Slashdot Mirror
CowboyNeal Weighs In On the Windows 8 "Metro" GUI
By far, the most visible new "feature" in Windows 8, is it's new UI, which takes inspiration from smart phone and tablet devices. The old start menu is now full-screened, with large icons for all apps, and apps run in full-screen by default, changing a desktop PC into a very large tablet minus touchscreen with a keyboard and mouse added on.
It's not surprising in the least that many users take issue with this. Early on, people have said something along the lines of, "Oh it's just for the early builds, surely they will allow some way for long-time users to disable it." However, now it would seem that that would be only wishful thinking, at least for the time-being.
This is a sharp turn for Microsoft from their previous UIs. Aero, found in both Windows Vista and Windows 7, allowed users to disable it if they didn't agree with it's aesthetic, or wanted to reallocate the memory from the UI to applications. Moreover, Aero was still functionally the same as older Windows UIs. It may look prettier, but it still fires up a Start Menu like before, still lets one dock things into the taskbar, and still lets the desktop get cluttered up with icons.
It's this difference that's key here. For companies that have Windows deployments with hundreds or thousands of seats, changing the way a Windows UI works is not an option. Regardless of how easy to use the Windows 8 UI may be, it's still not the same as what users have been trained to use since 1995. Sure, Windows 7 isn't Windows 95, but changes have been introduced gradually over time, making new features easier to adjust to. The Windows 8 UI is a fast, jarring change, that is likely to frustrate users as they adjust. With no clear path to turn it off as there is with Aero, it also makes it more likely that administrators around the world are less apt to adopt Windows 8 quickly. After the debacle around initial releases of Windows Vista, one might think that Microsoft had learned their lesson. Even Microsoft wasn't too popular to make an OS that no one wanted, and Windows XP lived on far longer than anyone ever thought it would. Windows 8 has already suffered from its share of bad press even before the official release. The logical thing to do here would be to be proactive in heading off user complaints.
That's why it's rather surprising to see them take a hard stance on the Windows 8 UI. Sure, undoubtedly some third party will create a drop-in shell replacement eventually. That's been done in past versions and will likely be done again for Windows 8. For a home user, it's an acceptable path. Home users of Windows are used to beating it into submission. However, for any company that has deployed hundreds of Windows seats, mandating the use of a third party shell replacement just isn't an option, much like Windows 8 isn't an option at present.
Short of opening the source to Windows, it's reconfigurability has, until now, been rather accommodating for users. Through the use of registry settings, or third party software, users have been able to configure Windows for themselves until they feel it's sufficiently usable. While still not "free" in the GNU sense, the UI has still allowed users this semblance of freedom, to do with the UI as they will. Since a normal user wouldn't hack at the source anyway, giving them the tiny bit of freedom to determine how they interact with their UI is what keeps them as a user. What Windows 8 is looking at here, is backlash not unlike the transition from GNOME 2 to GNOME 3, albeit on a much grander scale.
What will be the final outcome? That's hard to say at this point, as Microsoft could still change their stance and implement a way to bypass the Windows 8 GUI and bring up the legacy desktop. As it is, there are several keyboard shortcuts that allow this, it's just not possible to do so automatically at boot, which would seem to be what legacy users would want most. There's also an opportunity here. If people with large Windows deployments are faced with having to retrain their users, they may think about training them on Macs or Ubuntu or something else instead. The most likely scenario though, is likely the one that we saw with the release of Windows Vista, and that is that Windows 8's predecessor will be around for a lot longer than Microsoft planned.
Thank God for downgrade rights. :-)
The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
At last.
The Windows 7 perpetuity machine is fully fueled, and ready to roll.
"Flyin' in just a sweet place,
Never been known to fail..."
I'm beginning to think that Microsoft isn't allowing the new GUI to be disabled in order to purposely have a bad Windows version.
Then, Windows 9 will come out in a year or two and suddenly have the option of booting to the old Start menu, thus perpetuating the "every other version of Windows is good" trend.
GLaDOS for President 2016! "Well here we are again. It's always such a pleasure." -- GLaDOS, 2011
It's clear that Microsoft is terrified of Apple and feels the need to do "something, anything" to be seen as innovative. Of course, being innovative is not easy, and in my opinion MS lost their ability to innovate quite a while back. Metro is new, so MS is grabbing on to it like a shipwreck survivor grabs onto anything that floats.
Of course, "new" is not necessarily "good," and in this case I think the jury is definitely out on whether Metro is good.
All in all, this feels like a death rattle to me.
Don't buy it.
I have no way of knowing, but I would guess Microsoft expects Windows 8 to be adopted by Surface/tablet users first. Windows 7 will be the enterprise desktop of choice for some time. If things go according to Microsoft's plan, a few years from now users will be comfortable with the UI formerly known as Metro. Then the enterprise will migrate to Windows 9+ with whatever refinements it has. Whether this works or not, we shall see.
Imagine how much harder physics would be if electrons had feelings! -Feynman, maybe
I plan on sticking with Win7. The point you are missing is that many people LIKE the standard Windows set-up. We don't see a reason for it to change, especially just to pander to a small segment of the market (tablets). Guess what, tablets are great for watching YouTube and updating Facebook, and suck for just about anything else. Microsoft has remained dominant because it takes care of corporate customers. The new UI is going to mess this up for them. I suspect a few months after release, a number of managers are going to be fired and the UI will at least have the option of the Win7 style, if it isn't just changed to it outright.
We all learned this as kids.
Out right hiding dad's tools was unthinkable.
With Microsoft hiding the tools and forcing them to stay hidden... what are they thinking?!
When they forced the removal of "classic" view in Windows 2K8 it was insane.
I say it is insane because of the financial loss incurred by world business in lost man hours and down time just looking for the "new" way to do things you have been doing for more than a decade.
In man hours it is a simple salami attack taking small slices here and there from every user and admin.
In down time it gets scary. You have a site that is losing 100K per minute because it is down. The old way takes 2-3 min to fix the issue. once your tools are hidden you are on a 30 minute google session to find out how to do what you have been doing forever. 3 million dollars out the window for a single admin on a single outage. I had a site that cost that when it went down.
World wide, I would not be at all shocked if this causes more than a trillion dollars in hidden and obvious losses. I'm sure the R2 removal of classic did.
It maybe that in the future we just have to change the windows UI from explorer to Powershell so our tools stop getting hidden every new version of Windows.
but everyone will love this new GUI eventually though, right?
Which commentator has the most accurate view of Windows 8:
...
* Steve Ballmer
* Steve Wozniak
* CowboyNeal
I am officially gone from
Ssshhh, he's talking about management.
Discussion System prefs link: http://slashdot.org/users.pl?op=editcomm
No company in their right mind is going to adopt Windows 8 for their business workstations if Microsoft forces the Metro interface on everyone. It simply is not productive. Visual Studio Touch Edition? Microsoft Word and Excel from a tablet? Right. I have no idea what they are thinking. It seems like in their effort to pursue the tablet market they are alienating other significant revenue streams. I'm not following the marketing strategy.
We'll make great pets
Unlike most folks here on /., I've been a windows guy forever (Hint, I still have my windows 286 floppies!). I have my own copy of MSDN, and therefore Win8 (any version) is 'free' for me. This will be the first version of Windows I don't load. (I don't count ME - I was running NT...) Sorry Microsoft. I MIGHT stick it on some secondary box somewhere, so I can test code against it, but I'll keep coding for Win7/HTML/CSS,JQuery etc. I played with an early beta on a tablet, THAT was nice, but the desktop? RIGHT, and the last 2 places I consulted at all have the same opinion, that dog doesn't hunt, and will NOT be installed
-- 73 de KG2V For the Children - RKBA! "You are what you do when it counts" - the Masso
You can "bypass" Metro -- http://www.sepier.com/bypassing-metro-on-windows-8-rtm/
Yeah, uh, no. There are a lot of people with very valuable skills that don't include "computers." Reality doesn't work like this in most places.
We've come full circle. Full screen launching of apps was called DOS.
I have an old 98 laptop with AMD k5(?) processor and Kflex 48k modem. The software looks diffferent but acts basically the same as Seven. There's a start menu, control panel, built-in explorer window to navigate files. Windows key benefit is (or was) the constantcy across 17 years of usage.
My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
I just posted this on reddit yesterday:
I think that Windows 8 is going to backfire on Microsoft.
Most current Windows PC users are going to be instantly put off by "metro" on the desktop. It serves no immediate purpose and just makes it harder and less convenient to do many common things you already know how to do. There is a learning curve there and the interface only becomes efficient with some help or google searches and some practice. There is simply no reason (at this time, anyway) for it to exist on my desktop PC and it's annoying me. No other version of Windows has made me jump through quite this many hoops to do basic tasks
On a tablet it might work and it might work well. However.... I doubt MS can make a $200 windows tablet any time soon and that's the price point they will need to hit. Besides nearly everyone who wanted an iPad or iPhone probably has one by now, even if they normally use a PC. I think Windows 8 will drive millions of PC owning, happy iPad/iPhone users into the arms of Apple rather than entice them them to ditch their iPads and buy a Windows 8 Tablet. They are already tempted and if they have to learn something new, it may as well be Apples OS. When it comes time for a new PC, i think Apple can get a lot of sales, especially if they drop their PC/Laptop prices a bit. Also... I think most people running Windows 7 will not need new hardware for quite some time. The crop of PCs from the last 3 or 4 years are already overpowered for most home users. I don't see many of us buying just an OS upgrade either.
It's pretty obvious that Microsoft's ultimate goal here is to create an Apple-like walled garden. Initially, the wall won't be as high but there will be a wall. Don't forget this. They desperately want a successful iTunes/Apps Store/Google Play, etc...
Apart from "metro" There's little in Windows 8 that couldn't have been included in a Win 7 SP2. And nothing important that you can't already do in Windows 7 with a few downloads. While the core OS is solid, I still think we have another WinMe/Vista on our hands. Nobody asked for this.
No, nobody is going to move to Macs or Linux on an enterprise desktop. They will stick with Windows. Windows 7 will not sunset on support for quite some time, and in the interim people will wait and see what Microsoft is going to do; either Windows 9 will be a better benefit to them, or they will figure out how to make Windows 8 work for them.
The one thing people know about Apple is that they do NOT support enterprises in any meaningful way. Look at XServe, which was pulled from its product line, and OSX Server which is basically an equivalent of Windows Home Server. And Linux? Comon... the arguments for retraining users apply for Linux and Mac TOO. The amount of investments made around the Windows platform are for many companies, quite large, and nobody's going to throw them away because despite the new interface, its enterprise pinnings are still pretty good on the client desktop.
I'm in the "wait and see" crowd. I don't particularly think the new interface is appealing, especially as a keyboard/mouse user, but given how little I use my start menu as it is, maybe it's not such a bad change... I really don't know. I do know that when we got preview copies running on PCs, all the Mac users came running by and told the IT teams how much they liked it. Go figure, eh?
Technology changes. And for many non-IT users of computers, Windows 8 is going to be great, simple, and straightforward to use. Viruses won't happen as easily because of the App Store, IE can't have any plugins/addons in its metro form, so all in all, it will be a boon to those folks. The IT folks who resist change will be the same people crying about the MS Office ribbon, or whatever else they got stuck on and didn't want to adapt. You're IT people -- you're supposed to adapt and change. Granted this change may not be the best, but you use it as a tool rather than a religion and you may find it better. Or not. In either case I don't think Metro is going anywhere, and the Surface tablet, if it does as well as people think it might, will just reinforce the fact MS made the right decision.
I on the other hand, will just wait and see.
The price is always right if someone else is paying.
It is clear that, soon, new PCs and laptops will come preinstalled with Windows 8. 95% or more of users will have no idea how to "stay with Windows 7". Some may be lucky to have friends who can do that for them. Or even luckier to have real friends who install some reasonable Linux on their old machines so they don't have to spend big money on new hardware right now.
As long as Microsoft "rules" the desktop market the way they do, with a quasi monopoly, ordinary users are more or less at their mercy. Bickering about the average user not being able or willing to accept change doesn't help anyone, except perhaps, MS and their droids.
I like my spaghetti with source.
As Cowboy said above, full screen apps all the time is ridiculous. Sorry, I don't need my email app taking up my entire 24" display, thanks.
What I also found really annoying about apps is you can't easily close them. Esc does nothing, there is no "X" in the corners, nothing intuitive how to do it. I thought by time they hit the Release preview there would be some changes to this. The only way I found you can close them is my hiding/minimizing them, then bringing them up in app list in the top left corner thing-a-ma-jig, then right-click to bring up a "close" dialog.
App configuration is also a chore, the only way I found to bring up an apps options is to mouse over the "hot" top right corner of screen. Too bad this "corner" is about 1 pixel x 1 pixel. I'm not a GUI or usability designer, but the current app implementation is a chore to use. Perhaps there will be come big changes in the release, but as it stands right now there is no chance I would pay for an "App", let alone use a free one given the current design choices.
The MS strategy (which will probably have some success), is pretty clear...
They figure they've got a few years of desktop monopoly left, and they want leverage this to protect their core business from iOS and Android. The plan is to get home users used to the Metro UI so that they'll be more likely to buy Windows-powered phones and tablets. Home users are far less conservative than enterprise users, and most of them will just go with whatever is loaded on their machines.
Within a three years the vast majority will be comfortable with Metro. That's about the time enterprise customers will be looking to upgrade from Windows 7, and in the meantime, everybody will be familiar enough with Metro to be immediately comfortable when they pick up a Windows Phone/Tablet.
It's really not a bad strategy. I don't think it will crush iOS and Android by a long shot, but it might just prevent MS from becoming totally irrelevant.
It is tempting, if the only tool you have is a hammer, to treat everything as if it were a nail. - Abraham Maslow
He'd better be talking about shareholders. Management is subject to layoffs too.
Rethinking email
See, this is what you at M$ don't get. You don't "improve search" by introducing a big, new, confusing UI paradigm, you "improve search" by improving search! Similarly, I think those "speed improvements" in 8 vs. 7 could have been done without shoving "Metro" down everyone's throats.
Count me among the people who are going to squeeze every last bit of life out of Win7 we can, just as we squeezed more life out of XP until 7 came out and we could forget Vista ever existed.
Be who you are...and be it in style!
Microsoft is betting the style and usability of their new interface is a vast improvement over the UI they've developed over the past 17 years using QA and focus groups. Given their past track record in style and their repeated mistakes at usability changes (Microsoft Bob, anyone?) I predict Win8 will be DOA.
I'm not switching, you're not switching, none of us are switching until we're not completely freaked out about having to handle multiple calls from Laura in Accounting because she can't figure out how to get a picture of her cat as her screensaver. I'm already weeping for the day I have to support my wife's coworker's deranged uncle's brand new Acer laptop with Win8 and can't figure out how to get his multifunction printer to scan a document directly to his iLoveAccordiansAndUnicorns.blogspot.com web page.
----- obSig
I don't think that's all that important to them, directly.
But they definitely want the Windows Store to succeed, and the leverage they are using to get people to distribute apps through the Windows Store, rather than through the mechanisms used for Windows desktop apps previously, is that Metro-style apps can only be delivered:
1. Via the Windows store, or
2. To "enterprise side-loading enabled" versions of Windows (Windows 8 Enterprise and Windows 8 Server, but none of the consumer-targeted editions), or
3. By acquiring a special product key to sideload Metro-style apps on to a non-"enterprise sideloading enabled" version of Windows 8.
Alright then. Riddle me this:
Why isn't the new Start screen optional?
Think about the answer carefully, because it doesn't have anything to do with the design of the the-interface-formerly-known-as-Metro. Whether or not the new Start screen is usable or perhaps even better than the previous Start menu designs is irrelevant.
Why isn't it optional?
Lots of people kept buying/selling/using XP after MS ended mainstream support for it too. Or rather, after MS threatened to end mainstream support and then backed off. Twice, wasn't it?
When did GUI designers decide that they know best and that users should have no control?
More and more browsers, programs and O/Ses are hiding or completely eliminating the controls to customize their user interfaces.
THIS ISN'T PROGRESS!
If designers, instead, created highly customizable user interfaces with MORE options instead of less, they would inevitably have satisfied users.
Who the hell had the idea that giving all users a simplified, static, unchangeable interface was the right way to go? Was it Apple or did it start earlier?
oh, somebody moved my litter box.
I guess I'll have to pee here in the corner from now on...
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
I've tested it, and been testing it for a long time. I've had back and forth with Sinofsky over email on the subject. Here is my take on it.
'Metro' or whatever its name is now, is not really a full screen start menu replacement. Thats too simple a take on this. For a start, it doesn't really work the same way in terms of being a start button and start menu replacement at all. I'd go so far as to say its a pretty poor replacement for what was the start button.
How about this though. It *is* a desktop replacement, and in that, with its interactive applications and notifications means that perhaps the ideal here is to create a modern day real world interactive desktop that is a 2012 variation on previous widgets and gadgets and web based interactive stuff we have seen on the older desktop under Win32. It would seem to me that it works better in a context of embedding the start menu directly into a living desktop. Maybe it might have been better to make the pitch this way and to say that its a more evolved idea. And I think.. vaguely, for me - Metro might well work better if I context it that way. It really doesn't work for me personally in any way at all as a Start button / menu equivelent, replacement, or anything. But if we were going to actually talk about starting on a new footing and have an interactive desktop, where what was a start menu was actually in the desktop - maybe I'd take something of a longer, more sympathetic view. Except.. The Applications are now brain dead fullscreen horrors. You can't easily actually close them. Multitasking now is suddenly much more like some horrid 2012 throwback to OS9, or even Win3.11. Oh the system does multitask, but now the OS just feels like it doesn't. And there are serious and significant problems in Metro and WinRT when you try to apply your ideas of multi-tasking as you did in Win32. Its fortunate that you can still leap to a Win32 desk and environment. If you are used to havig a desktop, and a lot of applications around - which frankly is my home, then perhaps like me you'll find metro is just a horrible place to be stuck, and it gets worse as its used on big res screens. A lot of wasted space, and a serious lack of multiapplication access.
Its also a front end, desktop, UI and framework for new APIs - WinRT. And it has allowed a framework across to the ARM processor family with an entry point into mobility. And this is the part that is generally missed in most overviews about 'Metro'. Its very important to understand that While in 8, The old frameworks and API's remain, I would say that it seems to me that these are really really being left in with a very very firm view of being an end game and a legacy support structure. 'Your old apps will work'. And its Windows. If you break that, a fundamental stop occurs for many buyers. So thats got to stay
WinRT is a deathknell (or its at least supposed to be) for Win32 longterm. Its now going in theory to be at least the ground MS builds its consumer base on. The Start/Desktop will be based around it. The applications and development models will hinge off it. The Microsoft equivelent of the Apple 'App' and 'Media' Stores and Distribution model are going to be based round it, and the application base, and cloud MS brick by brick put together are going to be built on it. At least thats the idea.
Now, as far as I can see, there has been something of a bloodbath inside MS over this. Metro and WinRT has, at least for now, won. Win32 is either dead, or on a very back foot. There are lots of groupings who are still entirely Win32 based in all their stuff and when you run Metro, its pretty painfully obvious how Thin Metro actually is in real terms. 99% of everything I do flips to that Win32 desktop, and by run I mean all my consumer level stuff *and* all the MS stuff I run professionally, Including the bulk of the server side based stuff. If Metro is the victor, that victor has yet to fully own areas like server, exchange and a lot of groups and teams in MS. When I gave 2012 a test run, a heap of stuff i
We`re all equal
Help me out. Why does a better search function require ANY change in UI?
Let's look at their consumer releases:
Windows 3.1: pretty stable
Windows 95: somewhat buggy
Windows 98: pretty good for the time, especially SE. Got a cult following, with some misguided people (I'm looking at you, Teresita) still using it while it should be long dead and buried
Windows Me: "disaster" doesn't start to describe it. I quickly learned to refuse to help friends with computer problems if they were using Me.
Windows XP: still installed on more than 20% of computers, more than 10 years after its launch
Windows Vista: mostly negative reception
Windows 7: well-liked
Windows 8: catastrophy?