3 ms·
> That is obviously the answer because, hey, it worked for Apple, right? The fact is, it really didn't work for Apple. Short of a few common design choices, iO
by x0054 13y ago
> That is obviously the answer because, hey, it worked for Apple, right?
The fact is, it really didn't work for Apple. Short of a few common design choices, iOS and OSX are very different, and for a good reason. I am not sure why it's not obvious to people. Mouse or keyboard driven UI can be much smaller and tighter, with a lot less chrome, to allow more room for data. Touch UI has to be chunkier by default. The simple truth is Metro UI works amazing on a touch device, I love it. Windows 7 works just fine on PC. What Microsoft really needed is 2 separate operating systems, just like apple. The Windows line could have been updated with a fresh skin, more stability improvements, and some core new features here and there. The Metro OS could have been a separate OS for the Phone, Tablet, and TV markets. Instead Microsoft now has 4 incompatible OS lines which all function very different, but look identical, only adding to the confusion:
1. Windows 8 - For PCs, Tablets, and God knows what else,
2. Windows RT - For Tablets which are not as nice as the Windows 8 tablets but can run some of the same software, but not all of it, and some apps which work on the RT actually do not run on Windows 8 tablets, and, so ..... yeah.
3. Windows Phone 8 - Exclusively for phones. For convenience, incompatible with Windows Phone 7 and 7.5.
4. XBox OS - Runs only on XBox, looks like Windows 8, but works very different.
So, instead of 2 visually distinct operating systems, Microsoft now has 4 visually similar operating systems. I can see their logic, they wanted to leverage their huge PC instal base to drag some users to their Tablet and Phone products. Much like Apple is using iPods to sell people on iPhones and iPads, and perhaps later, Macs. But the problem is, they are not really achieving that goal, while pissing of their core PC customers.
- tankm0de 13y agothis is spot on. The only thing I would add is to point out how meticulously little has changed in the Apple OSX over the years. It's mostly carefully vetted polish & performance improvements. Microsoft tries to reinvent the wheel with every other release when what people really want is something stable, fast, simple & familiar, with tasteful updates so that nothing feels stale. The last few OSX releases, WinXP and 7 were in the sweet spot. When Apple added touch-sized icons to the Application menu in dock and eventually Launchpad, Microsoft and Canonical saw it and just completely jumped the shark on device/OS convergence. Meanwhile, Apple has tip-toed with the changes, to the point that they're not really moving forward with touch UI on OSX because it seems the value-add is not really clear for the end-user.
- axilmar 13y agoOr Microsoft could have the same Operating System but different GUIs. Remember that Operating System != GUI.
- amaks 13y agoBut that's what didn't work with Windows 8. For majority of consumers UI is operating system. Hence the confusion with difference between Windows RT and Windows 8. Hence the perception that Windows 8 has two isolated operating systems in it.
- x0054 13y agoI think what he means is more like iOS and OSX. Both run a very similar operating system but completely different UI. The best approach would be to have a common core with Windows and Metro interfaces, but separate them. Desktops and Laptops run Windows UI. Cellphones, Tablets, and TVs run Metro UI. This way you can maintain backwards compatibility on Windows side but allow the Metro side to be all new.