the lines between running and suspended apps, it's not clear. And if you can't run desktop apps in immersive windows, and in general have a 1:1 mapping of running system/app state between modes, you can't really have a pure modal separation - either the mode switch is made destructive and essentially becomes a reboot, or you're left with a bunch of hidden stuff "running in the other mode" which doesn't make any sense. Once you really start thinking through the ramifications of alternative models the current desktop-as-an-app model starts to seem pretty elegant in some ways IMO.
dippyskoodlez 13y ago
How does this handle multi-monitor environments? My workstations have either 4, 5, or 6+ screens at a time.
diego_moita 13y ago
It is a lot simpler: 1) Install the 8.1 update and disable the Metro screen. 2) Install classic shell: http://classicshell.net/ http://classicshell.net/. Done, Windows 8 is fixed.
ZanyProgrammer 13y ago
I've often thought about getting a Windows 8 tablet (probably a Surface 2) and I'll admit there are some pretty good things about the Surface-being able to snap two apps side by side is a big plus over iOS and Android, and (horror of horrors) being able to run Flash in IE 11 is a plus. Not to mention the kickstand, and not having to prop my iPad up against a bookcase. I guess I think that Windows 8 is a pretty good choice for tablets-maybe its just me, who doesn't use a lot of apps, but I don't think there's a lot missing on the tablet side. Or take the Surface Pro 2-you have Metro IE 11 which runs ABP, which is in and of itself a bazillion times better than mobile Safari. But yes, its a royal clusterfuck on the desktop, and I don't want Windows 8, much less a touch screen laptop that I"ll have to keep wiping down to keep fingerprints off of.
alok-g 13y ago
Previous discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7021429 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7021429
- rlu 13y ago
  He posts comments there about meeting with MS. Anyone know if he ended up getting a job?
  - TechnoFou 13y ago
    You can check the last blog post on my site, I talked about my visit to Redmond!
onedev 13y ago
Hire the fuck out of this guy, and pay him at least 1.5x normal. He is thinking in the right direction and Microsoft, you need thinking like this.
sdegutis 13y ago
Just some meta-commentary: The first section seems like it's mostly just him repeating himself quite a lot without really saying anything new at all. Very difficult to get through it. He also warns his readers: "Yes there will be a lot of spelling mistakes, unfortunately you will have to leave with it. The goal was to put out the information of my research, not to write a perfectly checked novel." That's like giving the recycling plant a bag mixed with recyclables and rotten garbage, and saying "you sort it out, it's your problem now" when it really isn't their job. So it's hard to take this article seriously. Someone who takes his own idea seriously wouldn't settle for presenting it so poorly. I'm disappoint.
- sdegutis 13y ago
  Regarding his actual idea: Years ago, I was drawn by Apple's attention to detail, UI, and UX, so I migrated from Windows to Mac OS X. Last week, I was drawn by Microsoft's attention to detail, UI, and UX, and have already started migrating from OS X 10.9 to Windows 8.1. (I'm typing this in IE11 right now on my rMBP actually, and I think I prefer it to Chrome.) The ideas and presentations in his article don't settle well with me. They feel like a huge step backwards in usability and design. I admit Windows 8.1 isn't perfect, but I don't think his changes fix any real problems that I have with it, and they certainly create some new ones. That said, I am excited to see how MS is going to make the desktop environment more unified and consistent in the future, which I'm sure they're working on.
  - n1ghtmare_ 13y ago
    I couldn't have said it better. I think Win 8.1 is quite nice actually, I know it's cool to hate on it, but frankly speaking it's pretty good (IMHO of course). I really don't get all the fuzz on the start menu, honestly, I'm never in it even on Windows 7, I press "win key"-> search -> run, and guess what I do exactly the same in Windows 8, except now the start menu is a bit more useful, I mean sure I don't use all the metro app (some I do for example news), but the rest acts a very nice shortcut "wall", and it helps keep my desktop is pristine. Even if Microsoft decides to ditch the whole Metro concept I hope they keep the "Start" the same as it is. I know I'm perhaps in the minority here but, the previous start menu was completely useless to me, honestly.
windsurfer 13y ago
This entirely misses one key part of how Windows has evolved: Microsoft is a collection of many competing individuals, not a single entity with unified goals. Windows development is shaped by a small team of developers and designers being influenced by a large battery of project managers and stakeholders. Their business is compromise, not uniformity or singular vision. For instance, Windows has to support both touch and keyboard/mouse because of the tablet PC group desiring equal marketing and development focus so as to not devalue the tablet brand and ecosystem. Windows doesn't have a coherent design language because it doesn't help everyone or any group particularly well. The Windows 8.1 upgrade had store login required because the app store was lacking traction. While Jay's UI ideas have great intentions, they're not solving any of the immediate problems Microsoft's groups have.
code_duck 13y ago
Regarding > " 1) Microsoft wants to create a coherent store experience and ecosystem for Windows with the Windows Store. [...] when Apple showed the world how awesome a central managed application store is, everyone had to do it. [...] it’s just an obvious thing that nobody got before. [...] It doesn’t make sense anymore to scout the web through bad website and installers that want to fill your computer with crap by default when you can have a one button purchase/install/update/manage for your apps. " Actually, Linux, especially Debian and Ubuntu have had that for years. Configuring a Windows machine with the software you need used to mean going to 10 different websites, downloading zip and exe files each with their own installer, etc and it would take forever vs. Debian or Ubuntu where you can install most anything from apt, quickly and easily just like an App Store... since 1999.
- ksk 13y ago
  I don't know why you picked Linux. Its a particularly poor example. Linux, unlike a modern OS, lacks any kind of sane dependency management. Thus, it throws this responsibility on the repository maintainer to maintain a MxN matrix of packages and dependencies. God help you if you add another repo with a different set of dependencies which conflict with the existing repos. Dependency hell is a still present problem on Linux. Anyway this is nothing new, as users of Linux, we all know about this and the developers know it even better. The Apple App Store distributes _self contained_ binaries+dependencies (excluding OS libs) which is one sane way of doing things.
  - rantanplan 13y ago
    :-O Which decade are you coming from? Windows and Mac don't have dependency management at all. They just pack one big blob with all the dependencies. Mac tries to imitate the Linux packaging with homebrew, but it's far from it yet. The thing about different repos with the same deps is solved with 'priorities', since its inception.
    - ksk 13y ago
      >Windows and Mac don't have dependency management at all. Not sure why you feel so compelled to talk about OSs I didn't mention. I was talking about the iOS App Store. In any case - apt-get, yum etc are third party tools that just copy, extract files from some server and run some pre-made configuration scripts. Thats all they do. All the hard work of figuring out dependencies, avoiding cycles, etc is done OUTSIDE the OS by the repository maintainers. You can do that on ANY OS. >The thing about different repos with the same deps is solved with 'priorities', since its inception. Different repositories which the user ads can and do have dependency conflicts. One package from repo-1 can require a lib with version >= 1.0 while another package from another repo-2 will only work with version 0.9, etc. I have often had to add add other repos to get software unavailable in current repos. I have run in to these issues quite often. And I am not even getting into how brittle apt-get in general is.
martin-adams 13y ago
I really like the ideas that Jay put forward. My opinion is that he's fixing the tablet experience for power windows users. I want my desktop because I know it works to get my task one; but I also want a tablet experience - in a single, unified device. I believe Microsoft need this as they will only lose a battle from negative reviews if they keep ignoring a very vocal user base, and they'll lose market share if they can't improve over iOS and Android. "Metro" apps on the desktop suck at the moment in my opinion. That doesn't mean they should be thrown out, they should be fixed.
sbierwagen 13y ago
Yes there will be a lot of spelling mistakes, unfortunately you will have to leave with it. The goal was to put out the information of my research, not to write a perfectly checked novel. Eyeroll.
- mwfunk 13y ago
  Seriously, it's such a minimal effort to do a spellcheck. Probably less effort than was taken to write that paragraph.
  - TechnoFou 13y ago
    Not when my first language is French.
cpursley 13y ago
Despite the linux comment in the authors post, but can someone please please please take some variation of "desktop" part of this design and turn it into a linux mint theme?
TechnoFou 13y ago
Ahhhhhh I was wondering why the sudden traffic! Finally found it after tracking a Twitter referring link with a lot of traffic, to a YC Twitter account mentioning I was in the major news! Thanks all of you!

145 points by JoshGlazebrook 13y ago

Linux is a usability nightmare the second you get out of the fake easy-to-use illusion layer they added with the new GUIs. Unless you’re a coder, don’t even think about it. Do you think he really believes this? Maybe I'm too far in a bubble or something, but that sounds completely dishonest.

norswap 13y ago
You would say the "unless you're a coder" part is wrong, but otherwise it has the ring of truth based on my experience. Configuration when not using UIs is hell because each application has its own format, settings file location (if it uses settings file at all -- you might be required to run a curses console program) and generally its own idiosyncracies. For a single logical concept (e.g. sound, ditto for display), a plethora of layers are involved and they all clash heavily, both in term of settings and abstractions.
copx 13y ago
I do not just believe it, I know it. When something does not work in Linuxland the answer is still "open the terminal, enter a bunch of cryptic commands" and/or manually edit text-based config files. I can do that easily, I grew up with DOS. We had to tweak the parameters of the memory manager and make custom boot disks with just the right set of drivers to get games working as kids. It is just that I am not willing to do that stuff anymore. This is the 21st century and my time has value. Recent examples of my Linux "user experience": - (Fedora) Internet went down while the package manager (OMG I hate those!) was busy updating the system. This left the package manager in a corrupted state. I could no longer use the GUI to install/update anything, only gave me a "please fix me somehow" type error message. I could easily google the solution. Four cryptic terminal commands later it was good to go again. But as I said: unacceptable for a modern desktop OS. - (Ubuntu) Getting my wifi to work. Do I even have to start? I ended up having to download a kernel module .tarball from somewhere, had to integrate that into the kernel, and edit some config files by hand. Again, no problem, Google is magic. However it wasted one hour of my life: unacceptable. On Windows getting the wifi to work required.. clicking on setup.exe.
- mikegioia 13y ago
  I haven't had wifi issues with Ubuntu for over 5 years. What computer did you have these problems with, where you needed to install a new kernel module? You hate package managers? I don't have experience with Fedora's and I don't know why it entered an inconsistent state, but OSX/iOS use a package manager. Android uses a package manager. What problem could you possibly have with package managers? Do you enjoy manually updating software one app at a time? The answer in "Linuxland" may still be to open the terminal and enter commands but the times a regular user needs to do that are becoming few and very far between. I have the majority of our (albeit small) office running Ubuntu 13.10 and I've yet to encounter anything like what you've described.
  - speeder 13y ago
    I think he is not angry at the package manager, he is angry that the package manager failed, and he had to use the terminal to fix it. And it IS not acceptable, I use Fedora myself, and every time this happened I got REALLY, REALLY upset, if I am using a GUI package manager, why the hell I should need to use console to fix it when it breaks? Why there is no option on the GUI to do that? Also I had a machine that I had to install a kernel module to put sound on it... Linux still have some serious issues with some hardware (mostly audio and radio-based communications, I've heard printers are problematic too, but it is years that I don't own a printer)
  - copx 13y ago
    >I haven't had wifi issues with Ubuntu for over 5 years. No surprise there. Some wifi hardware is supported out of the box and will just work. That is not the problem. The pain starts when something does not just work. >What computer did you have these problems with, where you needed to install a new kernel module? Given that I am a major nerd I have multiple ones and admin even more ones. I think that particular episode happened with an Asus Eee Box B202 and an older version of Ubuntu. > but OSX/iOS use a package manager. I do not use anything Apple but if I recall correctly OS X uses self-contained .app bundles i.e. the apps usually include all their dependencies except those present on a particular OS X version by default. It is the "dependency management" done by Linux package managers which I hate. Namely that every app becomes a tangled web of dependencies with unlimited potential for pain. Apps should be self-contained, the OS should be a stable, well-defined platform to run them. I.e. "requires Window XP or newer" or "requires Mac OS X 10.6 or newer" is okay, "requires [long list of packages]" is not. That model will cause problems sooner or later. "I updated X and suddenly Y no longer works" etc. As a programmer I find the concept of simply automatically updating libfoo 2.1.x to libfoo 2.1.y because "the developers say it does not break compatibility" scary. Software is written by people, developers accidentally break compatibility all the time, or write software which depends on buggy behavior, behavior which later gets fixed by other developers, thus breaking said software. Thus all common Linux package managers are themselves broken by design. They are only acceptable if you accept that occasionally some things will just stop working after a system update. >Do you enjoy manually updating software one app at a time? I do not often have to update any software and when I do it I can usually try the new version without uninstalling the old one easily and I know that its installation will not affect any other apps on my system. Yes, I enjoy that. >the times a regular user needs to do that are becoming few and very far between. No disagreement there, but as I said, personally I am not willing to put up with an OS where this happens, no matter how rarely it happens - unless I have to.
GFK_of_xmaspast 13y ago
I've been using linux for literally 20 years now. The first ten I did all my own sysadminning, the next ten I used it exclusively in organizations with professional administrators to complain to, and now in my current job I'm back to having to do things myself, and I can assure you it's just as much of a pain to do things in 2014 as it was back in 2002. They gave me a new monitor at work and it took me literally six hours to figure out the right magic to get the resolution in a mode that wouldn't cause instant headaches, and I still can't run KDE applications without the X server segfaulting.
- dman 13y ago
  What graphics card are you using?
- n1ghtmare_ 13y ago
  Yep that's pretty much mu experience with Linux. By the way I really like Linux (I used to use Ubuntu before they added Unity), however the constant fiddling with drivers and all kinds of stuff is just annoying.
- Zardoz84 13y ago
  What distribution are you using ? And what graphics card? I remember some issues with the first version of KDE 4, but since then I run it on Intel, AMD and NVIDIA cards, with open and proprietary drivers without big problems (AMD sometimes have glitches..)
  - GFK_of_xmaspast 13y ago
    Ubuntu (13.04 and 13.10) and a recent nvidia, don't have the model number here. My best guess is that it's some kind of font issue, plotting in R also segfaults the server but I can see the non-text part of the plot come up. I try to leave well enough alone because (a) I get paid to do work not to troubleshoot linux and (b) there's no guarantee that anything I do will result in a usable system.
HeroesGrave 13y ago
I can understand him saying that if he used, say, Arch. But distros like Mint are arguably easier to use than Windows. And then they have the advantage that they don't have to be 'fixed' like Windows 8, which destroys the point of the post.
Zigurd 13y ago
I'm sure someone still hates Unity, but I use it every day. It's a conservative design that evolves slowly. I wish the Ubuntu Touch UI had already been integrated with mainstream desktop Ubuntu so I could get a PC tablet as my day to day coding machine. It is very difficult to evolve a non-touch UI into a back-compatible touch UI. But the conservative approach Ubuntu Touch is taking might turn out to work better than what Microsoft did to Windows.
- Joeri 13y ago
  I have a windows 8 tablet / laptop hybrid as my hobby coding machine (asus t100), and i have to say that the bad rep windows 8 got does not match my experience. I've found the touch ui easy to use, and i even configured it to launch my ide in full screen mode, so i can go back and forwards between that and my browser without seeing a desktop in between. I've also noticed that i'm touching the screen quite often even while coding, and that's with an ide completely not optimized for touch (webstorm). The whole thing has convinced me that touch is an added value for any use case, even for programming.
  - scholia 13y ago
    As far as I can tell, the "bad rap" is mostly from people who haven't used it at all, or haven't used it for very long. (Typically XP users who are extremely averse to change.) The Windows 8 users I know personally like it a lot, though that doesn't stop them from complaining about the parts they don't like....

taylorlapeyre 13y ago

Brilliant work all around. I hope Microsoft sees this talent and picks this guy up like they did with Andrew Kim.

pbhjpbhj 13y ago

I like how he used the Ubuntu logo for "sharing" ... TBH it didn't look especially revolutionary - offer users the paradigm they want, appropriate to their hardware. The desktop version just looks like a candy skinned version of KDE to me.

gyufgyfigyugy 13y ago
Microsoft actually employs a very Ubuntu-esque icon as their sharing symbol, baked into Windows 8. This guy isn't responsible for it, didn't try to invent anything, re-invent it, or borrow it, or co-opt it. That's the very icon that Microsoft actually uses within current versions of Windows.

shadowmint 13y ago

Quick link to the designs: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/4855031/Windows%208.2%20Prototype%20by%20Jay%20Machalani.zip https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/4855031/Windows%208.2%20... Particularly the redesigned start menus and stuff about the charms bar are spot on, that really made me sit up and pay attention.

01Michael10 13y ago

Use Windows 8 if like it on your phone or tablet. PC? Install Windows 7 or Linux. Fixed...

CompleteMoron2 13y ago

I took a look at this. Excellent work on his part! I still use windows and Metro is just forced full screen apps that dont even work with the desktop classic . One thing apple got right was not to mixed iOs with MacOS (or whatever it is you guys call it) - Microsoft once again tried to stuff the kitchen sink into one OS. I'd actually like to - corny as it sounds - literally just have a smart widows logo floating around. It pops up when I hit the windows button on the keyboard, and it always finds an empty blank spot on the desktop to appear in to be ready. When i click on it this floting windows logo has literally four flyouts from it that contain a way to access apps, documents, email, and yuch - social feeds. (maybe its configurable so its for settings) - might work well for touch screens too. Of course these flyouts would be configurable to be a palette of your choice. Of course I'm not a designer and have terrible ideas - so into the ether with this rant and Prepare for downvote!

UnoriginalGuy 13y ago

So he splashed some new colours onto things, added back in a new Start Menu that is less usable than both the full screen metro one but also the old Windows 7 one, and then made the metro interface even more convoluted? Meh. As they say, it is very easy to criticise someone else for at least trying something and very hard to solve it yourself. I will fully admit that I have no better ideas for how to both keep the classic desktop but also integrate the new touch screen "metro" elements into it. I really do have to say that I think Apple has the "best" solution right now. iOS for touch devices (iPad, iPhone, iPod) and OS X for desktop. Then they get to sit back and make an absolutely wonderful user experience for both scenarios without worrying about the potential crossover. If I was in charge of Windows that is likely what I would do. Make Windows for Desktop and Windows for Touch, with starkly different UIs and designs, but with some emulation layer so people can run a touch app on the desktop (in like a sandbox window). Frankly Windows Desktop has a LOT of crust on it. Go look at Control Panel. They have UIs unchanged since Windows 9x (Mouse, Keyboard, etc), then they have UIs added in XP (Firewall), then different ones added in Vista (Action Centre, etc), and now in 8 we have "Change PC Settings" which is another UI concept again. If you've ever used OS X for any amount of time, the thing is just polished and consistent from top to bottom. I mean go compare OS X "Preferences" to Control Panel on Windows 8, and Apple manage to get that kind of consistent polish all over the place. Microsoft cannot kill the Windows Desktop as much as they might wish, so for the love of god go through from top to bottom and modernise it. Control Panel = Gone. Folder Options = Gone. Device Manage = Gone.

cpleppert 13y ago
>>If I was in charge of Windows that is likely what I would do. Make Windows for Desktop and Windows for Touch, with starkly different UIs and designs, but with some emulation layer so people can run a touch app on the desktop (in like a sandbox window) Emulation layers don't work; if your operating system needs to emulate needed applications no one is going to use it. Microsoft already has a touch optimized OS: Windows Phone, just port it to tablets. Easy. Done. Of course then it has to compete with iOS and Android on its merits and not because it has Office and can interface with the windows ecosystem and can kinda run desktop applications.

greenwalls 13y ago

He says "Apple showed the world how awesome a central managed application store is". As a developer I feel like the worst thing about iOS and Android are their app stores. Could Bitcoin, Bittorrent, Napster, Chatroulette, or any new and fun applications or websites exist if they were forced to appear in an app store? No way! Do we want some giant company deciding what new technology developers can come up with in the future? I hope we don't do that to ourselves. App stores are garbage.

roryokane 13y ago
I think he was advocating optional app stores, not a sole-provider app store like on iOS. Even though OS X and Android have app stores, they also let you install any “unapproved” apps you want and open whatever web apps you want, after changing a one-time setting. The proposed Windows 8.2 would probably be the same. As long as app stores remain optional, I think they are a good thing. It is a lot simpler for users to browse one place for apps and install all apps in the same simple way. An app store is a reassuringly simple way to install software for those who aren’t very confident with modifying their computers.
- scholia 13y ago
  There already is a good app store for Windows, and has been for a couple of years: http://allmyapps.com/ http://allmyapps.com/ You can download apps directly without using the installer, but the installer will update apps for you as well. There's also Ninite, of course, but AllMyApps has over 16,000 apps.

ronreiter 13y ago

Microsoft, hire this guy and pay him a lot of money!

dxfdfd 13y ago
Nothing unique here. Like the images but experience is still very much the same. Hire someone from Apple instead!

ljoshua 13y ago

The biggest improvement here is subtle, yet important. He made the desktop experience separate from the touch experience, and the touch experience separate from the desktop. Similar to what one would think of with Ubuntu on the desktop versus the touch version that would go on phones. Not providing the unoptimized experience would go a long way. And the comment on Windows RT being renamed Windows Lite... good idea.

contextfree 13y ago

Kudos to Jay Machalani for a great demonstration of the concept, but I have a couple of big problems with it, or in general any design that splits the current unified tablet/PC design we see in Windows 8 into two strictly separated modes (of course, having two totally separate SKUs or OSs can be thought of as an even more extreme version of this): 1. It breaks useful cross-mode windowing scenarios. Having a strict modal separation between the two windowing models breaks a bunch of IMO not terribly uncommon scenarios where mixing them in some way is useful. * Can't have a different mode on each monitor - if one is touch/a tablet and the other isn't, for example. * Can't snap an app beside the desktop and have the system automatically manage the use of the remaining space. There are actually some desktop apps that have hacked a custom implementation of this - OneNote for example - so I don't think it's a contrived scenario. * Sometimes I like to use the availability of desktop and immersive windows to express a "work versus play" (or, more precisely, "continuing part of ongoing persistent task versus transient digression") distinction. That way I can use the "transient/play" apps without worrying about them cluttering the taskbar, slowing down the PC, interfering with what I'm doing, etc. Modal separation breaks that. * Some apps just work better with one or the other windowing model - e.g., part of what I really like about Tweetium is how clicking on a link will automatically shrink the Tweetium window down to a narrow strip and open a browser window in the remaining space. That of course depends on the immersive windowing APIs. Other apps such as calculators or "sticky notes" work better in desktop windows. So it would be nice to have apps like this automatically open in the right kind of window, or at least allow the user to set this per-app, rather than requiring an obnoxious global mode switch that potentially messes with everything else. 2. Desktop apps inherently clash with the immersive app model and UX. While running immersive apps in desktop windows seems like it could probably work well, I'm really leery of the reverse. There are a few potential problems with running desktop apps in immersive windows that I see: * Desktop apps can open multiple windows and draw outside of their window. Some apps (ab)use this quite a bit for dialogs, palette windows, etc. This could get pretty awkward to map to immersive windowing - do we put each in its own "strip"? Do we make each "strip" a little virtual desktop where the app can put additional windows? Do we try some mix of the two approaches, and if so, how does the OS decide which is which? * A goal of the immersive app model was that the user wouldn't have to worry about closing apps or which apps were/weren't running - indeed that the concept of "running apps" wouldn't exist for most users. The system UI was designed around that - no "X" to close, no taskbar to show what's open. But desktop apps can do anything in the background, so closing them and knowing what's running is important. And when you switch modes back into the desktop, which apps should even be kept open? Since "metro" mode blurs the lines between running and suspended apps, it's not clear. And if you can't run desktop apps in immersive windows, and in general have a 1:1 mapping of running system/app state between modes, you can't really have a pure modal separation - either the mode switch is made destructive and essentially becomes a reboot, or you're left with a bunch of hidden stuff "running in the other mode" which doesn't make any sense. Once you really start thinking through the ramifications of alternative models the current desktop-as-an-app model starts to seem pretty elegant in some ways IMO.

dippyskoodlez 13y ago

How does this handle multi-monitor environments? My workstations have either 4, 5, or 6+ screens at a time.

diego_moita 13y ago

It is a lot simpler: 1) Install the 8.1 update and disable the Metro screen. 2) Install classic shell: http://classicshell.net/ http://classicshell.net/. Done, Windows 8 is fixed.

ZanyProgrammer 13y ago

I've often thought about getting a Windows 8 tablet (probably a Surface 2) and I'll admit there are some pretty good things about the Surface-being able to snap two apps side by side is a big plus over iOS and Android, and (horror of horrors) being able to run Flash in IE 11 is a plus. Not to mention the kickstand, and not having to prop my iPad up against a bookcase. I guess I think that Windows 8 is a pretty good choice for tablets-maybe its just me, who doesn't use a lot of apps, but I don't think there's a lot missing on the tablet side. Or take the Surface Pro 2-you have Metro IE 11 which runs ABP, which is in and of itself a bazillion times better than mobile Safari. But yes, its a royal clusterfuck on the desktop, and I don't want Windows 8, much less a touch screen laptop that I"ll have to keep wiping down to keep fingerprints off of.

alok-g 13y ago

Previous discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7021429 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7021429

rlu 13y ago
He posts comments there about meeting with MS. Anyone know if he ended up getting a job?
- TechnoFou 13y ago
  You can check the last blog post on my site, I talked about my visit to Redmond!

onedev 13y ago

Hire the fuck out of this guy, and pay him at least 1.5x normal. He is thinking in the right direction and Microsoft, you need thinking like this.

sdegutis 13y ago

Just some meta-commentary: The first section seems like it's mostly just him repeating himself quite a lot without really saying anything new at all. Very difficult to get through it. He also warns his readers: "Yes there will be a lot of spelling mistakes, unfortunately you will have to leave with it. The goal was to put out the information of my research, not to write a perfectly checked novel." That's like giving the recycling plant a bag mixed with recyclables and rotten garbage, and saying "you sort it out, it's your problem now" when it really isn't their job. So it's hard to take this article seriously. Someone who takes his own idea seriously wouldn't settle for presenting it so poorly. I'm disappoint.

sdegutis 13y ago
Regarding his actual idea: Years ago, I was drawn by Apple's attention to detail, UI, and UX, so I migrated from Windows to Mac OS X. Last week, I was drawn by Microsoft's attention to detail, UI, and UX, and have already started migrating from OS X 10.9 to Windows 8.1. (I'm typing this in IE11 right now on my rMBP actually, and I think I prefer it to Chrome.) The ideas and presentations in his article don't settle well with me. They feel like a huge step backwards in usability and design. I admit Windows 8.1 isn't perfect, but I don't think his changes fix any real problems that I have with it, and they certainly create some new ones. That said, I am excited to see how MS is going to make the desktop environment more unified and consistent in the future, which I'm sure they're working on.
- n1ghtmare_ 13y ago
  I couldn't have said it better. I think Win 8.1 is quite nice actually, I know it's cool to hate on it, but frankly speaking it's pretty good (IMHO of course). I really don't get all the fuzz on the start menu, honestly, I'm never in it even on Windows 7, I press "win key"-> search -> run, and guess what I do exactly the same in Windows 8, except now the start menu is a bit more useful, I mean sure I don't use all the metro app (some I do for example news), but the rest acts a very nice shortcut "wall", and it helps keep my desktop is pristine. Even if Microsoft decides to ditch the whole Metro concept I hope they keep the "Start" the same as it is. I know I'm perhaps in the minority here but, the previous start menu was completely useless to me, honestly.

windsurfer 13y ago

This entirely misses one key part of how Windows has evolved: Microsoft is a collection of many competing individuals, not a single entity with unified goals. Windows development is shaped by a small team of developers and designers being influenced by a large battery of project managers and stakeholders. Their business is compromise, not uniformity or singular vision. For instance, Windows has to support both touch and keyboard/mouse because of the tablet PC group desiring equal marketing and development focus so as to not devalue the tablet brand and ecosystem. Windows doesn't have a coherent design language because it doesn't help everyone or any group particularly well. The Windows 8.1 upgrade had store login required because the app store was lacking traction. While Jay's UI ideas have great intentions, they're not solving any of the immediate problems Microsoft's groups have.

code_duck 13y ago

Regarding > " 1) Microsoft wants to create a coherent store experience and ecosystem for Windows with the Windows Store. [...] when Apple showed the world how awesome a central managed application store is, everyone had to do it. [...] it’s just an obvious thing that nobody got before. [...] It doesn’t make sense anymore to scout the web through bad website and installers that want to fill your computer with crap by default when you can have a one button purchase/install/update/manage for your apps. " Actually, Linux, especially Debian and Ubuntu have had that for years. Configuring a Windows machine with the software you need used to mean going to 10 different websites, downloading zip and exe files each with their own installer, etc and it would take forever vs. Debian or Ubuntu where you can install most anything from apt, quickly and easily just like an App Store... since 1999.

ksk 13y ago
I don't know why you picked Linux. Its a particularly poor example. Linux, unlike a modern OS, lacks any kind of sane dependency management. Thus, it throws this responsibility on the repository maintainer to maintain a MxN matrix of packages and dependencies. God help you if you add another repo with a different set of dependencies which conflict with the existing repos. Dependency hell is a still present problem on Linux. Anyway this is nothing new, as users of Linux, we all know about this and the developers know it even better. The Apple App Store distributes _self contained_ binaries+dependencies (excluding OS libs) which is one sane way of doing things.
- rantanplan 13y ago
  :-O Which decade are you coming from? Windows and Mac don't have dependency management at all. They just pack one big blob with all the dependencies. Mac tries to imitate the Linux packaging with homebrew, but it's far from it yet. The thing about different repos with the same deps is solved with 'priorities', since its inception.
  - ksk 13y ago
    >Windows and Mac don't have dependency management at all. Not sure why you feel so compelled to talk about OSs I didn't mention. I was talking about the iOS App Store. In any case - apt-get, yum etc are third party tools that just copy, extract files from some server and run some pre-made configuration scripts. Thats all they do. All the hard work of figuring out dependencies, avoiding cycles, etc is done OUTSIDE the OS by the repository maintainers. You can do that on ANY OS. >The thing about different repos with the same deps is solved with 'priorities', since its inception. Different repositories which the user ads can and do have dependency conflicts. One package from repo-1 can require a lib with version >= 1.0 while another package from another repo-2 will only work with version 0.9, etc. I have often had to add add other repos to get software unavailable in current repos. I have run in to these issues quite often. And I am not even getting into how brittle apt-get in general is.

martin-adams 13y ago

I really like the ideas that Jay put forward. My opinion is that he's fixing the tablet experience for power windows users. I want my desktop because I know it works to get my task one; but I also want a tablet experience - in a single, unified device. I believe Microsoft need this as they will only lose a battle from negative reviews if they keep ignoring a very vocal user base, and they'll lose market share if they can't improve over iOS and Android. "Metro" apps on the desktop suck at the moment in my opinion. That doesn't mean they should be thrown out, they should be fixed.

sbierwagen 13y ago

Yes there will be a lot of spelling mistakes, unfortunately you will have to leave with it. The goal was to put out the information of my research, not to write a perfectly checked novel. Eyeroll.

mwfunk 13y ago
Seriously, it's such a minimal effort to do a spellcheck. Probably less effort than was taken to write that paragraph.
- TechnoFou 13y ago
  Not when my first language is French.

cpursley 13y ago

Despite the linux comment in the authors post, but can someone please please please take some variation of "desktop" part of this design and turn it into a linux mint theme?

TechnoFou 13y ago

Ahhhhhh I was wondering why the sudden traffic! Finally found it after tracking a Twitter referring link with a lot of traffic, to a YC Twitter account mentioning I was in the major news! Thanks all of you!