Coffeehouse Thread

29 posts

Forum Read Only

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

how about this: make a COMPLICATED metro app

Back to Forum: Coffeehouse
  • User profile image
    jamie

    the biggest gripes with metro apps is they dont do anything and offer no options

    and ... that is true

    so if anyone can prove that this isnt so - it should be MS

     

    take Mail, pictures, video/tv and redo them with MORE features and key shortcuts than their old counter parts

    show how a nice looking metro app can be even more powerful that old desktop apps

     

    if you cant - then stop with the metro apps - because they are pretty useless

    (i could write 3 pages on how bad Mail is even though it LOOKS fantastic - it does nothing)

  • User profile image
    bondsbw

    I like the idea.  I don't think Microsoft will do it for those apps, because those apps are intended to be very basic... not proofs-of-concept or highly complex systems.

    I expect to see this come from third parties who are interested in supplying apps that either go beyond the first party apps or do something entirely different.  (But Microsoft could help by curating a small list of good examples, once they are available.)

  • User profile image
    magicalclick

    ???? Those are already UA.

    Leaving WM on 5/2018 if no apps, no dedicated billboards where I drive, no Store name.
    Last modified
  • User profile image
    bondsbw

    @magicalclick: Right, but they are missing certain features that older versions have, and Jamie is concerned that it's because UWP as a platform simply isn't capable of doing more.

    Here I'll put the first list I found by searching on the topic of missing features from the Mail app (http://forums.windowscentral.com/windows-10/370571-windows-10-mail-app-missing-features.html)

    1) It doesn't provide the option to turn off Conversation View
    2) You can't view the headers in an email message
    3) You can only view messages in the Preview Pane, you can't open a message into a full-window/full-screen view
    4) You can't hold down SHIFT to select a range of messages, you must use CTRL to select each message individually
    5) There is no "Select All" option
    6) You can't create IMAP folders
    7) There are no message-management rules
    8) There's no spam filter
    9) You can't see more than one account at a time

    (Note that the first item is already fixed in a recent build.  Not sure about the rest.)

    Here's the thing... all of these features were just left out by Microsoft for whatever reason. Obviously the lack of a Select All doesn't mean that the platform can't support the concept.  The only item in the list that would need support from the framework is #3, opening a separate window (which UWP is perfectly capable of).

    My thinking is that the same is true of most of these apps.  90% of the features were left out obviously because of design decisions or time constraints.  10% of features rely on platform capabilities in some way... but most of those aren't actual issues, but again just design decisions/time constraints.  Of the rest, the secure sandbox will block some things that either need to be done a different way now or shouldn't be done at all (only applicable to third party Windows Store apps).  Finally, what's leftover are the UWP capabilities Microsoft has intentionally left out either because of OS design or because of their own time constraints.  They have reduced that last group quite a bit since Windows 8, and that list will continue to shrink.

  • User profile image
    DeathBy​VisualStudio

    , bondsbw wrote

    *snip*

    My thinking is that the same is true of most of these apps.  90% of the features were left out obviously because of design decisions or time constraints.

    And it's for this reason Microsoft should be ashamed of itself. They did this before with WP7/8 and W8 and all were big disappointments. You could make the argument that they will make it better over time but that excuse didn't make the recent predecessors to W10 successful either.

    By putting out this half-baked apps on a half-baked OS they end up alienating both consumer and developer as Microsoft fails to show why people should want to consume or develop for the platform in the first place.

    We all know how great W10 and UWP could be but we also know what Microsoft's track record has been so it's hard to trust them -- especially when they keep repeating the same mistakes..

    If we all believed in unicorns and fairies the world would be a better place.
    Last modified
  • User profile image
    magicalclick

    @bondsbw:

    Yeah, those don't sounds like a limitation of the app environment. Hopefully MS recognized those shortcoming and enhance the app soon.

    Leaving WM on 5/2018 if no apps, no dedicated billboards where I drive, no Store name.
    Last modified
  • User profile image
    NoelCarboni

    Have to agree with DeathBy VisualStudio (and others) on this.

    Imagine if the Apps provided with the OS were simply stunning...

    They would provide inspiration...  Examples to emulate...  Show off how important and good the new paradigm is...  Win hearts and minds.

    The downside:  Microsoft would have to actually do the work, and I don't care what programming environment you use, a rich, complex application is a lot of work!

    Imagine if, when DOING that work, they fed back to the team developing the environment what they found missing, or difficult to do, or poorly documented - which would all serve to make the application environment even better.  Those things aren't accomplished if they leave it to only 3rd party developers do big, important Apps.

    It's hard not to wonder, given the basic OOB Apps, if the Universal Windows Platform isn't quiet yet up to the task of carrying the world forward.

    -Noel

  • User profile image
    BitFlipper

    You can't create complicated finger apps for the simple reason that we have now reached a new level of wasted screen space, no matter how high resolution your display is (those controls will just resize on higher res displays in order to allow finger access, so the only option is oversized displays for anything complex). Oh wait, the single pixel border saves huge amounts of screen space, so it should balance out. Right?

    Forget about something like this.

    I stopped caring really, so I might be out of the loop on this, but can finger apps even spawn additional windows? For instance, if you wrote a finger music app, can you open the plugins in additional windows like every real music application on the planet does?

  • User profile image
    bundyum

    My opinion is the whole Microsoft Design language needs a reset.

    On my Windows 10 Surface Pro 3 I've just created a VPN to my workplace, and after successfully setting it up thought I would click on the VPN connections Advanced Options button. The screen that presents (in my opinion) just looks uninspired, bland, like they have taken an intern's summer project and checked it into source control.

    If that screen and the design language which underpins its implementation is the pinnacle of user experience evolution within Microsoft, then I sincerely hope someone at the top echelons of the company feels the same way I (we?) do; otherwise to continue down this path is just nuts!

  • User profile image
    NoelCarboni

    , bundyum wrote

    like they have taken an intern's summer project and checked it into source control.

    Couldn't have said it better myself.

    -Noel

  • User profile image
    BitFlipper

    , bundyum wrote

    My opinion is the whole Microsoft Design language needs a reset.

    On my Windows 10 Surface Pro 3 I've just created a VPN to my workplace, and after successfully setting it up thought I would click on the VPN connections Advanced Options button. The screen that presents (in my opinion) just looks uninspired, bland, like they have taken an intern's summer project and checked it into source control.

    If that screen and the design language which underpins its implementation is the pinnacle of user experience evolution within Microsoft, then I sincerely hope someone at the top echelons of the company feels the same way I (we?) do; otherwise to continue down this path is just nuts!

    The 7 people that actually like the depressing fugly new look and feel will tell you that you need to accept change. However there is a big difference between not accepting change, and not accepting sh*#ty change.

    But as we found out, this is the way it is going to be from now on since so far MS chose to ignore the negative feedback, so we better accept the sh$%ty change and live with it.

    And I agree with your assessment that this was an intern's summer project. Since the 1st beta release of W8, we saw the UI go through so many changes that it is clear they had no direction, clue or experience with UI design. First all drop shadows were removed. Then the drop shadow was brought back for the active window only. Then it was brought back for all windows. And the window borders, start button/menu, settings, and other things went through a similar identity crises. Whoever designed the UI did a crash course on UI design.

  • User profile image
    bondsbw

    , BitFlipper wrote

    Forget about something like this.

    There's no reason you couldn't design something like that if you wanted.

    I stopped caring really, so I might be out of the loop on this, but can finger apps even spawn additional windows?

    Yes, I addressed that earlier.

     

  • User profile image
    elmer

    I assume that the Office-Mobile apps (Word-Mobile, Excel-Mobile, etc) are universal apps ?

  • User profile image
    BitFlipper

    , bondsbw wrote

    *snip*

    There's no reason you couldn't design something like that if you wanted.

    Are you able to provide an example of a finger app that shows us how something like that can be done (not functionality wise, just UI wise)? I looked but didn't find anything close. It's all just dumbed down throw-away toy apps.

    Thanks in advance!

  • User profile image
    spivonious

    , BitFlipper wrote

    You can't create complicated finger apps for the simple reason that we have now reached a new level of wasted screen space, no matter how high resolution your display is (those controls will just resize on higher res displays in order to allow finger access, so the only option is oversized displays for anything complex). Oh wait, the single pixel border saves huge amounts of screen space, so it should balance out. Right?

    Forget about something like this.

    I stopped caring really, so I might be out of the loop on this, but can finger apps even spawn additional windows? For instance, if you wrote a finger music app, can you open the plugins in additional windows like every real music application on the planet does?

     

    Wait, did you really just complain about proper DPI scaling? If you want your app to show more on bigger screens, then you design your UI to be responsive and show more when on bigger screens. This is all baked into the UA platform.

    And I hate applications with multiple floating windows. They always get lost behind other windows or get in the way on top of something I'm trying to work with. Let me dock them in the main window, and have temporary dialogs slide in from the sides instead of popping up on top. There is no reason that a pro DAW could not be written as a UA (assuming they've addressed the horrible high audio latency present in Windows 8 WinRT apps).

  • User profile image
    BitFlipper

    , spivonious wrote

    *snip* 

    Wait, did you really just complain about proper DPI scaling? If you want your app to show more on bigger screens, then you design your UI to be responsive and show more when on bigger screens. This is all baked into the UA platform.

    What I mean is, to keep UA controls accessible with fingers, there is a physical minimum size they can be (I don't know, say 0.5 x 0.5"). This limits the control density, regardless of your display DPI. So a real application like a DAW cannot be realistically designed using finger controls, there is just too much functionality.

    And I hate applications with multiple floating windows. They always get lost behind other windows or get in the way on top of something I'm trying to work with. Let me dock them in the main window.

    No, we are talking about a real DAW, not a DJ mixing app. That is just how DAWs are used. With multiple monitors. With many open windows at the same time spread across multiple monitors. You often need to tweak multiple plugins per channel across multiple channels to get the desired sound. If you need to open/close windows endlessly to get to each of these plugins, it will interfere with this workflow.

    See that is part of the problem, the new gen UI designers at MS are so out of touch with real world use cases, they think everything can be reduced to a dumbed down finger app.

    So this is the future of computing? Sad. Especially considering the "quality" of the junk you find in the Store. So far I have not found a single app I'm impressed with, or found useful at all.

    As I said before, my SP3 doesn't qualify as a tablet because it isn't realistic to use as a tablet given the lack of quality apps. That is why I had to break down and get a iPad Air 2 so I can have a real tablet (after previously vowing, as a card-carrying MS fanboy, never to get an Apple product. However I since decided life is too short to wait for MS to stop flailing around and fix this mess).

  • User profile image
    kettch

    @BitFlipper: Fortunately, no one has said you can't continue to use existing windowing techniques where they are warranted. No one has said that everything must be finger friendly.

  • User profile image
    bondsbw

    , BitFlipper wrote

    Are you able to provide an example of a finger app that shows us how something like that can be done (not functionality wise, just UI wise)? I looked but didn't find anything close. It's all just dumbed down throw-away toy apps.

    Thanks in advance!

    Add this line of XAML to a UWP application:

    <Button Width="1" Height="1" />

    There, you have a button that is as small as any button could be in any application (without becoming completely invisible).  You can make the button as large or small as you want, and you can do the same with any control.

    If you thought this wasn't possible, why not?

Conversation locked

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