As for new users.... take a look at the extremely positive reaction to MeeGo among non Linux users. They are buying over priced hardware which is EOLed with poor support because they love the UI so much. That's what Maemo (which failed because of Gnome 2) should have been and had it arrived a few years early (i.e. no switch) it might have had 20% marketshare.
WHAT IS IT SUPPOSED TO FIX? What was missing in the classic desktop user design that is being fixed in by either Unity, Gnome 3 or Metro?
Scalability and resolution independence. The ability to use multiple input methods. The ability to move data independently of applications The ability to collaboratively work on documents
The desktop isn't broke (until Windows 8). Quit trying to fix it.
Then why are desktop sales decreasing? Why is computer literacy among the young falling? Why are desktop software sales decreasing? Why are the percentage of households owning computers decreasing?
And don't forget that QT truly does have an excellent tablet interface in MeeGo. I agree that's Gnome's purpose is gone. And I especially agree with you about GNUStep which I wish had gotten more love.
That being said, Gnome 3 is really creative. A few compromises and it could be excellent. I think Cinnamon which is Gnome 3 with the compromises is likely to be really a quite good GUI.
There are already 3 major forks: Unity, Mate and Cinnamon. The Gnome guys want to be innovative, and they have been. Gnome 3 is really interesting and creative, but cutting edge is bleeding edge.
Your numbers 2 and 3 happened when Maemo (Gnome based) became MeeGo (KDE based). It did happen. They essentially lost a huge contract because of Gnome 2's inflexibility.
In order to really get somewhere with this idea, they will need to fork their entire stack and take charge of it the way Google has with Android.
That's the idea of Google OS. To create enough of an abstraction layer that you can write to Google even if it is running on Windows.
He also doesn't make a distinction between system developer and app developer.
Good point. You're right hadn't noticed that.
I've never seen a DE project implement a suggestion I've made.
Well lets assume Gnome took 200 suggestions. From the perspective of a Gnome developer they are responding to feedback. From the perspective of end users who made 200,000 suggestions not so much.
If they made the Metro applications run on a desktop interface, everybody would be just happy
If they made the Metro applications run on a desktop interface then desktop applications would run better and end users would ignore Metro as just some option alternative GUI. The goal is to make Metro applications run better, to create a strong incentive to switch interfaces. This is what Microsoft did when they switched people away from DOS or what Apple did when they switched people away from Classic. Microsoft is going to want to move quickly towards making desktop applications feel like a guest OS on Metro.
Hierarchy is a series problem for about 80% of computer users. They don't understand the concept of folders within folders. Or even that they should be asking "where questions". I know it sounds crazy to think something this basic breaks down beyond 2 levels but it does.
The top 20% that get the hierarchy can just use the rapid application finder from the keyboard on Windows 8, and use the menus directly. Or for that matter they can likely change the UI from the default no problem.
. Hell, a year or so later, W7 came shipped on very low end Atoms with 1GB of RAM; that wouldn't have even been possible with Vista, and those machines would not have sold nearly as well with XP.
I couldn't parse this sentence. I think this is where you were making your final point. But no Vista was released: January 30, 2007;
A high end laptop at the time (Apple Macbook pro introduced October 24, 2006) had 2g min with a 120g hard drive min. Even a mid range system (the Macbook non pro) had 1g standard and a 80g hard drive. I don't see any reason Microsoft couldn't have targeted high end system and said XP was for the lower range. Just admit that Vista doesn't run well on the bottom 80% of systems.
I'll tell you what Office for OSX does: it makes Microsoft a lot of money
There used to be a statistic that Microsoft made $100 more per user for Apple than for Windows because Apple people bought more Microsoft software. But the fact is:
a) Microsoft never resolved their VBA problem for mac b) Microsoft never ported Visio, project, Lync... to Mac c) Microsoft doesn't treat Mac bugs as critical for example their retina problems
I agree that Mac users would like to use Office so it cuts both ways. Microsoft does a good job with Office and Apple people stay in the fold, OTOH allowing Apple to run office means more people switch to Apple.
The UI concepts DO NOT WORK with those form factors. And while many people are enjoying tablets and smartphones, there is still a great need for the more traditional form factors if you are doing anything other than multimedia or web consumption.
Probably. What Microsoft wants to ensure though is that this is at the application mode level and so only that mode within the application requires those form factors. So for example a spreadsheet might require a mouse and keyboard to make heavy changes but light editing and certainly viewing shouldn't need those sorts of devices. The spreadsheet should have modes that are tablet accessible.
The "Desktop PC" paradigm in business is not going away any time soon. It is a well known and understood style and ergonomically works very very well. Metro just doesn't work in that paradigm.
Microsoft disagrees with your premise. They see a multi-paragidm way of working which extends beyond just the desktop. Certainly the desktop exists but the applications and the data need to cross paradigms.
I anticipate that we will see Metro and the touchscreen UI concept for Desktops go by the wayside within two years. Win8 will get patched to remove the Metro UI (With Metro Apps running in non-fullscreen windows instead) the Start button and Start menu will return and that will be the end of this abortive experiment in "blended" UIs.
If that happens, Microsoft is finished in the consumer space. I don't think they are willing to lose consumer. They remember far too well how they beat IBM, Unisys and DEC for the enterprise desktop.
If I have to start switch to a different app enviroment, why not make it Linux.
For some of them that might happen. The hope (from Microsoft's perspective) is that Linux screws up the way they did with Netbooks and Nokia's original move and can't get the GUI / application issues worked out fast enough when Microsoft creates the windows. But this is a real risk.
Guess MS is copying Apple's market strategy, expensive media consumer devices. 'Expert' users are expensive to support, where a consumer will take what's given to them and like it.
Given Apple's share of high end users. I don't see any evidence that this is Apple's strategy. Apple handles demanding users by giving them excellent systems at a high cost.
Well OK here are the main points from the interview
1) He wants to move towards distributing Gnome more directly in particular to Windows. 2) He likes the fact that Gnome has clear direction. In his mind the crisis was when Gnome 2 started wrapping up and the Gnome developers didn't know what to do. While for the developers Gnome 3 has been full of direction 3) The Canonical divorce is continuing and Ubuntu will not be the testing platform going forward. Gnome OS is coming somewhat out of the desire to have a stable place to test Gnome. 4) He really believes the diversity of the open source eco system makes it impossible to support software. 5) He believes that the Gnome community is responding to the criticism they can extract, i.e. the constructive criticism. For example changes to the UI file movement and getting rid of the "copy and paste" applied to files.
In terms of corporations they should skip Windows 8 for a few years. Windows 8 is aimed at consumer. Windows 7 is an excellent enterprise OS.
In terms of PC is dead.... The data is clear
1) Levels of PC literacy among the young have been dropping sharply for a decade. 2) Percentage of households with a traditional PC are down almost 16% 3) PC replacement cycle is up from about 2-3 years to 5-7 years and still increasing. 4) Software replacement cycles are now increasing with fewer people willing to pay for later versions.
Absolutely pushing up the price of hardware is going to create an opening for FOS software at the low end. Normally Microsoft would want to avoid that. But if the alternative is losing consumer all together they would rather create the opening.
June 30, 2008 end of retail sales October 22, 2010 end of systems with XP preinstalled April 14, 2009 end of mainstream support April 8, 2014 end of extended support (XP below service pack 3 has earlier dates)
What the end of extended support means is: a) No more security updates b) No more option of paid support c) No more maintenance of website information on MSDN....
With traditional hardware you shouldn't want it. Stick with 7. What it does is create an OS for the next year or two's worth of hardware to target. And that's when advantages start happening.
That's the problem. They don't want there to be a difference between tablets and laptops. Right now, you don't have the right hardware for that.
microsoft is getting their earful of leaving the default gui everyone likes alone
Power users like it. For newer users especially the young they don't like it at all. Computer literacy and familiarity with Windows is falling fast and has been for a decade.
Because they have a long terms vision of ubiquitous computing. They know how to get there mostly but they face a huge chicken and egg problem.
1) The hardware guys need an OS and a few applications to tune against. But mostly they need users willing to pay substantially more for more expensive hardware.
2) The developers need a hardware and an OS to test their applications against.
They don't want you using a desktop interface. They want to encourage the switch to metro based applications. What you are suggesting would do the opposite.
Apple went from 2% of the desktop marketshare to 12% now in the USA. Apple went from losing money on desktop to making almost all the hardware profits in the industry, over 90%. And Apple's share among computers over $1000k reached as high as 90% 3 years ago (though has since fallen).
No it isn't. OSX uses the XNU kernel which is not the FreeBSD kernel. Darwin is a BSD and the other layers closest to FreeBSD, thus it is often an easy recompile between FreeBSD and Darwin. But the kernel is one of the areas of substantial difference.
What are your options if you want the lastest Windows OS but don't like the interface formerly known as Metro?
Windows has always allowed for skinning. Anyone who could handle Linux will be able to reskin Windows 8 and replace the UI. For example take a look at http://www.stardock.com/
Slashdot Mirror
Even the new shell is customizable.
As for new users.... take a look at the extremely positive reaction to MeeGo among non Linux users. They are buying over priced hardware which is EOLed with poor support because they love the UI so much. That's what Maemo (which failed because of Gnome 2) should have been and had it arrived a few years early (i.e. no switch) it might have had 20% marketshare.
WHAT IS IT SUPPOSED TO FIX? What was missing in the classic desktop user design that is being fixed in by either Unity, Gnome 3 or Metro?
Scalability and resolution independence.
The ability to use multiple input methods.
The ability to move data independently of applications
The ability to collaboratively work on documents
Should I keep going?
The desktop isn't broke (until Windows 8). Quit trying to fix it.
Then why are desktop sales decreasing?
Why is computer literacy among the young falling?
Why are desktop software sales decreasing?
Why are the percentage of households owning computers decreasing?
Under what fair criteria is that not "broke"?
And don't forget that QT truly does have an excellent tablet interface in MeeGo. I agree that's Gnome's purpose is gone. And I especially agree with you about GNUStep which I wish had gotten more love.
That being said, Gnome 3 is really creative. A few compromises and it could be excellent. I think Cinnamon which is Gnome 3 with the compromises is likely to be really a quite good GUI.
There are already 3 major forks: Unity, Mate and Cinnamon. The Gnome guys want to be innovative, and they have been. Gnome 3 is really interesting and creative, but cutting edge is bleeding edge.
Your numbers 2 and 3 happened when Maemo (Gnome based) became MeeGo (KDE based). It did happen. They essentially lost a huge contract because of Gnome 2's inflexibility.
In order to really get somewhere with this idea, they will need to fork their entire stack and take charge of it the way Google has with Android.
That's the idea of Google OS. To create enough of an abstraction layer that you can write to Google even if it is running on Windows.
He also doesn't make a distinction between system developer and app developer.
Good point. You're right hadn't noticed that.
I've never seen a DE project implement a suggestion I've made.
Well lets assume Gnome took 200 suggestions. From the perspective of a Gnome developer they are responding to feedback. From the perspective of end users who made 200,000 suggestions not so much.
If they made the Metro applications run on a desktop interface, everybody would be just happy
If they made the Metro applications run on a desktop interface then desktop applications would run better and end users would ignore Metro as just some option alternative GUI. The goal is to make Metro applications run better, to create a strong incentive to switch interfaces. This is what Microsoft did when they switched people away from DOS or what Apple did when they switched people away from Classic. Microsoft is going to want to move quickly towards making desktop applications feel like a guest OS on Metro.
Hierarchy is a series problem for about 80% of computer users. They don't understand the concept of folders within folders. Or even that they should be asking "where questions". I know it sounds crazy to think something this basic breaks down beyond 2 levels but it does.
The top 20% that get the hierarchy can just use the rapid application finder from the keyboard on Windows 8, and use the menus directly. Or for that matter they can likely change the UI from the default no problem.
Interesting, I got the email notification on this comment. Hmmm wonder what happened.
. Hell, a year or so later, W7 came shipped on very low end Atoms with 1GB of RAM; that wouldn't have even been possible with Vista, and those machines would not have sold nearly as well with XP.
I couldn't parse this sentence. I think this is where you were making your final point. But no Vista was released: January 30, 2007;
A high end laptop at the time (Apple Macbook pro introduced October 24, 2006) had 2g min with a 120g hard drive min. Even a mid range system (the Macbook non pro) had 1g standard and a 80g hard drive. I don't see any reason Microsoft couldn't have targeted high end system and said XP was for the lower range. Just admit that Vista doesn't run well on the bottom 80% of systems.
I'll tell you what Office for OSX does: it makes Microsoft a lot of money
There used to be a statistic that Microsoft made $100 more per user for Apple than for Windows because Apple people bought more Microsoft software. But the fact is:
a) Microsoft never resolved their VBA problem for mac
b) Microsoft never ported Visio, project, Lync... to Mac
c) Microsoft doesn't treat Mac bugs as critical for example their retina problems
I agree that Mac users would like to use Office so it cuts both ways. Microsoft does a good job with Office and Apple people stay in the fold, OTOH allowing Apple to run office means more people switch to Apple.
It's not about "Metro Apps" and "Metro Hardware"
Actually it is. Don't dismiss those issues.
The UI concepts DO NOT WORK with those form factors. And while many people are enjoying tablets and smartphones, there is still a great need for the more traditional form factors if you are doing anything other than multimedia or web consumption.
Probably. What Microsoft wants to ensure though is that this is at the application mode level and so only that mode within the application requires those form factors. So for example a spreadsheet might require a mouse and keyboard to make heavy changes but light editing and certainly viewing shouldn't need those sorts of devices. The spreadsheet should have modes that are tablet accessible.
The "Desktop PC" paradigm in business is not going away any time soon. It is a well known and understood style and ergonomically works very very well. Metro just doesn't work in that paradigm.
Microsoft disagrees with your premise. They see a multi-paragidm way of working which extends beyond just the desktop. Certainly the desktop exists but the applications and the data need to cross paradigms.
I anticipate that we will see Metro and the touchscreen UI concept for Desktops go by the wayside within two years. Win8 will get patched to remove the Metro UI (With Metro Apps running in non-fullscreen windows instead) the Start button and Start menu will return and that will be the end of this abortive experiment in "blended" UIs.
If that happens, Microsoft is finished in the consumer space. I don't think they are willing to lose consumer. They remember far too well how they beat IBM, Unisys and DEC for the enterprise desktop.
If I have to start switch to a different app enviroment, why not make it Linux.
For some of them that might happen. The hope (from Microsoft's perspective) is that Linux screws up the way they did with Netbooks and Nokia's original move and can't get the GUI / application issues worked out fast enough when Microsoft creates the windows. But this is a real risk.
Guess MS is copying Apple's market strategy, expensive media consumer devices. 'Expert' users are expensive to support, where a consumer will take what's given to them and like it.
Given Apple's share of high end users. I don't see any evidence that this is Apple's strategy. Apple handles demanding users by giving them excellent systems at a high cost.
Phones and tablet. iOS and Android. They are substantially decreasing their use of desktop software and desktop OSes.
Well OK here are the main points from the interview
1) He wants to move towards distributing Gnome more directly in particular to Windows.
2) He likes the fact that Gnome has clear direction. In his mind the crisis was when Gnome 2 started wrapping up and the Gnome developers didn't know what to do. While for the developers Gnome 3 has been full of direction
3) The Canonical divorce is continuing and Ubuntu will not be the testing platform going forward. Gnome OS is coming somewhat out of the desire to have a stable place to test Gnome.
4) He really believes the diversity of the open source eco system makes it impossible to support software.
5) He believes that the Gnome community is responding to the criticism they can extract, i.e. the constructive criticism. For example changes to the UI file movement and getting rid of the "copy and paste" applied to files.
In terms of corporations they should skip Windows 8 for a few years. Windows 8 is aimed at consumer. Windows 7 is an excellent enterprise OS.
In terms of PC is dead.... The data is clear
1) Levels of PC literacy among the young have been dropping sharply for a decade.
2) Percentage of households with a traditional PC are down almost 16%
3) PC replacement cycle is up from about 2-3 years to 5-7 years and still increasing.
4) Software replacement cycles are now increasing with fewer people willing to pay for later versions.
Absolutely pushing up the price of hardware is going to create an opening for FOS software at the low end. Normally Microsoft would want to avoid that. But if the alternative is losing consumer all together they would rather create the opening.
June 30, 2008 end of retail sales
October 22, 2010 end of systems with XP preinstalled
April 14, 2009 end of mainstream support
April 8, 2014 end of extended support
(XP below service pack 3 has earlier dates)
What the end of extended support means is:
a) No more security updates
b) No more option of paid support
c) No more maintenance of website information on MSDN....
With traditional hardware you shouldn't want it. Stick with 7. What it does is create an OS for the next year or two's worth of hardware to target. And that's when advantages start happening.
That's the problem. They don't want there to be a difference between tablets and laptops. Right now, you don't have the right hardware for that.
microsoft is getting their earful of leaving the default gui everyone likes alone
Power users like it. For newer users especially the young they don't like it at all. Computer literacy and familiarity with Windows is falling fast and has been for a decade.
Because they have a long terms vision of ubiquitous computing. They know how to get there mostly but they face a huge chicken and egg problem.
1) The hardware guys need an OS and a few applications to tune against. But mostly they need users willing to pay substantially more for more expensive hardware.
2) The developers need a hardware and an OS to test their applications against.
So who can go first?
They don't want you using a desktop interface. They want to encourage the switch to metro based applications. What you are suggesting would do the opposite.
Apple went from 2% of the desktop marketshare to 12% now in the USA. Apple went from losing money on desktop to making almost all the hardware profits in the industry, over 90%. And Apple's share among computers over $1000k reached as high as 90% 3 years ago (though has since fallen).
No it isn't. OSX uses the XNU kernel which is not the FreeBSD kernel. Darwin is a BSD and the other layers closest to FreeBSD, thus it is often an easy recompile between FreeBSD and Darwin. But the kernel is one of the areas of substantial difference.
What are your options if you want the lastest Windows OS but don't like the interface formerly known as Metro?
Windows has always allowed for skinning. Anyone who could handle Linux will be able to reskin Windows 8 and replace the UI. For example take a look at http://www.stardock.com/