3 ms·

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 o

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.
- edvinbesic 13y ago
  Emulation layers do indeed work, just look at the Apple IBM to Intel transition and Rosetta for running G5 apps.
- magic_haze 13y ago
  The entire reason why WP is lacking traction is because of IOS and Android's ecosystems, not because of any special merits in their OS code. Indeed, that is also why Windows proper is still dominant on desktop. Throwing away compatibility with the ecosystem would be the height of folly. (Also, there are office clients for all these platforms: they don't work as well as they do in Windows, but they do exist)
voyou 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)." I agree that this would be much better than current Windows 8; Microsoft isn't full of idiots, so I imagine there are people working for MS who are aware that the attempt to combine tablet and desktop interfaces in Windows 8 is producing a pretty shit product. The question is, what is it that is compelling Microsoft to pursue this approach, even though the immediate product it produces isn't very good? I assume the top people at Microsoft think there is commercial pressure to use their dominance on the desktop to strengthen their position on tablets, and they think the mediocrity of Windows 8 is a price worth paying to achieve that.

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.

edvinbesic 13y ago
Emulation layers do indeed work, just look at the Apple IBM to Intel transition and Rosetta for running G5 apps.
magic_haze 13y ago
The entire reason why WP is lacking traction is because of IOS and Android's ecosystems, not because of any special merits in their OS code. Indeed, that is also why Windows proper is still dominant on desktop. Throwing away compatibility with the ecosystem would be the height of folly. (Also, there are office clients for all these platforms: they don't work as well as they do in Windows, but they do exist)

voyou 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)." I agree that this would be much better than current Windows 8; Microsoft isn't full of idiots, so I imagine there are people working for MS who are aware that the attempt to combine tablet and desktop interfaces in Windows 8 is producing a pretty shit product. The question is, what is it that is compelling Microsoft to pursue this approach, even though the immediate product it produces isn't very good? I assume the top people at Microsoft think there is commercial pressure to use their dominance on the desktop to strengthen their position on tablets, and they think the mediocrity of Windows 8 is a price worth paying to achieve that.