Coffeehouse Thread

69 posts

8.1  (why?)

Back to Forum: Coffeehouse
  • User profile image
    magicalclick

    , bondsbw wrote

    @magicalclick: Both ideas, 1) removing metro on desktops and 2) adding the MRU list, have a business justification of pleasing more customers.

    But I showed that there is a clear business justification not to do #1.  Nobody has shown that there is a clear business justification not to do #2.  That's the difference.

    no official quote from MS site = baseless assumptions. That is C9 culture. So you need to do better than that.

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

    @Sven Groot:Yes! I'd want some sort of dynamic category. Additionally, it'd be nice if "jumplists" somehow were reflected in the start screen. Rather than tiles that show you things, they could be more interactive with controls.

  • User profile image
    evildictait​or

    , MasterPi wrote

    @Sven Groot:Yes! I'd want some sort of dynamic category. Additionally, it'd be nice if "jumplists" somehow were reflected in the start screen.

    +1. I'm not sure how they could do it (maybe click-and-hold to get to the jump list or something), but that would certainly be nice Smiley

  • User profile image
    evildictait​or

    , Sven Groot wrote

    Even better: make it extensible, so developers can create their own groups. For example, imagine a a group that shows thumbnails for the most recent videos in my YouTube subscriptions. It'd be live tiles on steroids, a way to customize the start screen for developers that's not limited to showing one tile but can define a list of related tiles.

    You have to be a little bit careful in exposing highly user-customisable stuff to developers - they have a habit of abusing that position (see here).

    What would be nice is if developers had an API to suggest a group to the user, which the user can then modify as they wish. Allowing developers to munge around all of your icons and place themselves as they wish is annoying. Remember the days where every installer would dump six shortcuts on your desktop and three in your quick-launch bar? With the start screen that would be even more annoying, since all of your icons would now be in a different place to where you left them 

  • User profile image
    MasterPi

    , evildictait​or wrote

    *snip*

    +1. I'm not sure how they could do it (maybe click-and-hold to get to the jump list or something), but that would certainly be nice Smiley

    Mouseover -> changes to an interactive canvas. Or even right click...they need to do something about the context bar for mouse/keyboard because it just isn't right. We need a context menu on the screen for mouse...

  • User profile image
    elmer

    , bondsbw wrote

    @magicalclick: Both ideas, 1) removing metro on desktops and 2) adding the MRU list, have a business justification of pleasing more customers.

    Note: My 'idea' (not that it's that actually my idea) is not the removal of 'metro' from desktops, per-se - it's more the work environment differentiation of the two products.

    The 'amd' consumer product should only run the 'metro' environment, and not provide a 'desktop' of any sort. 

    Consumers don't need (dare I say, don't want) traditional desktop apps, and would prefer to use a tablet that is more akin to an iPad - i.e. essentially an oversize Windows phone. You can't run traditional apps on it anyway, so don't confuse consumers with a useless desktop - this should be a dedicated platform, and should not need a desktop of any kind.

    The 'x86' business product should only run the 'desktop' environment, but support 'metro' apps in windows, ala Stardock's ModernMix.

    Business users need the traditional desktops apps and currently don't want the metro environment - that has been made clear any number of times - but running metro apps in windows will provide a pathway for the future and a reason for devs to write them - i.e. targeting both platforms. This is a transitional platform, and business users will migrate to a full metro environment once all of their traditional apps have metro equivalents and the metro environment has matured.

  • User profile image
    evildictait​or

    , elmer wrote

    The 'x86' business product should only run the 'desktop' environment, but support 'metro' apps in windows, ala Stardock's ModernMix.

    Why? Why should my laptop not be able to run Angry Birds and Fruit Ninja and all of the other apps that my phone can do?

    Business users need the traditional desktops apps and currently don't want the metro environment - that has been made clear any number of times - but running metro apps in windows will provide a pathway for the future and a reason for devs to write them - i.e. targeting both platforms. This is a transitional platform, and business users will migrate to a full metro environment once all of their traditional apps have metro equivalents and the metro environment has matured.

    I think you are mistaking "business users" with "developers". There are large numbers of people who spend their entire life going from one full-screen app to the next. Be it Word, Outlook, PowerPoint, Internet Explorer or the latest and greatest internal business tool; most of these tools are run in Full Screen and most of them (with the exception of Word and Outlook) are fairly low word density.

    Sure, there aren't many business users who want exclusively metro content. But that's not to say that metro content is somehow the opposite of their needs.

    I don't think anyone (other than DeathByVisualStudio) is suggesting that metro is a replacement for the desktop and that the desktop is going away anytime soon. It's clearly not - there are too many things that can't be done in metro. But that doesn't mean that Metro is all bad, or that business customers don't want it.

    I find it strange that the argument has always been "Metro or Desktop". I don't see why the argument can't be "isn't both better?" Since (with the exception of tablets), that's what we've got.

  • User profile image
    magicalclick

    @evildictaitor: FYI your first quote is broken. I hope you are not trolling Elmer, so, I will assume the broken quote is due to technical difficulty or temporal issues. But, please go back and quote the sentence ending with period instead of comma. I am not blaming you, but, your quote does not reflect on what I actually read.

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

    @magicalclick: Posting to C9 via a phone is a painfully bad experience Sad Hopefully its fixed now.

  • User profile image
    elmer

    , evildictait​or wrote

    *snip*

    I find it strange that the argument has always been "Metro or Desktop". I don't see why the argument can't be "isn't both better?" Since (with the exception of tablets), that's what we've got.

    Metro/Desktop is a convoluted nomenclature, and what I am referring to the the working environment, not the applications themselves.

    I'm saying that WindowsRT should not need a desktop environment at all... it's nuts that MS have this clunky confusing legacy environment, essentially because they can't get their act together in providing native metro version of all the apps supplied and required for it to function.

    Windows8 (for want of a better term) on the other hand, is the platform of choice if you need legacy/advanced app/service support, and the legacy environment should be the default choice. Running Metro apps in windows is perfectly doable, as Stardock have shown, and should be the default mode.

    Eventually, as the need to support legacy apps/services disappears because 'metro' equivalents are available, the need for a legacy environment will also disappear, and effectively WindowsRT (or some future development/merging of the two platforms) will become the single standard platform.

  • User profile image
    magicalclick

    , evildictait​or wrote

    @magicalclick: Posting to C9 via a phone is a painfully bad experience Sad Hopefully its fixed now.

    yup it is fixed. I agree, C9 has intentionally bad browser support on WP8. I didn't have that problem back in WP7.

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

    , magicalclick wrote

    *snip*

    no official quote from MS site = baseless assumptions. That is C9 culture. So you need to do better than that.

    Baseless?  I'm pretty sure that the idea behind it--Microsoft got in the tablet business to maintain dominance of personal computing---is implied.  If I cared enough, I could probably find a quote from Microsoft saying as much.

  • User profile image
    bondsbw

    @elmer:

     

    The 'amd' consumer product should only run the 'metro' environment, and not provide a 'desktop' of any sort. 

    I assume you meant ARM and not AMD.  I agree with this, unless the desktop is opened up for development on that platform then I feel it shouldn't exist.

    But on your other point, about x86 running only desktop, I disagree.  Put $5 down on ModernMix and be happy, let the rest of us enjoy the closest thing to a tiling window manager that has come out of Microsoft in decades.

    Windows8 (for want of a better term) on the other hand, is the platform of choice if you need legacy/advanced app/service support, and the legacy environment should be the default choice. Running Metro apps in windows is perfectly doable, as Stardock have shown, and should be the default mode.

    This is an opinion that is not shared by all.  As I said before, this doesn't align with Microsoft's goals to produce a platform that can be competitive into the next generation of personal computing devices.

    Microsoft can either give you what you want and sacrifice their future, or allow you to find your own way to what you want and have a chance to compete with iOS and Android.  I'm going to be blunt; when you state that your goals are not in the best interest of Microsoft, then Microsoft doesn't care about your goals... and shouldn't.

  • User profile image
    elmer

    , bondsbw wrote

    @elmer:

    *snip*

    I assume you meant ARM and not AMD.  I agree with this, unless the desktop is opened up for development on that platform then I feel it shouldn't exist.

    Yes, typo.

    But on your other point, about x86 running only desktop, I disagree.  

    *snip*

    Microsoft can either give you what you want and sacrifice their future, or allow you to find your own way to what you want and have a chance to compete with iOS and Android.

    MS's chance to compete with iOS and Android is WindowsRT - it's just that they are totally screwing it up.

    Windows8 is their chance to retain customers while they develop a competitive product, and dare I say it, but they are screwing it up.

    I'm going to be blunt; when you state that your goals are not in the best interest of Microsoft, then Microsoft doesn't care about your goals... and shouldn't.

    You talk about the two as if they are different. Microsoft's goals should be to produce a product I want to buy.

    I absolutely agree with you that I can solve my problem with their product by installing some third-party tools, and that's exactly what I'm doing (and for that matter, everyone I personally know who is using Win8) so I'm not exactly stamping my feet and holding my breath because it's not the product I want, but longer-term all it is doing is encouraging me to look elsewhere.

  • User profile image
    bondsbw

    , elmer wrote

    Microsoft's goals should be to produce a product I want to buy.

    No, their goals are to target the masses of home users in order to keep them familiar with the Windows platform.  So, the following conclusions can be made:

    • Microsoft has to compete in the tablet market to keep users interested in Windows as a platform.
    • Apps make or break tablets, so Microsoft needs a quick infusion of tablet apps.
    • Developers only build apps for tablet platforms with a large user base.
    • The WinRT user base depends on the fact that the majority of Windows users (laptop and desktop) are actively working in the modern UI.

    That's why Microsoft is not going to default the desktop.  It would kill Microsoft's ability to target the masses of home users and to keep them familiar with Windows.

  • User profile image
    magicalclick

    , bondsbw wrote

    *snip*

    Baseless?  I'm pretty sure that the idea behind it--Microsoft got in the tablet business to maintain dominance of personal computing---is implied.  If I cared enough, I could probably find a quote from Microsoft saying as much.

    then, go get an official quote that states your idea is inline with MS business interests. I am waiting.

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

    @magicalclick:  That was talking about how it is not in Microsoft's business interests to default the desktop interface... which has nothing to do with my idea.

    But I'll bite:  the very definition of business is trade, and to trade you provide something of value (MRU list) in return for something of value (cash).  So I turn this back on you:  find a quote that directly says Microsoft doesn't want to do business any more, and I'll log off this forum and never return.

  • User profile image
    magicalclick

    @bondsbw: don't assume your idea is correct just because no one is bothered to prove you wrong. You have to find evidence to support your argument yourself. That's your task. No, I am not going to find evidence to disprove your idea when you don't have evidence yourself. Peer review only happens after you did the work, not the other way around. Anyway, if you can't get the evidence. Don't bother. I will just tell you my motive instead. The reason I demand you to provide evidence because you dismiss other ideas just because that's is not your idea. We are supposed to respect each others idea without being a technical jerk who demands unrealistic data to support every single idea when that idea is not supported by you. Yes, it is good to go deeper and discuss and analyze an idea, but, not using it as a cover up to dismiss others. I have seen this again and again in C9 community. When you disagree with someone else, you dismiss it by demanding evidence that is difficult to collect. And you just hide behind MS and say, "that's not MS's interest, #dealwithit".

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

Comments closed

Comments have been closed since this content was published more than 30 days ago, but if you'd like to continue the conversation, please create a new thread in our Forums, or Contact Us and let us know.