Metro UI, looks like it's there to stay on the desktop

[Dos_Box]

The Register are running this article: Workers can't escape Windows 8 Metro - Microsoft COO ? The Register

Which says:

 

Windows 8 will help people work harder, faster and better, argues Microsoft Chief Operating Officer Kevin Turner, because the "immersive" Metro user interface removes all their distractions.

Highlighting business-centric features in the new OS, Turner insists Windows 8's fondness for fondleslabs will boost office productivity. The controversial handheld gadget-friendly Metro UI (described by our Andrew Orlowski as "a huge negative") will be an asset for businesses, Turner reckons, because full-screen apps will immerse workers in their spreadsheets, pushing distractions out of sight and ramping up output.

 

 

Of interest at the bottom of the page is this bit though:

 

Turner also talked up Windows To Go, which stuffs a user's business apps, files, settings and a full corporate Windows 8 build on a memory stick, as well as improvements to networking and support for 3G and 4G, among other features. Windows 8 also includes Microsoft's virtualisation tech Hyper-V, with high-definition graphics and support for touch and USB devices on a local PC.

 

If Metro is going to be a permanent presence on the desktop I wonder if there will be an easy way for schools and businesses to define and set the Metro UI via GPO?

Unless I've read it wrong of course, but has anyone found anyhting in the local group policies to define Metro or be able to disable/enable it in W8 yet?

[zag]

I don't see any advantage of upgrading to windows 8 in a school environment yet. Unless you have tablets of course.

[3s-gtech]

Not finished migrating to Windows 7 yet, but I will hold fire on 8 for a very long time, until more pioneering bods have worked out how to effectively use it in schools!

[jinnantonnixx]

The stubbornness regarding Metro UI smells like the whole idea came from a management level, rather than an engineering level.

 

"I like flicky tiles. Make them work on this thing."

 

You know the sort of thing.

Edited March 6, 2012 by jinnantonnixx

[Mr.Ben]

I like this quote from the Bob Chronicles:

 

"The problem with radically new things is the first ones are usually atrocious," mused Stanford's Cliff Nass in a 1999 interview with the Knight Ridder/Tribute News Service. "But most atrocious products, if they're new, have some redeeming features. [The industry[ has very little tolerance for designs that are overall worse but have insight in them...It's only concerned with things that are overall better,"

 

Seems apt to apply to Metro (even though on a tablet it's quite good)

[zag]

I like this quote from the Bob Chronicles:

 

"The problem with radically new things is the first ones are usually atrocious," mused Stanford's Cliff Nass in a 1999 interview with the Knight Ridder/Tribute News Service. "But most atrocious products, if they're new, have some redeeming features. [The industry[ has very little tolerance for designs that are overall worse but have insight in them...It's only concerned with things that are overall better,"

 

Seems apt to apply to Metro (even though on a tablet it's quite good)

 

The problem isnt the new metro interface, that would be great for a tablet. The problem is they are trying to force it onto desktop machines so they can get the app developers.

 

Any metro app on my desktop 26" TFT just looks ridiculous.

Edited March 7, 2012 by zag

[Domino]

So..... When does Windows 9 come out?

[sted]

So..... When does Windows 9 come out?

 

if win8 does as well as vista can microsoft actually make it to win9?

[Dos_Box]

@zag Agreed, I'm running it on the RM Slate here and it is far, far better than W7 for tablets (graphical restrictions not withstanding). My guess is that any tablet looking to run this will probaly be of the spec we saw on the Samsung stand at BETT with an i5 processor and dedicated graphics. The onboard Intel graphics on the slate means that many graphically intensive apps simply won't run on the meagre 64MB graphics RAM available.

Saying that though, it may steal an advantage over the iPad/iOS if the Intel (or ARM) tablets are priced right and have even a moderately decent spec.

For the desktop however, it wouldn't surprise me if one of the first W8 apps is a Metro disabler, or even a method to keep Metro but to logon to the desktop straight away.

[Domino]

if win8 does as well as vista can microsoft actually make it to win9?

 

If win 8 does as well as vista, then windows 9 will be out by Christmas

[east]

From what I understand the x86 version of Windows 8 will provide more of a desktop type of OS whereas the WOA will be the full on Metro UI that we are seeing. It will be interesting to see what MS do based on the feedback they get from the beta release, if at all anything.

[SYNACK]

it wouldn't surprise me if one of the first W8 apps is a Metro disabler, or even a method to keep Metro but to logon to the desktop straight away.

 

Already there: Stardock releases free Start menu app for Windows 8 - TechSpot News

Six Ways To Avoid Metro And Use Only Desktop Mode In Windows 8 | Gizmodo Australia

 

Metro is good for touch UI but I have multiple moniters and a mouse, they can make it better or go jump when it comes to desktops. They may pull something out or they may end up with another hurried release of Windows 9 to fix what they broke as they will never admit they are wrong.

 

I am starting to suspect that they are just pushing for a user mandate to make it to version 10 like everything else in the software world by embedding one or more egregious issues in each release that must be 'fixed' in a new version. Dumb stuff like no domain join on ARM and Metro for everything despite its issues with existing setups. Its funny, they still don't have the stones to drop 32bit but they will pull the plug on the entire desktop UI.

 

Having read some of the stuff about metro and its easier use of spatial memory etc it does make some sence. Pushing it to full screen and kicking you out of all other productivity while your doing it makes no sense. The full screen == no distractions stuff has a little merit but also reaks of the opposite of MacOSs old no full screen/maximize iron fist.

 

W8 does lots of things right but they are looking at a more uphill battle than they have ever faced with this. The previous suppliers of continuity through compatibility seem to be trying to bin the whole market that they created and move into a different, more heavy handed - Applish - market. Balmer needs to go, lack of features is not a feature, from MS it is a cop out and a dissapointment.

Edited March 11, 2012 by SYNACK
autocorrect is evil

[Michael]

In all of Microsoft's OS history, they have either done really well or really poor:

 

Windows 95 - Good

Windows 98 - Good

Windows ME - Poor

Windows 2000 - Good

Windows XP - Good

Windows Vista - Poor

Windows 7 - Good

Windows 8 - ?

Windows 9 - ?

 

Working on this revoluntionary algorithmic formula, Windows 8 should be a good OS

[Quackers]

In all of Microsoft's OS history, they have either done really well or really poor:

 

Windows 95 - Good

Windows 98 - Good

Windows ME - Poor

Windows 2000 - Good

Windows XP - Good

Windows Vista - Poor

Windows 7 - Good

Windows 8 - ?

Windows 9 - ?

 

Working on this revoluntionary algorithmic formula, Windows 8 should be a good OS

 

Your theory is flawed as 2000 onwards are NT based and come from the NT4 Famley, and you have included 9x code which was killed off with XP, when NT met the home user......

[Michael]

You're right, but I suppose I tried to stick to more mainstream OSes. NT 3.5 and NT 4.0 for example were not mainstream. Windows 2000/XP introduced NT to the masses.

[plexer]

I thought it was that every other windows release was good?

 

Ben

[Arthur]

Giving a single overall rating to an operating system is equally flawed because they change over time due to service packs, hotfixes, better drivers, security issues, etc.

 

Windows XP

24/08/2001 (RTM) to 08/09/2002 = [b]Bad[/b]
09/09/2002 (SP1) to 24/08/2004 = [b]Satisfactory[/b]
25/08/2004 (SP2) to 21/04/2008 (SP3) = [b]Good[/b]
22/04/2008 to 27/04/2009 = [b]Good[/b]
28/04/2009 onwards = [b]Very Bad[/b]

 

Windows Vista

30/01/2007 (RTM) to 03/02/2008 = [b]Bad[/b]
04/02/2008 (SP1) to 27/04/2009 = [b]Satisfactory[/b]
28/04/2009 (SP2) to 22/02/2011 = [b]Good[/b]
23/02/2011 onwards = [b]Bad[/b]

[RabbieBurns]

confused. how can they go from good to bad overnight?

[PiqueABoo]

Bit crocky. XP is Very Bad since 2009 because of what exactly? There isn't anything much wrong that wasn't wrong in RTM with XP *today* (I only moved to Win7 recently because it was preinstalled on new h/w).

[SYNACK]

Bit crocky. XP is Very Bad since 2009 because of what exactly? There isn't anything much wrong that wasn't wrong in RTM with XP *today* (I only moved to Win7 recently because it was preinstalled on new h/w).

 

I remember XP having issues at RTM which is why we left it till SP1, It was better than 98 but there were more issues with profiles unloading and GPOs etc. My memory is a little foggy going that far back though.

 

 

XP today is a horror show, wireless support is junk compared to 7, network stack is a joke and inefficient as anything (just try file copies over a slow VPN). The OS is that old that it has had so much bolted onto it that it is a tad top heavy. .net 2 to 4 and inumerable patches, a few directX versions and a whole security overhall. This is before you deal with the inefficient mess that happens when you install XP on a remotely modern PC and you have to integrate practically all the drivers onto a slipstreamed CD just to get it to boot as none of the system hardware is included or was even thought of when XP was around if you can even find drivers for it. The old GDI system is hack, realy a single window corrupting the whole screen (dead window syndrome), Aero is much better as it is seporatly composeted and actually uses the avalible hardware. The sound system with only global sound hooks, 32 bit and the silly 3GB limit. Lack of quick start menu search (use it all the time). Single service at a time startup on boot and single kill on shutdown, little active memory caching (apart from the primative prefetch that usually ended up adding minutes to boot time if not cleared). No self healing for registry fault and major system file corruption, no proactive support for SMART HD diagnostics in the OS. More limited GPO objects, no native DVD/x264/xvid/divx/aac/mov/mp4 codecs.

 

There is a lot to dislike about XP now that there is a better option in the same product line, hell I'd even include Vista SP1+ in that catagory. I agree with the assessment @Arthur made. Sure you can patch over some of XPs defficiencies with stacks and stacks of extra software and time and effort and complexity or you can just upgrade to an OS designed for modern hardware and save everyone the hassel.

[Dos_Box]

Yeah, XP has had it's day that's for sure. I remember getting on OEM disk a week before the official release and installing it on a 256MB PC133 Athlon 750 machine. It absolutely flew. I recently did an XP SP3 install onto 1.2Ghz Celeron laptop with 256MB DDR RAM, and teh word slow doesn't even begin to cover it. As Synack pointed out, XP has been so patched, bloated and added to that it simply makes sense to use a more modern OS that is more optimized for the task in hand on the same hardware that you were using XP on. I like 7 and Vista, and you really notice the lack of useful features when you go back to XP.

[Arthur]

how can they go from good to bad overnight?

When SP2 for Vista was released, there was no reason to stick with XP. When SP1 for Windows 7 was released, there was no reason to stick with Vista. It's that simple.

 

XP is very bad since 2009 because of what exactly?

Vista SP2 and Windows 7 were both released in that year. Even if you didn't upgrade straight away to Windows 7, Vista SP2 was a far better choice than XP given the hardware that was around at that time. I don't know about you, but a couple of years earlier in 2007, I built a brand new PC with a quad core processor (a Core 2 Quad Q6600 overclocked from 2.4GHz to 3.2GHz), 8GB RAM and a 150GB WD Raptor hard drive. Installing XP on that would have been a complete waste of time and money since the OS wouldn't have been able to take advantage of the hardware.

 

There isn't anything much wrong that wasn't wrong in RTM with XP *today*

What @SYNACK and @Dos_Box said!!! XP prior to SP2 wasn't particularly great and putting XP on a modern-day Core i5/i7 PC is beyond comprehension. Don't get me wrong, I used to like Windows XP (much like Windows 2000 before it), but its time has long since passed.

[sted]

When SP2 for Vista was released, there was no reason to stick with XP. When SP1 for Windows 7 was released, there was no reason to stick with Vista. It's that simple.

 

 

Vista SP2 and Windows 7 were both released in that year. Even if you didn't upgrade straight away to Windows 7, Vista SP2 was a far better choice than XP given the hardware that was around at that time. I don't know about you, but a couple of years earlier in 2007, I built a brand new PC with a quad core processor (a Core 2 Quad Q6600 overclocked from 2.4GHz to 3.2GHz), 8GB RAM and a 150GB WD Raptor hard drive. Installing XP on that would have been a complete waste of time and money since the OS wouldn't have been able to take advantage of the hardware.

 

 

What @SYNACK and @Dos_Box said!!! XP prior to SP2 wasn't particularly great and putting XP on a modern-day Core i5/i7 PC is beyond comprehension. Don't get me wrong, I used to like Windows XP (much like Windows 2000 before it), but its time has long since passed.

 

great if you have 8gb quad core pcs. school im in now has fujitsu siemens e2500 until last week most had 512 ram and they are p4 iirc they are ht p4s but thats typical i find of school pcs. While win7 even x64 runs on them video drivers are missing and not avaliable so im not sure i want to rebuild anyway

[SYNACK]

great if you have 8gb quad core pcs. school im in now has fujitsu siemens e2500 until last week most had 512 ram and they are p4 iirc they are ht p4s but thats typical i find of school pcs. While win7 even x64 runs on them video drivers are missing and not avaliable so im not sure i want to rebuild anyway

 

If all your ICT gear is 6-7 years old then you have bigger issues. The lack of WDM drivers just kills the Aero experience and sets you back to GDI loosing that advantage. Other than that you still get many of the benifits however they (despite some specific exceptions) won't be quick. Some of our old hps actually run faster than lenovos two years newer.

 

Our PCs are not all quad core 8GB etc, many are simply 2GB with a modern dual core CPU - Intel 2GHz or above and DX9 integrated GPU. We are of course manitaining these by replacing out the oldest each year so these are the bottom of the food chain in most of the schools I deal with.

 

7 32bit runs alright with 1GB but runs much better with SATA drives and DDR2 memory.

[X-13]

For the desktop however, it wouldn't surprise me if one of the first W8 apps is a Metro disabler, or even a method to keep Metro but to logon to the desktop straight away.

 

[shell]

Command=2

IconFile=Explorer.exe,3

[Taskbar]

Command=ToggleDesktop

 

 

Save as .scf

 

Create new task.

 

Set to trigger at logon.

 

???

 

DESKTOP!

 

 

I tried it on Win8 running through VirtualBox, it works but it's a bit laggy. [Could be configuration problems.]