Coffeehouse Thread

140 posts

Forum Read Only

This forum has been made read only by the site admins. No new threads or comments can be added.

Conversation Locked

This conversation has been locked by the site admins. No new comments can be made.

New anti-Win8 video is making rounds

Back to Forum: Coffeehouse
  • User profile image
    dentaku

    I installed Win8 on a new HDD a while ago. It took an update the third time I booted into it at it never booted again. I'm so annoyed by the interface (because I DON'T HAVE A TOUCHSCREEN) that I just disconnected that drive and I'm not terribly interested in using it again until I can make it work like a desktop OS should (and it stops messing with my Win7 drive, replacing invalid security IDs etc... when there's noting wrong with the disk and CHKDSK doesn't need to be run on it).

    All they had to do was ask the user "are you using a touchscreen" and if you say no, make the interface work similarly to Win7.

    ALSO: Not being able to use Cleartype in IE10 when I'm NOT using it in portrait mode because I'm using a desktop computer, not a tablet, makes my eyes water.
    Just give us desktop users a way to turn it on if we want it!


    I'm far more impressed with Windows Phone 8 than Win8. Of course WP8 only runs on touchscreen devices so it's suited for the hardware it's installed on. If anything Win8/RT are hurting the good name of WP8.

  • User profile image
    exoteric

    Start stopping and stop starting? Wink

    I still think there ought to be either one class of application that can morph between desktop and tablet UX or two classes optimized for these separate experiences (well, if we ignore mobile applications for a moment.)

    That - and that a desktop machine should not have to bother with a tablet UX. A tablet with an additonal desktop interface is fine however, IMHO.

  • User profile image
    evildictait​or

    , BitFlipper wrote

    LOL, nobody used? With all due respect I think you need to speak for yourself on this one.

    For myself, and everyone enrolled into the Microsoft Customer Experience Program.

    "We'd seen the trend in Windows 7," said Chaitanya Sareen, principal program manager at Microsoft, referring to the telemetry gathered by the Microsoft Customer Experience Improvement Program. "When we evolved the taskbar we saw awesome adoption of pinning [applications] on the taskbar. We are seeing people pin like crazy. And so we saw the Start menu usage dramatically dropping, and that gave us an option. We're saying 'look, Start menu usage is dropping, what can we do about it? What can we do with the Start menu to revive it, to give it some new identity, give it some new power?'"

     

    The fact is that practically nobody used the heirarchy menu ("classic menu") part of the start menu. Sure, people used the front part of the start menu, but that's just a collection of fixed buttons (control panel, my documents, shutdown etc) and a random selection of your most used apps.

    In Windows8 your most used apps appear in your start screen, and you get more than 7 of them at a time. Most of the complaints are that the other buttons aren't there, but they are, they're just less easy to find.

    The problem isn't that Microsoft changed or killed the start menu. It's that they don't make it clear to customers where the buttons have moved to. It really isn't obvious to new users how to turn off the machine, how to get back to the start screen or what the hell the charms bar is or how to get to it, and that's really the problem with Windows8.

    So I stand by my assertion: The start menu was a badly collected assortment of randomly changing crap that people didn't use because they were busy pinning the apps they wanted or using search or desktop shortcuts for the other apps. Practically nobody used the dumping ground of the heirarchy and few people used the small number of ever-shifting randomly selected apps on the front screen.

    "Killing the start menu" is really interface nostalgia and annoyance at not being told where the fixed buttons (like control panel) moved to inside the start screen.

  • User profile image
    wastingtime​withforums

    , evildictait​or wrote

    *snip*

    For myself, and everyone enrolled into the Microsoft Customer Experience Program.

    http://www.technologyreview.com/news/508311/the-woman-charged-with-making-windows-8-succeed/

    When you sign into your Windows PC, one of the things you get asked is whether you'll be part of our customer experience improvement program, and if you will, then you're sending some data to us. Everyone gets asked that. We get terabytes and terabytes of data every day, and we can't possibly use it all.
     
    Yea, the ones that contradict their decisions. Why can't they use them all, not enough servers? Do they read them manually? After seeing Sinofsky in action on his blog, I don't trust their statistics

     

    , evildictait​or wrote

    The fact is that practically nobody used the heirarchy menu ("classic menu") part of the start menu. Sure, people used the front part of the start menu, but that's just a collection of fixed buttons (control panel, my documents, shutdown etc) and a random selection of your most used apps.

    It was the central hub, now there's no central place at all! All the links to the document folders, control panel etc. are randomly spread apart and you need to hunt them all down. The hierarchy menu is even more confusing now than it was with the Start Menu. Despite having the whole screen at their disposal, they have somehow managed to make it more worse - it's an intimidating wall of text that scares far more than the old "All Programs" did. The link to "All Programs" is now hidden to boot.

    , evildictait​or wrote

    In Windows8 your most used apps appear in your start screen, and you get more than 7 of them at a time. Most of the complaints are that the other buttons aren't there, but they are, they're just less easy to find.

    The problem isn't that Microsoft changed or killed the start menu. It's that they don't make it clear to customers where the buttons have moved to. It really isn't obvious to new users how to turn off the machine, how to get back to the start screen or what the hell the charms bar is or how to get to it, and that's really the problem with Windows8.

    The real problems with Windows 8 is that this thing breaks mental processes. Switching applications by switching into a full screen context is *

    , evildictait​or wrote

    So I stand by my assertion: The start menu was a badly collected assortment of randomly changing crap

    Are we talking about live tiles?

    , evildictait​or wrote

    that people didn't use because they were busy pinning the apps they wanted or using search or desktop shortcuts for the other apps.

    Search is now even more bonkered. You can't even drag the items from the result list into applications now.

    , evildictait​or wrote

    Practically nobody used the dumping ground of the heirarchy and few people used the small number of ever-shifting randomly selected apps on the front screen.

    Ah, come on! I see tons of usage of the start menu frontpage. Your assertions are just Sinofsky-BS.

    , evildictait​or wrote

    "Killing the start menu" is really interface nostalgia and annoyance at not being told where the fixed buttons (like control panel) moved to inside the start screen.

    How the heck is the metro menu better? In almost all ways it's worse. Far more things are hidden, it's less central. There's lots of scrolling involved (far more nauseating than scrolling the start menu, because the whole screen scrolls this time), handling with the search results is a mess,  installing new programs shuffles that thing around and many times barfs dozens of items on it, because there are no folders. You have the jarring context switch, you have no indication that it is searchable (yet is is), and on and on. The only improvement is that you have a bit more items at glance before you need to scroll around. Whoopie doo.

    Don't get me wrong, if they would have produced something better than the start menu, I would be all for it. But it's worse. Maybe they can still produce a far better version of the start menu, I hope so, but until then they are forcing people on this gimped piece of code. And that is just ....

  • User profile image
    Craig_​Matthews

    , evildictait​or wrote

    *snip*

    For myself, and everyone enrolled into the Microsoft Customer Experience Program.

    *snip*

    I'll make fun of Microsoft: "Our Microsoft Customer Experience Program statistics indicate that 100% of Windows users participated in the Microsoft Customer Experience Program."

    So, the MS CEP -- you're talking about that checkbox we see now and then in Windows and other MS apps that people uncheck almost automatically, right?

     

     

  • User profile image
    evildictait​or

    , wastingtime​withforums wrote

    How the heck is the metro menu better?

    I didn't say the metro menu is better. I just said the old start menu was crap and that this nostalgia for the old start menu is not bourne out by the data that Microsoft actually collects.

    People just didn't use most of the features in the start menu. It is old fashioned and out of date. In Windows7 the huge majority of users of the start menu were for three features: The shutdown/hibernate/restart button, the search box and the "control panel/computer/documents" buttons. Practically nobody used the folder structure and although the random collection of recently used apps were widely used in Vista, they were very much not used in Windows 7 because people pinned their apps instead.

    So anyway, argue to your hearts content that the metro screen is rubbish or not a suitable replacement, but don't go on about how Microsoft attempting to improve or remove features that people weren't using anyway is somehow going to cause the world to end, or that is was our favourite feature in Windows and that any change of the start menu is somehow going to cause users to be unable to use their machine.

    So, the MS CEP -- you're talking about that checkbox we see now and then in Windows and other MS apps that people uncheck almost automatically, right?

    Perversely, opting out of MSCEP is a data point collected by Microsoft, and the vast majority (>95%) of users (including corporate users) are opted in, although that doesn't include people who don't ever allow their computer to connect to the Internet.

  • User profile image
    BitFlipper

    , evildictait​or wrote

    *snip*

    I didn't say the metro menu is better. I just said the old start menu was crap and that this nostalgia for the old start menu is not bourne out by the data that Microsoft actually collects.

    MS is actually collecting data right now that shows removing the start menu was a big mistake.

  • User profile image
    Ray7

    , Sven Groot wrote

    It is not a more illogical place than the start menu to be sure. The only problem with it is that it's hard to find, because unlike its previous spot it's not in your face the whole time.

    Placing it on the start menu was illogical but no one cared because it was easy to find. I can just about see that 'off' might be considered a 'setting', but it's a little bit of a reach.

    But, once you know where to find it, it's not that hard.

    Obviously, yes.

    And as Jim Young pointed out, you can just push the power button. It is by default set to shut down on desktop PCs (at least it is on mine).

    Is there any place on the desktop that tells people they're okay to do this? Most users I come across are conditioned not to turn the machine off from the power switch. I know it's fairly safe (I've only ever trashed one WIndows7 machine when I did it), but I certainly don't like doing it.

     

  • User profile image
    evildictait​or

    , BitFlipper wrote

    *snip*

    MS is actually collecting data right now that shows removing the start menu was a big mistake.

    No, they are getting some data that shows that replacing the start menu with the start screen in the way that they did might have been a mistake - but since most people triailing Windows8 so far have been techies or have had literally a week since they opened their new laptop present, it's probably too early to tell.

    People didn't like the start menu. Nobody was swanning around in 2011 saying to their neighbour - you know what really makes my day great? The start menu. You know my favourite part of Windows - the one part I couldn't do without? The start menu. God help me if I didn't have a start menu because then I would forget how to breathe.

    This whole show isn't about the start menu. It's about change.

    Windows 95 was going to fail and was signalling the end of Microsoft's support for DOS and that Microsoft was making the interface more "childlike" and taking their OS less seriously. Who needs a graphical menu when you have memorized the manpage for that app? Stupid Microsoft. I don't even have direct write access to the screen buffer, so how can I write my app's graphics in a way that isn't going to be slow now? What a bunch of jokers Microsoft are.

    Windows 2000 takes too much power away from the user - and stuff like Active Desktop show Microsoft's "race to the bottom". They're taking away our Win9x interface that we all always loved and changing it (those b*stards). Is this the end for Microsoft?

    Windows XP - once again, Microsoft shows us that they are willing to sacrifice the power user with "blue balloons" and bubble-wrap interfaces. Most of the Windows 2000 "features" are no longer included by default - you need to install them off the disk now. Even the telnet interface isn't installed by default! Goodness me - Microsoft are on their way out, 2003 - the year of the linux desktop! Thankfully at least you can set Windows XP to look like Windows 2000 via "classic mode". Thank god. We always loved that Windows 2000 interface. It was perfection.

    Oh my golly-gosh! Windows Vista has taken away our beautiful XP interface and replaced it with some kind of glass aero crappy b**! They took away our pinball game and we have to install third-party stuff like WindowBlinds to get our beautiful XP interface back that we always loved. Even our start menu has changed! Curses to you Microsoft! This, surely, is the end of the road for MS. 2006 - the year of the linux desktop for sure! The gadget-sidebar is a total joke and we've lost features like Active Desktop! Is nothing sacred? Silverlight and .NET in-the-box? Just flash and Java wannabees. Microsoft sure looks like it's about to go bankrupt!

    Windows7? It's Windows Vista SP2! Yet another nail in the coffin for Microsoft. Jump-lists? Pinning stuff to the oversized taskbar? When will Microsoft learn they need to put features in for customer to buy it! What a bunch of jokers.

    Windows8! Oh my god! My beautiful aero is gone! And that start menu that I definitely always loved. And my taskbar - that beautiful slightly-bigger-than-it-was-in-XP taskbar that I always loved has been molested by the removal of it's start menu! And gadgets! Oh how I pine for thee! My beautiful gadgets! SURELY this is the end of the desktop and Microsoft forever and ever!

    Thankfully there are great alternatives to Windows now. We can all turn to Linux: They would never force an interface on their users that nobody really liked. Or we could all go to Google who never remove products or features that we might be using and certainly don't read our documents and emails in order to make money, or Apple, where all of our corporate applications run perfectly and who give us full control of our devices to do as we please.

    So anyway, I look forward to Windows9 when we can look forward to whatever other changes we see being the cause of mass hysteria on the Internet and calls for Microsoft's CEO to resign and yet another year of the linux desktop.

    A bit of historical perspective on these things is often useful. It makes you realize that every so often someone predicts the world is going to end. But each and every time, the date comes and goes and the world is still spinning.

    The start menu was crappy. Nobody used it. It got axed. Microsoft shares are still going strong. Get over it.

  • User profile image
    Ray7

    @evildictaitor:

    Actually, I think the start menu is great. The apps I use most often just seem to show up in it of their own accord. Anything else I need, all I have to do is search for it.

  • User profile image
    Ray7

    , wastingtime​withforums wrote

    *snip*

    That madness came from Ballmer's mad envy at Google. Now he has replaced it with Apple-envy. The resulting move to shove metro down the throats of everyone is equally foolish. Maybe more so, since this time the madness wasn't stopped. One could say this time Ballmer bought Yahoo for 44 billion indeed.

    Envy is a frigging dangerous thing at MS!

    I think this this is what concerns me the most. The obsession with Apple seems to have gone as far as MS trying to revise history by banging on about how they conceived their new tablet strategy before Apple conceived the iPad. 

    Big whoop. 

    That MS thinks this is important is quite troubling. Everybody knows they invented the tablet; all Apple did was watch MS mess up for decade and figure out what they were doing wrong.

     

  • User profile image
    BitFlipper

    First of all... What is wrong with the concept of "Starting the Shutdown process..."?

    Second... Just because everyone didn't use all features of the Start menu doesn't mean the whole thing needed to be trashed. Saying "nobody used it" is absolutely false.

    I find going to the Metro screen to find/start applications much more cumbersome. Also, the recently used documents is a pain to use. In fact I don't really know how it is supposed to work in Windows 8. I'm aware of two ways to do it:

    1. Yes I get a jump list for every pinned application. Except I don't want to pin every application to the task bar.
    2. Hey I can always press Windows+R and type "recent" + Enter.

    Big fail.

  • User profile image
    Ray7

    , BitFlipper wrote

    First of all... What is wrong with the concept of "Starting the Shutdown process..."?

    Perhaps the thinking is that off is a setting?

    But it doesn't say off; it says shutdown which is an action, not a state.

     

  • User profile image
    wastingtime​withforums

    , evildictait​or wrote

    *snip*

     

    People didn't like the start menu. Nobody was swanning around in 2011 saying to their neighbour - you know what really makes my day great? The start menu. You know my favourite part of Windows - the one part I couldn't do without? The start menu. God help me if I didn't have a start menu because then I would forget how to breathe.

    No one is thinking about elevators all day, until the one you're using gets damaged.

    , evildictait​or wrote

    This whole show isn't about the start menu. It's about change.

    Indeed, bad change.

    Windows 95 was going to fail and was signalling the end of Microsoft's support for DOS and that Microsoft was making the interface more "childlike" and taking their OS less seriously. Who needs a graphical menu when you have memorized the manpage for that app? Stupid Microsoft. I don't even have direct write access to the screen buffer, so how can I write my app's graphics in a way that isn't going to be slow now? What a bunch of jokers Microsoft are.

    Windows 95 has been covered already.

    Windows 2000 takes too much power away from the user - and stuff like Active Desktop show Microsoft's "race to the bottom". They're taking away our Win9x interface that we all always loved and changing it (those b*stards). Is this the end for Microsoft?

    Bullshit, apart from hyper-deranged freetard circles no one thought these things about Win2000 (Active Desktop was introduced with IE4 in the W95 timeframe). Taking power from the users? If there was any criticism, it was about the hardware requirements compared to NT4 and Win9x, not about the stuff you claim. And even those voices were kinda silent.

    There was a Windows 98 color theme by the way.

    Windows XP - once again, Microsoft shows us that they are willing to sacrifice the power user with "blue balloons" and bubble-wrap interfaces. Most of the Windows 2000 "features" are no longer included by default - you need to install them off the disk now. Even the telnet interface isn't installed by default! Goodness me - Microsoft are on their way out, 2003 - the year of the linux desktop! Thankfully at least you can set Windows XP to look like Windows 2000 via "classic mode". Thank god. We always loved that Windows 2000 interface. It was perfection.

    Luna looked indeed silly compared to Win 2000, and many businesses ran it with the 2000 theme that XP shipped with (notice a trend?) But Luna hasn't made the handling worse.

    , evildictait​or wrote

    Oh my golly-gosh! Windows Vista has taken away our beautiful XP interface and replaced it with some kind of glass aero crappy b**! They took away our pinball game and we have to install third-party stuff like WindowBlinds to get our beautiful XP interface back that we always loved. Even our start menu has changed! Curses to you Microsoft! This, surely, is the end of the road for MS. 2006 - the year of the linux desktop for sure! The gadget-sidebar is a total joke and we've lost features like Active Desktop! Is nothing sacred? Silverlight and .NET in-the-box? Just flash and Java wannabees. Microsoft sure looks like it's about to go bankrupt!

    Total bullcrap. Vista had indeed issues, but not the silly ones you're pretending. No one cried about .NET (Silverlight in Vista?!) and Pinball, the main problems were the bad drivers at start and slowness; partly because of bugs (network file copy), partly because of Microsoft's own stupid recommendations (Vista Ready). And there was the overblown DRM scare. I for one think that Vista was a very good OS after SP1 and after the drivers were fixed, but I am not gonna be deranged enough to think that all the outcry was because of Pinball and.NET.

    Don't fool yourself. 

    Windows7? It's Windows Vista SP2! Yet another nail in the coffin for Microsoft. Jump-lists? Pinning stuff to the oversized taskbar? When will Microsoft learn they need to put features in for customer to buy it! What a bunch of jokers.

    Let's be frank here: Apart from some tweaks, Vista and W7 aren't exactly much different. It's a bug fixed Vista for the most part. (kinda like Win2000 <-> XP) The related server version Server 2008 R2 is called that for good reason.

    Does that makes it a bad OS? No, but let's not pretend that that claim is without any merit

    Windows8! Oh my god! My beautiful aero is gone! And that start menu that I definitely always loved. And my taskbar - that beautiful slightly-bigger-than-it-was-in-XP taskbar that I always loved has been molested by the removal of it's start menu! And gadgets! Oh how I pine for thee! My beautiful gadgets! SURELY this is the end of the desktop and Microsoft forever and ever!

    You're forgetting one crucial thing: All the previous additions were pretty much for the better (except for Luna I guess) and people (and MS) were easily able to point out at the improvements and advancements. That is completely different with Windows 8. People post huge lists of failings all over the net and the fanbots so far weren't able to crack those criticisms down. Even in this very thread you can't claim what the great improvements are with metro menu that warrant the resulting regressions. In fact, you weren't able to squelch the criticisms in this entire forum. Isn't that worrying? Sure, there were always detractors, especially coming from the FOSS brigade, but never before was a Windows OS this hated by the Windows devs and admins themselves. Something is definitely different this time. I can't remember when MS censored posts to such extend like Sinofsky did on his blog (or ever in fact). I can't remember when there was such a silence on Microsoft's part on the issues.

    Thankfully there are great alternatives to Windows now. We can all turn to Linux: They would never force an interface on their users that nobody really liked. Or we could all go to Google who never remove products or features that we might be using and certainly don't read our documents and emails in order to make money, or Apple, where all of our corporate applications run perfectly and who give us full control of our devices to do as we please.

    I actually liked MS products and have no illusions about the competition. That's why Win8 is so infuriating.

    And it's not only about the metro-menu and all the headache that brings, it's the whole approach. For example the darn "apps" themselves: How hard could it have been to include a "Pro mode" (with scary "You're on your own now!" warnings if needed) or something like that which would allow sideloading? They could still have their store and still make the enthusiasts
    and "Pros" happy. It would have been easy to make the Metro-Notro-Win8stylestoreapps-whatever more appealing to the laptop and desktop users. How about more features availble the bigger the screen is? "Windows has detected you have a 24 inch screen, multi-tasking and windowing of Metro apps is enabled now". Stuff like that wouldn't be too hard, freeware like Bluestacks does it! But no, Microsoft has chosen the most limiting and existing-customers-repulsing way possible. That is why there are complaints and bad feeling all around. That's where the "walled garden" and "dictatorial" accusations come from. MS was a  quite comfortable choice between the strict Apple- and the free-for-all linux world, pretty much the golden middle, now they are doing their darndest to change themselves into a totally redundant MicroApple and this generates ill felings. The many game developers were annoyed for good reasons IMHO. And let's not start on the limitations of the metro apps.. Oh sure, they aren't forcing metro down on you, except they do:

    Now let's forget the start screen, just open up an audio file on the desktop.. BAM - You're on a full screen monstrosity, with "parental advisory" graphics from obscene rap album covers and stuff like that. With no obvious way to get out of it. PROGRESS. They wanted to simplify Windows 8. That's why instead of clicking on an easy to spot bright red X, (that's faaar to power user for the common idiot to understand) you need to "grab" the application by its invisible head and drag it down the drain so that it can disappear. And if you managed to close it, you're back on the metro screen instead of the desktop (where you started). Just fabulous! So just playing a darn audio file means switching through completely different GUI environments and playing a mini-adventure. Same is happening when you open up pictures and movie files. Yes, that's what I call a great user experience right there. Then there's the DVD codec issue and WMP not playing them even if you have the codecs installed, mail apps that can't handle common protocols.. No one is going to change their provider just because subpar OS update decided it wants to out-hipster the whole world.

    Sure, you can hack-around to link WMP back to the files etc. but shouldn't an "upgrade" make stuff.. you know, better?! How's stuff like that a good default experience? In the first beta versions, the welcome screen could not be clicked away. You had to drag it away with the mouse! Totally insane. That's one of the very few things they have fixed, but the fact that something like that made it into an alpha version, yet alone beta, makes it clear what kind of carelessness the "design" of Win8 truly was/is. I am pretty sure the main reason the server got metro too is to prevent "power users" running Server 2012 as a desktop replacement.

    All that is just NOT comparable to the previous versions. Never before were there such regressions in usability of Windows and "feel" of the company. You cannot will that fact just away.

    Then there's the whole subplot about their handling of developers and the whole Silverlight affair to promote the W8 craplets - killing SL just when it was going strong as LOB tool. The amount of badwil they have created with this OS among their (former) allies, devs and supporters is just staggering.

  • User profile image
    dentaku

    You know, the Start Menu isn't something I use much at all. I usually just click on the start orb and type the words I'm looking for.
    I love the search in Win8's start menu but I'd like to see that search show up in something that's NOT fullscreen that looks more like a traditional start menu so us non-touchscreen users can take advantage of it when we're in desktop mode.

    It's mostly all the needless mousing around and messing with "gestures" that are far more suited for touchscreens when I'm using a mouse, keyboard and two non-touch monitors. It is needlessly clumsy and even worse with standard a mouse touchpad.

    ALSO. When Vista made the shutdown button actually NOT shutdown the computer (if I remember correctly) it annoyed allot of people including me. It was great when Win7 made the Shutdown button actually do just that plus it was very easy to find again. I doubt the average user could find the Win8 shutdown button without allot of swishing around with pop-out menus that aren't suited for mice in any way.
    When you're using a desktop PC or a laptop "shut down" should shut off your computer COMPLELTEY DEAD, not hibernate or sleep and it should be easy to find because the power button on many desktops isn't in the most user friendly place. Mine's behind a door on my giant case under my desk. You also don't want a laptop accidentally not being shut down or coming out of sleep when it's in a bag.

    When I buy a Surface Pro I will be happy to use all this new stuff, but don't force it on me on my desktop PC with a mouse, keyboard and 2 monitors. clumsy cumsy clumsy.

  • User profile image
    evildictait​or

    , wastingtime​withforums wrote

    No one cried about Pinball

    http://blogs.msdn.com/b/oldnewthing/archive/2012/12/18/10378851.aspx#10379111

    I kind of got bored with the rest of your rant. Didn't bother to read it.

    If you don't like Win8, vote with your wallet and don't use it.

  • User profile image
    ScottWelker

    @evildictaitor: Useful, cogent commentary. Thanks.

    I hope it's understood though this does not dismiss all criticisms or, in the case of my earlier reply, observations.

    Still, change is always hard and usually met with some inherent opposition. Good post!

  • User profile image
    Lizard​Rumsfeld

    If you don't like Win8, vote with your wallet and don't use it.

    Yeah, screw discussion about a product in discussion forums.  Cheerleading only please!

    BTW, you don't need to type 1000 words on the tired, crusty hand-wave-away opinion of "People Don't Like Change", which is the go-to argument for Win8 defenders it appears (Ed Bott is apparently making his living on it currently).  Well, I guess you do when you have to invoke revisionist history like you did, really these "arguments" you're presenting for opposition of previous MS OS's are largely nonsense, as wastingtimewithforums ably revealed. Classifying the response to your repetitive diatribe as a 'rant' (then proudly stating you're ignoring it) is just thick with irony.

    You can like Win8 just fine, but to argue this is just "more of the same" as in past years is just sticking your head in the sand.  The opposition to it is far more vocal, the stakes are much higher, and the mind-boggling inattention to detail should be obvious to anyone with any sense of proper design principles.

    iOS is significantly different from Windows.  So is Windows Phone.  OSX is quite different as well.  Yet I enjoy my iPad, my Win7 desktop PC, my mbook Air and my Nokia WP7 very much.  So this is not just people unwilling to accept change, it's people unwilling to accept change that makes little sense, except in the cynical case where it's MS trying to desperately crack into a market and wants to cram interface elements far more applicable to touchscreens onto platforms where they don't really apply. 

    Despite all the difference in those platforms listed however, they all have one aspect in common - their interfaces are extremely well suited to the platform they primarily run on. 

Conversation locked

This conversation has been locked by the site admins. No new comments can be made.