Metro tiles are fine in the Windows 8. The full screen apps make less sense on a desktop, but not necessarily no sense in every situation. If Microsoft made all of the Metro apps able to operate in either full screen or standard desktop modes at the user's discretion (similar to Chrome for Windows 8) there'd be absolutely no problem with it on desktop.
I can imagine it's the worst on a TV, where everything has to be bigger and you're using a controller, but Xbox interfaces have always been horrible and I gave up on mine years ago.
Only users aren't "bound" to Metro on Windows 8. I've been running it for a year and aside from the idiotic default associations (which you change once and forget about) and the start screen (which is actually a huge improvement over the start menu, although "boot to desktop" should have been included from the start), I haven't _had_ to use any of the Metro shit once.
The hate on Metro is way overblown. Microsoft (for once) tried to make a really bold, innovative move. They botched the job of educating users on the changes, and didn't quite get there with the Metro/Desktop integration (they should really look to Chrome on Windows 8 for how that should have been handled), but it's (at worst) a little different and a little better than Windows 7.
Why would "Fitts's Law" be applicable to a global menu, even if it mattered (it doesn't)? The menu isn't in the corners. I've also never met anyone who took it on faith that their mouse pointer got to a point on the screen without looking.
Why does a theoretical benefit in motor functionality (easier to go up-left than up-right for right-handed users) matter when (again) it's about where the user is _looking_, not what is imperceptibly "easier" for their hand to carry out?
Why are so many of you idiots still going on about the Windows 8 start screen when you clearly haven't known how to use Windows since at least the ’90s? Clicking through trees of redundant folders has not been the optimal way to use Windows in a long, long time. Windows 8 makes actual common use cases for the former start menu functionality easier, and even improves things if you want to click-click-click like a baby as well. Windows 8.1 takes a step backward by tacking on a start button that provides no useful functionality while taking up space on the taskbar.
Unlike the Windows 8 start screen, the stupid Mac Launchpad provides nothing whatsoever.
It's amazing that you think such stupid thoughts are worth sharing.
There is no "market" to set a price when you have one company, operating under a government-sanctioned monopoly, controlling all Internet access with speeds over 5Mbit.
XP was never that great even when it was recent. It's certainly much, much worse than Windows 7, 8, and even Vista. Fucking well past time to let that shit die.
I think the difference now is that instead of most people being somewhat incompetent C/C++/etc. programmers, they're less than competent Java/.Net/JavaScript programmers. The level of competency may not have changed, but the bar for competency has lowered so overall quality has fallen a lot.
Windows 8 has _always_ had a "Start Menu." It just looks like a bunch of tiles. People who haven't used it complain that it looks different and whine like babies because change scares them.
Guess what? Microsoft was right. The Start Menu is just a collection of links and a way to access the quick search functionality, two tasks that are legitimately better served by the tiles.
The only legitimate complaint in any of that garbage is the criticism of Windows RT, which is irrelevant to a discussion of desktop Windows 8 and is admittedly complete shit. Are you really this stupid, pal?
How about you try listing a few actual issues with Windows 8. I'm still waiting to hear any from the complainers, who seem to exclusively fall into one of two camps: 1) bitches who can't get over the start menu and 2) bitches who haven't fucking used it.
If you're going to claim Windows 7 is fine but Windows 8 is not you're an idiot who doesn't know what they're talking about. They're practically the same thing when it comes down to actually using them.
You do realize that you can set Windows Media Player as the default program for all supported filetypes from the "default programs" dialog, right? No, of course you're too fucking stupid to know anything that simple.
Again, is there anyone who would care to explain how Windows 8 is in any meaningful or significant way different to use than Windows 7? It's fucking not and anyone who has actually used it would know that.
Have you even used Windows 8 on a desktop? Care to explain how the workflow is different in any meaningful way? Because I've been using Windows 8 exclusively for months at work and have found it to be 5% "different," 5% better, and 90% identical.
Which is exactly how things work in Windows 8 as well, you just "type away" on the start "screen" rather than the start "menu."
Outside of running "Metro" apps in Windows, this "serious proposal" doesn't seem to have any "serious" ideas for improving Windows 8. It just comes off as yet another set of idiots who want to cry because things change sometimes. In actual use Windows 8 and Windows 7 are basically identical if you don't use the touch controls, some of the stuff just looks different.
Slashdot Mirror
No, it's _his_ basement. Mom said he can do whatever he wants with it, as long as she can still get to the washer and dryer.
Metro tiles are fine in the Windows 8. The full screen apps make less sense on a desktop, but not necessarily no sense in every situation. If Microsoft made all of the Metro apps able to operate in either full screen or standard desktop modes at the user's discretion (similar to Chrome for Windows 8) there'd be absolutely no problem with it on desktop.
I can imagine it's the worst on a TV, where everything has to be bigger and you're using a controller, but Xbox interfaces have always been horrible and I gave up on mine years ago.
Only users aren't "bound" to Metro on Windows 8. I've been running it for a year and aside from the idiotic default associations (which you change once and forget about) and the start screen (which is actually a huge improvement over the start menu, although "boot to desktop" should have been included from the start), I haven't _had_ to use any of the Metro shit once.
The hate on Metro is way overblown. Microsoft (for once) tried to make a really bold, innovative move. They botched the job of educating users on the changes, and didn't quite get there with the Metro/Desktop integration (they should really look to Chrome on Windows 8 for how that should have been handled), but it's (at worst) a little different and a little better than Windows 7.
It's certainly a whole lot better than Mac OS X.
Why would "Fitts's Law" be applicable to a global menu, even if it mattered (it doesn't)? The menu isn't in the corners. I've also never met anyone who took it on faith that their mouse pointer got to a point on the screen without looking.
Why does a theoretical benefit in motor functionality (easier to go up-left than up-right for right-handed users) matter when (again) it's about where the user is _looking_, not what is imperceptibly "easier" for their hand to carry out?
Why are so many of you idiots still going on about the Windows 8 start screen when you clearly haven't known how to use Windows since at least the ’90s? Clicking through trees of redundant folders has not been the optimal way to use Windows in a long, long time. Windows 8 makes actual common use cases for the former start menu functionality easier, and even improves things if you want to click-click-click like a baby as well. Windows 8.1 takes a step backward by tacking on a start button that provides no useful functionality while taking up space on the taskbar.
Unlike the Windows 8 start screen, the stupid Mac Launchpad provides nothing whatsoever.
It's amazing that you think such stupid thoughts are worth sharing.
There is no "market" to set a price when you have one company, operating under a government-sanctioned monopoly, controlling all Internet access with speeds over 5Mbit.
XP was never that great even when it was recent. It's certainly much, much worse than Windows 7, 8, and even Vista. Fucking well past time to let that shit die.
I think the difference now is that instead of most people being somewhat incompetent C/C++/etc. programmers, they're less than competent Java/.Net/JavaScript programmers. The level of competency may not have changed, but the bar for competency has lowered so overall quality has fallen a lot.
That actually can make you a monopoly. It's just that being a monopoly isn't necessarily illegal.
"...happens to turn up profiles like this one which appear to reveal more codenames..."
Is it really impossible to find a single motherfucker left on the fucking Internet who knows when to use "which" and when to use "that"?
Windows 8 has _always_ had a "Start Menu." It just looks like a bunch of tiles. People who haven't used it complain that it looks different and whine like babies because change scares them.
Guess what? Microsoft was right. The Start Menu is just a collection of links and a way to access the quick search functionality, two tasks that are legitimately better served by the tiles.
Written like someone who has actually used Windows 8. Unsurprising that it gets modded "troll" by idiots who haven't.
Have you actually used Windows 8? You don't seem to understand how it works at all.
The only legitimate complaint in any of that garbage is the criticism of Windows RT, which is irrelevant to a discussion of desktop Windows 8 and is admittedly complete shit. Are you really this stupid, pal?
Neither of which take cartridges...
How about you try listing a few actual issues with Windows 8. I'm still waiting to hear any from the complainers, who seem to exclusively fall into one of two camps: 1) bitches who can't get over the start menu and 2) bitches who haven't fucking used it.
If you're going to claim Windows 7 is fine but Windows 8 is not you're an idiot who doesn't know what they're talking about. They're practically the same thing when it comes down to actually using them.
You do realize that you can set Windows Media Player as the default program for all supported filetypes from the "default programs" dialog, right? No, of course you're too fucking stupid to know anything that simple.
Again, is there anyone who would care to explain how Windows 8 is in any meaningful or significant way different to use than Windows 7? It's fucking not and anyone who has actually used it would know that.
Windows 7 and Windows 8 are so fucking similar to use. Have you even touched a Windows 8 desktop? The parent isn't insightful, it's ignorant as shit.
You clearly haven't used Windows 8 and are making a fool of yourself.
Have you even used Windows 8 on a desktop? Care to explain how the workflow is different in any meaningful way? Because I've been using Windows 8 exclusively for months at work and have found it to be 5% "different," 5% better, and 90% identical.
Which is exactly how things work in Windows 8 as well, you just "type away" on the start "screen" rather than the start "menu."
Outside of running "Metro" apps in Windows, this "serious proposal" doesn't seem to have any "serious" ideas for improving Windows 8. It just comes off as yet another set of idiots who want to cry because things change sometimes. In actual use Windows 8 and Windows 7 are basically identical if you don't use the touch controls, some of the stuff just looks different.
This is the default in Windows 8.
No, it's just terrible. Better to have no computer at all than deal with the bullshit involved with a Mac desktop.
So how is that different from any other Apple product? Last thing I ever want to do after using a Mac is use one again.
OS X is an awful desktop. Ironically, Windows 8 actually does a lot of the stupid shit that makes OS X so awful, but in a much less awful manner.
So you feel inferior when talking to people who are less delusional than you? How is that their fault?