In the article on Windows 8, I already mentioned that in order to demonstrate the viability of Metro for something other than Facebook and Twitter, Microsoft should come up with a Metro interface for Microsoft Office – one that doesn’t leave out 90% of Office’s features. Well, Microsoft has hinted that they are, indeed, working on Metro Office. In addition, it turns out Microsoft isn’t entirely sure to how to address the issue if legacy applications on ARM.
As far as Metro goes, it does seem to have a stigma: it’s a tablet interface, not suited for real work. At worst, some consider it to be nothing but a toy when it comes to desktop/laptop computing. Personally, I belong in the camp that Metro is, indeed, a toy for desktop/laptop computing – no window management pretty much seals that deal for me.
Still, a good way for Microsoft to make sure Metro can do more than just be good at Twitter and Facebook is to Metrofy Microsoft Office. The reasoning here is that if they can create a compelling Metro interface for what is surely the most complicated piece of software most users ever have to deal with, then Metro is ready for real work.
In my eyes, Metro Office should not be a cut-down version of the real thing. Microsoft expects us to use Metro on our desktops and laptops, and as such, Metro applications should be at least just as capable as current, traditional software. A cut-down Metro interface for Office just for tablets is fine – but for desktop/laptop Windows 8 users, we’re going to need more than that.
While Microsoft hasn’t yet confirmed just how feature-rich Metro Office is going to be, they did confirm they’re working on it – just like I said back in July. “You ought to expect that we are rethinking and working hard on what it would mean to do Office Metro style,” Steve Ballmer told a Wall Street analyst.
Another story currently unfolding regarding Windows 8 concerns its support for the ARM architecture. The question is – how will Windows 8/ARM deal with legacy applications coded for x86? Microsoft already stated virtualisation (like Apple’s Rosetta) was out of the question, but what about recompiling? Will the old stack be included and/or open for development at all on the ARM version?
This Is My Next’s Joanna Stern posed this question to Microsoft executive Mike Anguilo, and he basically said that even Microsoft itself hasn’t been able to answer this question yet. “Porting things and whether we open native desktop development are either decisions that are either not made or not announced yet,” he said.
I think the problem here is that with Windows available for ARM, ARM laptops will become easier to market. Not allowing any form of legacy applications on tablets is one thing, but the situation gets murkier when you talk about laptops. A laptop running Windows is a laptop running Windows, whether it’s got an x86 or an ARM chip. Sure, we geeks may care about that stuff, but normal people will just see a laptop. And that laptop needs to run Awesome Garden Designer Pro 2003.
This is something Microsoft needs to address, but how, I honestly don’t know.
An ARM tablet that won’t run legacy apps. Hey, I have an idea, go buy that nice tablet over there that has a lot more apps and doesn’t break into schizophrenic UI daydreams from time to time?
An x86 tablet that’s thicker, heavier, with shorter battery life, and that needs a stylus or mouse & keyboard to use those legacy apps. Hey, wasn’t this called a TabletPC for the last 10 years nobody wanted it?
It’s just a one-two powerhouse combo.
Microsoft has stellar developments tools.
It wouldn’t be suprised if the visual studio of the future ease this x86&ARM portability issue.
AIUI, all you need to do right now with the W8 version of VS is to port any existing code to the new WRT framework and them compile it for your target architecture. (I have not tested this!)
As has been said here and there, this doesn’t mean that you can run legacy x86 apps on ARM. It simply doesn’t have the horsepower to do x86 emulation. At least not yet. Given that it is a low energy design it will likely never be an ideal platform for x86 emulation until massively parallel hardware is available.
The bad news is that any apps that are using older/other tools or that have assembly optimizations are immediately not just a recompile away. Not to mention, if you don’t own the app and it isn’t actively being supported anymore, you’re even further from a port. And that’s without getting into the point that if it needs a re-compile for ARM to most likely work on a tablet, you really would want the interface re-done to support touch, not the original app. Otherwise just get a laptop already…
Glare what do you think about these developments.
All of these seems to have release dates coinciding with the Win 8 release. Is the “not powerfull enough” argument really valid?
http://androidandme.com/2010/09/news/arm-reveals-quad-core-2-5-ghz-…
http://blogs.nvidia.com/2011/01/project-denver-processor-to-usher-i…
another story on this
http://www.pcworld.com/article/240183/why_windows_8_on_arm_matters….
I’ll start by disclaiming. (o;)
I have been at odds with the M$ fanbois for some time that ARM will never be useful as a PC CPU. That said, it may be that I have been influenced by their negativity in my assessment.
In the first article the announcement of a 2.5 GHz 4 core for a timeframe that is close to that expected for W8 seems promising. Especially when coupled with the promise of 5 times the performance of the A8. However the intended application of these is still for phones although given how the iPad performs now it could be a pretty snappy tablet with the updated CPU.
This is still intended to sit in a ‘small’ device. This means short data paths, low power, tight video coupling. Good application for laptops as well as tablets, phones and tab-phones. It remains to be seen how well the chips will be integrated with the other parts of the system. What type of bus(es) will they sit on and how power consumption will be affected by that design when put to non-phone/tablet uses.
The second article extends out to address their usefulness in the embedded space. Not a big jump from phones and tablets, but still a distinct niche. It points up how the power efficiency is also due to the architectural efficiency of the RISC design. That would tend to bode well for taking on the chore of x86 emulation, but again, once the CPU crunches the numbers the results have to be passed around the circuitry to be made useful. Both Intel and AMD have made great strides doing this. ARM CPUs might well do so too, especially with highly parallelized GPUs. Can they go from promise to performance in the sigificantly different area of emulation of the CISC/RISC blend that is x86? Well, we should see in about a year.
The last article seems to address the emulation conundrum most directly and most successfully. 16 cores and DirectX support. Although not strictly adhering to the definition of massively parallel it’s 16 times more parallel that existing single core devices and coupled with other likely efficiencies and speedups it looks like it may be up to the task. In a year. (;
So while they are powerful now, for what they are as well as in the sense of being able to do work in general, the task they would be taking on still leaves some room for doubt as to whether they would be “powerful enough”. It seems like that room for doubt is being pretty well compressed though.
I suspect that what we will see is that the need for emulation of x86 CPUs will be tapering off, possibly quite sharply. The end of backward compatibility? Massive replacement of existing codebases that are working fine simply for the purpose of throwing new hardware at existing solutions in order to displace them for no economic benefit? Not so much that as powergrid and, possibly automated, refactoring of existing source code to work on upcoming devices that will provide some enhanced utility and economic benefit.
My speculations on these points. A knowledgeable person may have something very different to say.
ARM will not be useful as a desktop CPU until it gets some standard hardware architecture like the one x86 has. A computer is simply more than a set of CPU registers and instructions.
“ARM will not be useful as a desktop CPU until it gets some standard hardware architecture like the one x86 has. A computer is simply more than a set of CPU registers and instructions.”
O ye of little faith.
Microsoft has a working windows 8 running on an ARM processor.
Were just not privy to all the ins and outs yet but ARM and Windows is making this work.
ARM is just at the beggining of the out of order path, that Intel has entered with introduction of P6 whole 16 years ago. That’s a lot of time to catch up. Of course they have better ISA and can pump up the core number (much easier from the power management pov) but that won’t change the need for single core IPC for productivity apps.
Microsoft is an easy target because they haven’t been compelling in the tablet market as of yet, but they may know what their doing with Metro.
First off, I don’t think that it is going to be a one-size-fits-all solution like existing tablets are. I suspect that we’re going to see ARM based tablets that will be of limited functionality (at least initially) when compared to iOS and Android products. As many people have pointed out, the apps simply aren’t there yet. But they could be in time.
I suspect that we will also see a variety of Intel based tablets. They will have serious shortcomings compared to ARM based tablets, e.g. in term of cost and battery life, but they will be able to run a broad range of native Windows and Metro applications.
But, in the long run, I suspect that will all be temporary. At least it will be if Microsoft is as serious about WinRT as they sound. Once applications are developed for WinRT they will run on both platforms, albeit they may have to be compiled for Intel and ARM if they are using native code. Now something tells me that the serious applications are probably going to ignore the UI guidelines that Microsoft it bound to develop for Metro, and stick to something more conventional, but they would run on your ARM tablet quite nicely if you hooked up a keyboard and a mouse — and would be just as powerful as existing software.
It will take time though. After all, the existing Windows software ecosystem wasn’t created overnight. Heck, Windows developers have even had to go through major transistions. Heck, Mac developers have had to go through major transitions and there was even a smaller market base to justify it. But Microsoft will probably succeed in the long run.
(Sorry iOS and Android fans, but everything I’ve seen from those platforms have been toys in comparison to what you find on Microsoft’s platforms. I’m also not convinced that developers are eager to jump to iOS or Android for serious applications.)
Microsoft’s previous attempts at tablets tried to get people to touch the desktop — which was fraught with peril and essentially the wrong choice because windowed/desktop UI is small, complex, and difficult to target properly. Think about all of the toolbars and menus and junk UI that’s impossible to target with a fat finger. Metro changes all that. It removes the chrome and clutter, and gets down to the essence of what the user is trying to manipulate. A lot of geeks will resist this change because they believe that the simplification somehow dumbs-down the user experience to the point where geek hegemony doesn’t rule supreme anymore. But that’s okay, because they still have their command-lines and desktop, if they really want it. It’s just that the rest of the world wants a simpler experience.
How can you be so sure? Any computer user, including grannies, who isn’t a total idiot, will know how to use Windows, from XP to 7, or OS X.
As it has already been said, if you can’t use such simple interfaces, you have no business using a computer.
But what matters most, time will tell and users will vote with their wallet. My money is on Windows 8 doing worse than Vista, regarding sales.
This will be also a great opportunity for OS X, if only Apple had somebody in charge who was visionary enough to bring Macs to the masses, by making prices more affordable.
Sales of laptop computers (easily the largest category of computers sold today) are declining, while sales of the iPad are increasing. I think it’s reasonable to conclude that sales of iPads (and smartphones) are eating into laptop sales. The market is speaking. IDC, Gartner, and everybody else echoes these sentiments. Microsoft is responding.
Agree.
I disagree. Vista didn’t really offer much value over XP. The interface was pretty much the same, and it created some glaring performance issues. Windows 8 is a different animal altogether. The interface has been completely revamped, it’s a new programming model, there’s a Store ecosystem developing, and thus … this won’ be your father’s version of Windows. I believe that the market will respond favorably.
Disagree. OSX is mired in old school desktop thinking. It’s not going to build significantly more market share, other than the iPad and iPhone.
Edited 2011-09-18 23:14 UTC
I think even the geeks agree that Metro is a superior interface on touch-based devices. What we don’t want to accept is Metro being forced on the desktop computers. If you tried it you’d know that it’s next to useless on a 24″ monitor, operated with mouse and keyboard.
You could say that we don’t have to use Metro if we don’t want to, but the fact that normal desktop is suddenly being called “legacy”, and all the new APIs target Metro, win32 supposedly being phased out, THAT’S what makes us nervous. It seems like Microsoft is forcing Metro on us, no matter the device, it’s size, shape or controls.
I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again:
Metro SUCKS!
I see it serving nobody any good. Destroy it and those who need such a simplistic interface to use a computer!
Survival of the fittest!! DO NOT cater to the weakest minds!!
–The loon
PS: How do you shutdown Windows 8?? Anyone know??
There are two ways to shut down:
1. Move your mouse over to the start menu, select settings and on the right hand side the settings panel will appear and select power and there you can select reset, shut down or sleep.
2. On the legacy desktop press Alt + F4 and it will give you options to log off, switch user, shut down, restart or sleep.
Hope that helps.
Edited 2011-09-17 02:39 UTC
To translate that to the average user: ask someone who knows it and write it down, so you can find it again in the future.
Please make it easy, not more difficult. That would save me a lot of time explaining people how to do a lot of simple tasks on their computer.
Hahahaha. “Move your mouse over to the start menu, select settings and on the right hand side the settings panel will appear and select power and there you can select reset, shut down or sleep.”
So back on XP, it was a lot more complex – click ‘Start’ and then select ‘Turn Off Computer…’. Admittedly, the ‘Start’ thing made no sense then and still doesn’t, but geez, it’s like every iteration is an exercise in making things worse instead of thinking of ways to improve it.
Ballmer needs to be go ASAP. Every idiotic laugh of his just puts Windows further behind where it needs to be. A new marketing push for TabletPC under the guise of Windows8 isn’t going to suddenly turn a decade of crap into gold.
Ctl Alt Del still works as in 7, red button still there.
I used 2 monitors so I always see the desktop on one and mostly on the other if I don’t trigger Metro.
Also I used RocketDock to add links to various Win apps, control panel etc buried in the programs folder tree plus my regular apps.
If Microsoft had not catered to the weakest minds, they would have continued to develop their UNIX offering in full command line glory. They would have always shipped a compiler with every operating system, and expected the user to be proficient in its use. But instead it took the easy route and made windows. Microsoft made its Billions by making computers cheap and usable for most people.
Its like you are complaining to a giraffe that its too tall to be a church mouse.
Prior versions of Windows catered to those who were willing to put a little thought into their actions, though it was still dumbed down too much.
There is a happy medium that must be achieved, Windows 7 is a nice medium, a nice balance. The system itself doesn’t require too much of you, and it doesn’t get in your way when your trying to do something you’ve down 1,000 times on other versions of Windows.
It is hard for me to describe how badly Metro is: it alienates old users completely, it lacks intuitive interface cues (I’m sure they’ll work on that **cough**), it shoe-horns a new paradigm into an old box, and it is outright expecting touch-screen usage.
If you make an interface designed to be used by a baby, then those using it will begin to also think like a baby.
–The loon
The joke is that they’re talking about x86 tablets that half expect touch-screen usage, with the other half being either stylus or keyboard/mouse. So let’s mix the content consumption paradigm that apparently is very appealing to users who don’t need a full PC – or don’t want one when sitting on a sofa – with the old interface, in which case you have every nightmare that TabletPC brought to the table. What? Hey Steve, you do know you can still deliver a laptop/desktop OS without having to actually mix touch apps directly into it, right? Like… tablets using WP7 without turning Win8 into a bastardized piece of crap? But this is apparently Ballmer’s personal quest, making sure that stuff like Courier doesn’t see the light of day if it isn’t running full-blown Windows.
It’s just too strange.
Once I discovered Linux ( and once they had decent fonts) I couldn’t stand windows anymore. Its too much of a walled garden. You can make it work decently with enough effort and the right applications installed, but that’s too much of a hassle to do simple tasks on a friends computer. Win 7 is already too stupid.
… For me. Left out the qualifier.
I didn’t mean to diss anyone who finds it perfect for their needs. Obviously some people do like it and it works well for them. Just as obvious, to me, is that some people will also like windows 8 Metro and it will work well for them. I’m betting the next big transition ( windows 14?) will bring the same gripe from some of the people who love win 8 metro ( its dumbs down the interface so you can apply direct thought to the machine, instead of just using a finger!).
Metro = Microsoft Bob for a new age. I bet the iDiots are going to love it.
LOL. So true. I’m an iDiot and I like metro.
“Survival of the fittest!! DO NOT cater to the weakest minds!!”
Survival of the fittest isn’t a cause, it’s an effect. If the simplistic interface wins, it is the fittest.
Windows 95 wasn’t the best OS, but it won. Why? It was most fit.
Besides the methods described by kedwards and transputer_guy, if you are not logged in, while looking at the wallpaper you can hit ‘Enter’ on the kb (clicking with the mouse just makes it jump for a second and then you are looking at the wallpaper some more) and the login screen will come up. In the lower right area is the bisected-circle on/off power icon. It works as expected.
That’s fantastic, so it’s almost easier to log out and then shut down, but of course log-out is probably hidden under 4 menu layers too.
If you are in the Metro environment then just go to the user icon (upper far right, past the last app icon, in my case Silverlight), click on it and you get a context menu which offers Change User Tile, Lock, Log Off and Add User.
I also found out that clicking on the wallpaper before you log in is a waste of time. Hitting the Enter key makes it scroll away. Or drag it out of the way and the login screen appears. The login screen has the powerdown/on-off icon.
I imagine that .net applications will be able to be quickly recompiled on Windows ARM. I bet that is how they are going to do it.
Actually, the .NET applications will stay as they are.
There won’t be any recompiles since they are stored as bytecode.
This is a big advantage to develop in .NET – your apps will continue to run on x86 while also being able to run on Windows 8 in the future.
There are different issues here. It’s true that .NET bytecode can run on any processor architecture, but that doesn’t mean MS is committing to supporting desktop-based WinForms apps on ARM. Obviously the system would be leaner and meaner on ARM with as many pieces removed as possible, which directly affects compatibility. An entire set of .NET VMs (for different versions) on a tablet is quite a load. As the article said, either not decided or not announced.
It depends on what .net means to you.
The current crop of .net apps, just like everything else, are considered ‘legacy’ (apps which are considered ‘legacy’ can’t be sold in the app store, can’t carry the ‘Ready for Windows 8’ logo, won’t be featured by Microsoft etc, won’t work on platforms that don’t have the Win32 stack, etc.)
You have to build to WinRT basically, irrespective of what language you use.
(I think the whole .net language is going away.)
.net is not a language… it is a framework.
Yes, it is going away because it is being replaced with WinRT which will have all the same framework tools of .net, but also add in the hooks needed to manipulate the OS at a system level.
It ain’t over ’til they port VS to Metro.
Actually I just wish I could run VS6 again on Win 7, I could on Vista but not on 7. VS6 was about as complex an IDE as I could use or needed and I knew it inside out.
Same for office, I still pine for the utter simplicity of WriteNow (about 40KB of pure MacOS 68K asm) and many other smaller apps fallen by the way. Actually I always liked CodeWarrior for MacOS, Windows, and its BeIDE version, cross OS and cross processor with ease and then snuffed out.
The problem with MS and Apple is that general purpose apps and OSes keep getting bigger by trying to be all things to all people at the same time. We really do need to keep apps at different levels appropriate to the users needs.
VS 2010 is a WPF app so it should be a very quick port.
Yeah. Two square blocks:
– Build
– Debug
Both with live info displayed (compile ETA and bugs left, respectively).
It’ll be *so* nice.
Please cut the negative crap. Just because you perceive Metro as being a dumbed down interface doesn’t mean that the people who it seems to be designed for are stupid. A lot of those people are actually quite intelligent. It is just that they place their priorities in life elsewhere. Some of them may even be quite proficient at using a computer, they just want to use something that provides a lot of information at their fingertips (those tiles are live) or something that they perceive as beautiful (which boxy menus and terminal windows ain’t).
As for the ones who simply aren’t as proficient with computers as we are, well, they may demonstrate intelligence in other ways. Many of them have this thing called “people skills.” Now I know that a lot of geeks look down at that but hey, being able to motivate people to get the job done (e.g. good managers) or to make people deal with their problems (e.g. psychologists) or to encourage them to learn (e.g. teachers) are incredibly important functions. And if their focus on people makes them dorks in front of a machine because they couldn’t give a damn about the machine, so be it.
Of course, I’m picking on the people skills part because a lot of technically inclined people come off as rather abrasive. And when we are dealing with our own kind, that’s usually okay because we understand the content of the message (i.e. we don’t take things personally). But even some technically inclined people can demonstrate an ignorance of how computers work. Believe it or not, there are many scientists and engineers who can barely handle a computer. Sure they may know a few programs remarkably well, and those programs may be so complex that most people couldn’t handle them. Yet the moment you toss a new piece of software their way it is almost as though they are starting at ground zero. Since they don’t understand the underlying principles they’re behaving like trained chimps. But just because they are trained chimps in front of computers doesn’t mean that they are trained chimps while designing bridges or interpreting data received from distant galaxies or whatever.
So please appreciate those other people for who they are, and please reject the notion of degrading them because they have different values and skills than you do.
(Sorry about being tangental to the topic, but some of the comments were deplorable.)
The percentage of the population in the developer world that do not have at least some rudimentary computer skills is dropping all the time.
ergo, the need for a dumbed down interface is reducing all the time.
I have the Win8 demo installed on a VBox VM on my Macbook. It was running when I wanted to show my 89yr old Mother some pictures of the Cycling tour of Britain I took in Scotland last weekend. She saw it and asked what that was.
After a bit of explanation she tried it out. For someone with no IT skills and the nearest she gets to a computer is a TV remote control she soon commented.
‘It is not very good is it?’
When I asked why, she said that compared to how easy it was for me to move around apps on OSX,’you have to click an awful lot’.
Now I don’t know all the shortcuts yet but most of them are useless for me when I use a mouse as I’m a lefty but now that I look at it in the light of her comments, she is right.
As it stands, Metro is going to be very frustrating to use on the desktop for any length of time.
This equals failure in my eyes.
If I were a teacher, i’d probably mark it as ‘Could do better’.
It remains to be seen if MS can persuade us to use a mobile phone interface on a 24in LCD screen without wanting to give Mr Balmer a good kicking.
If all you use are desktop apps, you can live in the desktop in Win8. The only time you have to flip into Metro is on the Start screen. But EVEN THAT can be disabled and use the standard Start menu, if you find that easier to use. So, your point is kind of moot.
And where is the switch to turn standard Start menu back on and hide Metro, I saw the registry hack on a previous post, that didn’t work for me. Registry hacking should never be the normal way of switching things around.
You know what, if MS would just alter the login boot to allow users to choose either classic or novelty mode that would be fine for everyone, wouldn’t it?
And yet that’s precisely how zillions of utilities work.
http://www.neowin.net/news/windows-8-how-to-re-enable-the-classic-s…
tomcat,
http://www.neowin.net/news/windows-8-how-to-re-enable-the-classic-s…..
This worked for me, the system crashes are still happening, unfortunately.
“And yet that’s precisely how zillions of utilities work.”
This is unacceptable for such a basic requirement. transputer_guy is right it’s a glaring omission by microsoft. However let’s assume they will fix it.
Switching back to the classic start menu makes all the new OS apps inaccessible, why? The apps on the metro start menu should be present on the standard start menu. Otherwise microsoft is punishing those who don’t like the metro start menu by making win8 apps incompatible and inaccessible under win8 classic.
Ideally metro apps from the classic start menu would either launch themselves full screen, or even in a window. Both are perfectly obvious and reasonable solutions to the incompatibility which microsoft invented.
It’s a developers preview, by definition it is incomplete. It is not a “it’s a glaring omission by microsoft” perhaps they haven’t written the gui to allow you to change it? Perhaps you need patience.
BluenoseJake,
“It’s a developers preview, by definition it is incomplete. It is not a ‘it’s a glaring omission by microsoft'”
Sure it’s incomplete, but it’s still a glaring omission. None of us have a clear picture of what microsoft intends to do with metro, will they make metro apps and standard apps compatible? I’ve learned not to trust that they’ll do the right thing.
“perhaps they haven’t written the gui to allow you to change it? Perhaps you need patience.”
Perhaps, perhaps not. I don’t have faith in MS doing the right thing – I hope I am wrong though!
you think it’s a glaring omission, they probably think getting the main metro interface working, their new api framework functional and the integration with the classic desktop more important.
I tend to agree with them, you expect too much from a developer preview, way too much. There is a whole year for it to get all/some/none of the features that semi anonymous posters on some OS blog think are truly important.
And maybe, just maybe, some change is good?
Sure, if you disable Metro, Metro will be far less frustrating to use.
You made a very nice point.
It’s that simple, as some distro switch a default desktop. At first there is complaining everywhere and (click-click) back to work.
Metro will bring something, that was on Linux for years: user can use his favorite desktop. Gnome, KDE, XFCE, WindowMaker, Fluxbox and many more. And they are 100% compatible. I may have Gnome 3 in my laptop and IceWM, or Gnome 2 at work and it make no difference for Firefox or Pidgin.
MS is going to make .net apps work in both environments, just as Nokia tried with QT. It’s brilliant. It’s like Pidgin would switch to old and rusty interface under WindowMaker and shiny awesome thing under KDE4.
SeeM,
“It’s that simple, as some distro switch a default desktop. At first there is complaining everywhere and (click-click) back to work.”
Are you saying it *will* be that simple when released? Because in the preview I saw no way to simply get the old functionality back.
“Metro will bring something, that was on Linux for years: user can use his favorite desktop. Gnome, KDE, XFCE, WindowMaker, Fluxbox and many more. And they are 100% compatible. I may have Gnome 3 in my laptop and IceWM, or Gnome 2 at work and it make no difference for Firefox or Pidgin.”
Yes under linux this is true. But from what I’ve seen of this dev preview, microsoft has omitted any such compatibility between metro apps and standard apps. If they bridge this gap, then the choice would be good for users. However the preview offered no such choice to the user.
Metro interface ….
STOP IT!
Is everyone here an expert in everything? Or an advanced user of everything?
Well, here’s a newsflash for you. Not everyone actually has an interest in computers. Not everyone finds Windows or Linux as easy to use as you. Some people get frustrated when using a computer because it feels like there’s too much complexity and it makes them feel inferior or uncertain because they don’t really know too much about what they’re doing.
I haven’t used any Metro interface, but people have been complaining that it’s “too dumbed-down”, with the implication that “people should just learn as much about computers as I have”.
That’s a dumb point of view – sorry, but it is. If you don’t like Metro, don’t use it. You have that option. But by opposing its development you’re trying to exclude people from being able to use computers. Metro could possibly help “computer-illiterate” people to actually accomplish more with their computers and feel more confident doing so.
To use an analogy, it’s like insisting that everyone be made to drive manual transmission cars that require double-clutching and controlling the engine revs when changing gear, like they used to do in the olden days. Because anyone who can’t do that is an iDiot and shouldn’t be allowed to drive. Right? Oh, and get rid of that starter motor – hand cranking is good enough.
3rdalbum,
“I haven’t used any Metro interface, but people have been complaining that it’s ‘too dumbed-down’ … That’s a dumb point of view – sorry, but it is. If you don’t like Metro, don’t use it. You have that option.”
You profess to have no experience with it and yet you judge the opinions of those of us who’ve tried it? Good grief.
And no, personally I don’t dislike it because it emphasizes a single application interface over a multi-window one. What sucks is metro’s implementation of a single-window interface. Metro’s implementation it’s just awful, illogical, confusing.
“But by opposing its development you’re trying to exclude people from being able to use computers. Metro could possibly help “computer-illiterate” people to actually accomplish more with their computers and feel more confident doing so.”
I don’t think anybody said this, the problem is that metro is just as confusing as what it replaced. There is no harmony between metro mode and standard modes. Eliminating chrome actually hurts user navigation and increases the learning curve. Efficient workflow between metro/desktop is impossible.
“To use an analogy, ”
Here is a better car analogy:
Metro, as it stands in the preview, is like a road network, only all the signs have been taken down. You have no idea where you are, no idea where you can go. You either have to recognize your surroundings from memory or drive around randomly until you get somewhere.
Well, I have used metro and I’d disagree. Metro will be godsend to most laymen. If anything, it’s unfamiliar.
>> What sucks is metro’s implementation of a single-window interface. Metro’s implementation it’s just awful, illogical, confusing.
I’m genuinely interested as to why you believe so. GUIs on windows are already an inconsistent mess.
The only real complaint about metro would be a complaint with all touch-interfaces — they’re not discoverable. The prime advantage that WIMP-based GUIs have over CLIs is precisely that you don’t need to RTFM. That said, with cryptic and tiny icons, modal interfaces most of this advantage is lost. Even so, Metro has strict guidelines including for gestures as well, so I have more hope for it.
Most of the rest of the world out side of the USA still drives manual rather than automatic. In the UK almost everyone learns manual, and almost everyone can drive. So what your analogy really suggests is that if people find something mildly difficult you should take it away; even if pretty much everyone is capable of learning to use it and, consequently, of using the machine more efficiently and broadening their options should they ever wish to go somewhere a bit out of their comfort zone.
I mean… I believe some of you are looking at this matter the wrong way. I don’t think this is about “dumbing down” the desktop at all, this isn’t about making the PC easier to use for the average Joe. No, this is about that old trick: leveraging your privileged position in one market to compete better on another market where you’re not relevant.
What benefits do they get by forcing Metro on desktops? I’m thinking there are at least two:
– First, they’re familiarizing users with the UI. Once they’ve used a PC with Windows 8 for a while, they already know how to work with a Windows 8 tablet or phone. No more puzzled faces when faced with a Windows mobile device. No more “what the hell is that thing with all those tiles?”
– Second, and perhaps more important: developers, developers, developers. You only need to watch the Build keynote to realize how often they talk about how big the current Windows ecosystem is and the huge opportunities it provides for developers. Or in other words, how do you get people to develop apps for your new mobile platform? Simple, just force it on the product that will ship without a shadow of a doubt in thousands of new PCs as soon as Windows 8 hits RTM. No one can say “maybe nobody will use this Metro thing, why should I develop for it?” because even if reception is really terrible, new PCs are going to be sold and even in the worst case scenario, not everyone is going to downgrade to Windows 7. Just remember Vista, which with all the backslash, managed to capture a decent market share.
Think about it. What do they have to lose anyway if they alienate their traditional desktop users? They survived the Vista fiasco almost unscathed because (let’s face it, shall we?) they have virtually no competition on the desktop, and they received no benefit in exchange. If they get some flak for forcing Metro UI on desktops but this time manage to be successful on tablets and phone spaces, maybe they’re thinking it’s a trade-off well worth making.
Vista was terrible on so many levels and still is, I still have to boot it on occasion. It did untold damage to MS good will the likes of which they never really appreciated, I curse it and them every time I am using it. I paid good money for that.
Now they repeat the process with 8, a simple login switch to disable Metro is all it takes.
Actually I really doubt whether many Windows users will buy a Metro tablet, so the few that do will justify all of this pain.
Product segmentation is a good thing, Apple seems to understand this better.
The reason Vista was terrible, is that it’s a rushed inconsistent mess. Not to forget, it had bad rap before it was released as well.
Windows 8 on the other hand is bimodal — a strict paradigm shift. Not so with Metro interface; it has been well received on cellphones from what I know.
please tell me how they can disable it? It is the UI of the OS… it is not a shell on top of windows 7… it is the UI.
Actually… http://www.sevenforums.com/chillout-room/187152-windows-8-heres-tri…
If they did not really face the competition on desktop, there would be no Vista at all. They released a beta quality software because they were close to loosing the position. In fact, they are clearly on decline as the numbers state.
As tablets are now just the toys, they could easily release a tablet-only Windows version with a good degree of media support, a good e-mail client (capable of corporative stuff) and a descent viewer (with limited editing capabilities) for office document formats – and they could hook the majority of tablet users as they did with palm users once. There is no need in sacrifices at all.
They clearly state that they see tablets and PCs as two distinct products that are going to merge in “a couple of years”. If so, forcing Metro on PC just means that they are putting their money in this statement. It’s not about extending to another product market, it’s just securing own positions.
PROFESOR BALTAZAR!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ar7e1XMYotA
(hi, to Tomislav from PEEK&POKE
)
hint to rest of world:
Profesor Baltazar ALWAYS have “magical”^a"c solution to ANY problem…
Then again, does the average user even need 90% of Office’s features.
The features are there when you need them:
whether its just one guy or a clerical staff of 500 to 15,000.
There was a time when WordPerfect offered about a dozen flavors of its core word processor —
for the law office, the medical professional and so on.
This looks plausible.
But in fact it adds layer upon layer of cost and complexity at every step along the way.
“An x86 tablet that’s thicker, heavier, with shorter battery life”
That problem has been solved. No power disadvantage over others in the very near future.
http://www.pcworld.com/article/239972/intel_shows_off_tablets_using…
I bet the same kind of person is bitching about Metro as those bitching about Gnome 3.
All these people bitch about “dumbed down” “dumbed down”, well….
maybe its just DIFFERENT! maybe it DOES NOT LOOK LIKE WIN95!
So, you actually have to think about interacting with your machine differently than you did with Win95 and all the Win95 interface clones like Win2000/WinXP/Vista/7/KDE/Gnome2.x…
The impression I get of all these Metro / Gnome3 haters is that they are just afraid of change.
Now, I have not tried Metro, but I do like Win7 Phone, and I hugely like Gnome 3.1, in fact I like Gnome 3.1 a lot better than Lion, and I now pretty much use Gnome 3.1 as my full time desktop.
Edited 2011-09-17 21:26 UTC
So what? Metro, Gnome 3 (and KDE 4 for that matter) all belong to the same kind of crap: change just for the sake of it.
Imagine that applied to cars or houses, all of a sudden crazy designs with no thought to usability: how many do you think they would sell?
with that attitude we would all be using a terminal today.
And all living in caves and riding donkeys? Wrong!
For real improvements it takes a very long time. In order to destroy what you have created, very short.
It has taken 30 years or longer to bring personal computers where they are now, while a bunch of idiots is trying to destroy them in no time.
But this has never been a strict slow progressive evolution. Instead, it’s a sporadic one, of ridicule and hype. iPhone for instance was a tremendous game-changer in smartphone market. It’s not a “bunch of idiots”.
While I own a 17″ MacBook Pro, I have never cared for iPhones. What are they? Phones? No, a simple but fully functional phone costs 20 Euro. Cameras? Buy a better camera for much less. Surf the intenet? Hardly, with a 3.5-inch display. It is just human madness, we allow to get ourselves brainwashed by hype.
iPhones/Android Phones are multi-modal communication devices….that means that I can e-mail, IM, SMS, phone,video chat, remote desktop, find information on the web, snap a picture of something that I need to send to someone so they have a concept of what I am talking about… From nearly any place I have a cell signal.
There is a lot of value in that for a lot of people.
I can also, listen to my music, play games, and read books.
Mobile computing is a very important aspect to modern computing and communication that is probably as game changing as the Web was.
Most of those things can be done, more comfortably, if you have a camera, a cheap mobile phone and a computer. I have friends who are not young and not particularly tech savvy who do all the above very well without a smartphone.
Edited 2011-09-19 02:57 UTC
The functions can be done, but not with anywhere near the flexibility of situations and speed of response time that a smartphone provides.
And it is all pretty simple to do in a smartphone.
Edited 2011-09-19 16:12 UTC
You must have far bigger pockets than I do. Even when I wear cargo pants, I doubt that I could stuff a laptop into a pocket. Do tell me where you buy pants that can hold a laptop, phone, ipod AND camera.
Can’t you wait until you are at home?
Having said that, in the winter I have at least 8 pockets.
Edited 2011-09-19 22:17 UTC
Earlier, I said the Metro/Gnome3 haters were afraid of change, perhaps thats true, but consider this.
You have one group of interfaces that are all fundamentally Windows95 UI clones, this include Win2000/XP/Vista/7/KDE/Gnome2.x and to an extent OS/2 Warp4. I’ll bet the people who really like this set of interfaces are people who’s first computer experience was Windows 95. We tend to like what we first learn.
Now, whilst I may be in the minority here, I never liked Win95, in fact, I despised it. At the time (1995) I had an Amiga at home, and used a NeXTs and Suns at school. That might explain why I’m a huge Amiga/NeXT/BeOS and to an extent Mac fan, and why I liked Gnome 1.x but not Gnome 2.x.
Anyway, as I see it, we have the Windows95 based interfaces and non-Windows95 based interfaces. Metro/Gnome3 haters might just be fans of Windows 95 UIs and Metro/Gnome3 fans might never have cared for Windows95.
I for one am glad that FINALLY Windows95 is perhaps no longer the gold standard of user interfaces.
Edited 2011-09-17 23:31 UTC
Where would you put people who believe that OS X is the best OS?
OS X is certainly not comparable to Metro or Gnome3.
And in which family of operating systems would you put OS X?
BTW I never used Windows 95, at the time I was refusing to use computers, I found them glorified typewriters.
Edited 2011-09-18 00:20 UTC
Actually, I think Gnome3 has some similarities with OSX, namely the dock.
No, I don’t think OSX is in the Win95 family of interfaces, OSX is obviously a blend of Mac Classic and NeXT, and oddly enough, I liked both of them better than OSX:) (from a UI standpoint).
Mac fans are an eclectic bunch, sadly many of them are “hipsters”, the iPod generation that follow anything Apple says because iPods cool.
I’m Mac fan (with reservations), I’ve been using Apples since the Apple ][. I’m not particularly happy with OSX Lion, like I said, I switched over mostly to Gnome3. Again, I like a lot of things about Gnome3, but it still has some obvious issues.
Frankly, the OSs I’ve liked best of all are NeXT, BeOS and Amiga. Sadly, I think OSX has gone downhill since it was NeXT, and with Lion, seems to be accelerating.
Edited 2011-09-18 02:46 UTC
I don’t know, actually I quite like Lion.
It has been optimized a lot under the hood. My MacBook Pro used a lot of resources and run very hot under Snow Leopard. Now it runs cool and quiet.
There are a few changes in the graphical interface, but I find them improvements (some fine tuning still needed).
As I have already said in a previous post, I like Macs, but I am not a zealot, I don’t desire everything created by Apple.
you like Lion but hate Windows 8?
weird because Lion is incorporating mobile interface features into the OS just like Win 8 is…though it is at a much different pace.
Come on, in which way does Lion look like Windows 8 to you? Launchpad? That is only an applications menu, OS X needed one.
Edited 2011-09-19 00:19 UTC
They changed their scrolling paradigm and they have changed their window management to bring it in line with what Users are familiar with in a touch based environment.
I did not say it looks like Win8 at all… you are complaining about Win8’s touch-centric UI, I pointed out that Apple is moving in the same direction, only slower
MacMan,
I don’t know why metro sympathizers (many who’ve never even tried it), keep coming back to “afraid of change” and “it DOES NOT LOOK LIKE WIN95!”? These statements attack the critic, but don’t address the criticisms.
A single application interface could work very well for many people who don’t use a computer for more than one task at a time…that includes my own parents. However the metro interface shown here is unnecessarily confusing and difficult to use on it’s own terms. This has nothing to do with “win95”, though there are a number of compatibility issues metro introduced quite unnecessarily. It’s a garbage implementation of a potentially good idea.
Edit: Maybe they will fix metro based on all the negative feedback they get, however there is a lot not to like about metro as it stands. Maybe they won’t fix it and just try to force it onto all of us instead. With microsoft, this isn’t unheard of.
I find that functionally, but not aesthetically, metro seems to be a very distance descendant of the old DOSShell, which had the ability to switch between full screen dos programs (text and graphic) in much the same way metro does.
Edited 2011-09-18 03:24 UTC
I’m writing this from a metro-style IE on brand new Windows [8] Developer Preview. I’m playing with the thing the whole day and it seems to me that Metro itself is a clear message: Microsoft don’t want to cope with legacy any more.
It seems that Microsoft has worked out a plan for moving customers to Metro:
1. Provide Windows 7 as the last desktop PC with some tablet capabilities.
2. Provide Windows [8] Developer Preview as early as it is barely usable, with the quick start kit for developers.
3. Provide Windows 8 with ugly (x86) to no (ARM) legacy applications support.
As Microsoft has stated, they separated the new Metro apps and libs from the legacy, so they can regard Windows 8 as Windows 7 plus Metro add-on. So, they keep maintaining legacy part in a bugfix mode and concentrate resources on Metro.
At the same time Microsoft encourages developers to start experimenting with Metro right now, so when Windows 8 hits end users there will already be a number of third party apps at avail.
If so, Windows 8 is targeted at early adopters who want to switch to Metro as soon as it is possible. At the same time the release of Windows 8 with Metro as a main UI will show the big software houses that it is the right time to move to Metro.
Effectively, when Windows 9 (or 10) reaches users as the first Metro-based version of Windows targeting the general public with i386/amd64/arm hardware configurations, the Metro ecosystem will be already built.
It’s absurd the way some people are reacting to the _current_ and _non-final_ details of Windows 8. And that some people are crying that this or that is somehow being forcefully shoved down their throats….as if someone is standing over them with a gun making them install it. How can you post such ridiculousness without embarrassment?
Don’t like Windows 8? Don’t use it, you aren’t forced to. Don’t like Windows <fill in whichever flavor you wish>? Don’t use it, you aren’t forced to. Want to whine and moan about what I’ve said? Don’t bother, I’m not interested in hearing it.
You may resume your childishness now.
“It’s absurd the way some people are reacting to the _current_ and _non-final_ details of Windows 8.”
Until the final windows 8 is out, we can (and should) criticize the preview. It would be pointless to withhold criticism until it’s complete, by which time it’s already in the market and we’ve lost the opportunity to fix it.
“And that some people are crying that this or that is somehow being forcefully shoved down their throats….as if someone is standing over them with a gun making them install it.”
Unfortunately, microsoft does shove things down consumer’s throats which we don’t want. They use a number of monopoly tactics to eliminate reasonable choice. Most people are still content with XP, yet if their computers die, they are frequently forced to purchase a new OS which they neither needed nor wanted.
“How can you post such ridiculousness without embarrassment?”
Bit of an exaggeration isn’t it?
“Until the final windows 8 is out, we can (and should) criticize the preview. It would be pointless to withhold criticism until it’s complete, by which time it’s already in the market and we’ve lost the opportunity to fix it.”
Who exactly is “we” supposed to be here? This may come as a surprise but once Windows has reached the preview point, it’s well along the way to being a market-ready product. I don’t know why you think your criticism has anything to do with what the retail version will be. The only “opportunity” that exists for you is forming opinions about the preview, not making business decisions about the product. If you believe otherwise then you have to accept that Windows is exactly what people have asked for.
“Unfortunately, microsoft does shove things down consumer’s throats which we don’t want. They use a number of monopoly tactics to eliminate reasonable choice. Most people are still content with XP, yet if their computers die, they are frequently forced to purchase a new OS which they neither needed nor wanted.”
I’m a consumer and Microsoft has never threatened me, shoved anything down my throat, or done anything beyond provide an OS option, among other software, should I choose to use it. I no longer use Windows XP, by my own choice, but if I did and my box died, I would simply reinstall it.
Microsoft hasn’t and doesn’t eliminate choice. For example, while I use Windows 7 for my desktops, I use Linux for my servers. Why don’t I just use Linux for the desktops too? Because I think Linux is trash for desktops. The point is I, and everybody else, does in fact have choices available to them. Those who think Microsoft is some evil empire that forces their dictatorship on the poor helpless consumer is pure fantasy. It’s simply not based in reality.
There’s something else people seem to have forgotten. Microsoft does not answer to anybody but their shareholders and board of directors. They are a company that creates products & services made available for public consumption. NOBODY is forced to buy or use those products or services. I don’t believe for one second you have ever been forced to buy and install Windows — but if you have, you should file a police report immediately.
Microsoft makes some great software. It escapes me why that is so hard for some people to acknowledge. Further, I can’t help but wonder why those few who think Microsoft is so “evil”, and Windows such a pile of crap, invest so much time & energy into talking about it. I guess some people just need something to complain about or they’re not happy.
You won’t be threatened at gunpoint, but once Microsoft releases a new OS, PC manufacturers will start selling their laptops or desktops with the new OS.
I had to buy a laptop in 2008 with Vista. True, I could (and did) “downgrade” to XP, but that is because I know how to install an OS and where to find the drivers (if available).
Joe User doesn’t know how to do that.
People are far more computer literate these days then say, 10+ years ago. I’ll agree that Joe User may be a little intimidated by a full install, but he/she likely knows about drivers and can manage to install them. That’s my experience with Joe User anyways.
About the laptop… You didn’t _have to_ buy one with Vista on it, you chose to. How do I know? Because several manufacturers have laptops available that don’t come with an OS.
I still stand by the idea that the consumer decides how he spends his money, not Microsoft.
That laptop was a special offer, 29 Euro a month with 0% APR. At the time I didn’t have over a thousand Euro to buy cash.
As to “Joe User”, I must know a different kind, because I don’t know a single one who would install an OS or upgrade a BIOS. Many of them have been using computers for longer than I have.
Of course I also know “geeks”, but that is a different matter.
ilovebeer,
“This may come as a surprise but once Windows has reached the preview point, it’s well along the way to being a market-ready product.”
You are contradicting what others are saying. For instance BluenoseJake claims that the reason metro exhibits problems today is because it’s a preview and it is not market ready. For the sake of everyone involved, I hope he is right and you are wrong.
“If you believe otherwise then you have to accept that Windows is exactly what people have asked for.”
You really should know better than that.
“I’m a consumer and Microsoft has never threatened me, shoved anything down my throat, or done anything beyond provide an OS option, among other software, should I choose to use it. I no longer use Windows XP, by my own choice, but if I did and my box died, I would simply reinstall it.”
You know damn well microsoft uses it’s monopoly position to push products the market often doesn’t want, don’t play ignorant here.
Edited 2011-09-19 11:51 UTC
“You are contradicting what others are saying. For instance BluenoseJake claims that the reason metro exhibits problems today is because it’s a preview and it is not market ready. For the sake of everyone involved, I hope he is right and you are wrong.”
Maybe I didn’t make the point clear enough. Windows previews are well along the way to being market-ready — meaning nearly (if not all) major design decisions have been made and committed to. Microsoft does in fact ask people what they (dis)like long before this point.
“You know damn well microsoft uses it’s monopoly position to push products the market often doesn’t want, don’t play ignorant here.”
While some of Microsoft’s business practices may be “questionable” in some peoples eyes, the fact stands that they can not force you to spend your money. They can not force you to run Windows. They can not force you to upgrade Windows if you do run it. They can not force you to do ANYTHING. That’s just plain & simple, unarguable facts of reality.
Just for laughs, why don’t you list out all these supposed unwanted products Microsoft shoves down your throat. If what you claim is true it should be an easy task. If you’re going to make wild accusations, you’ll be asked to back them up with real world evidence it’s more then just your imagination.
ilovebeer,
“While some of Microsoft’s business practices may be ‘questionable’ in some peoples eyes, the fact stands that they can not force you to spend your money. They can not force you to run Windows.”
You ignored Anonymous Penguin’s observation, where many consumers are in fact forced to buy windows.
Personally I am forced to as well as I have to support clients using windows. In my line of work, I have no choice in the matter. That is what happens when one platform is the defacto standard or monopoly. Many of us are coerced into running what everyone else is using simply because everyone else is using it, not necessarily due to merit. I would expect every last person in IT to understand this phenomenon, microsoft certainly do.
“They can not force you to upgrade Windows if you do run it. They can not force you to do ANYTHING. That’s just plain & simple, unarguable facts of reality.”
In the case I outlined, they can and do force you to upgrade windows. The WinXP OEM licenses are not transferable, new licenses of XP are not for sale. This amounts to a forced upgrade on most new systems. Those of us lucky enough to have a transferable license are in the minority, and require technical expertise beyond that of ordinary users.
“Just for laughs, why don’t you list out all these supposed unwanted products Microsoft shoves down your throat. If what you claim is true it should be an easy task. If you’re going to make wild accusations…”
All the products in which microsoft has a monopoly. What rock have you been living under??
Edit: I am not asserting that windows is no good for anyone/anything; I prefer it sometimes even. However why do you deny that a great deal of microsoft’s market share came from business tactics rather then the merit of their product?
Edited 2011-09-19 20:15 UTC
“You ignored Anonymous Penguin’s observation, where many consumers are in fact forced to buy windows.
Personally I am forced to as well as I have to support clients using windows. In my line of work, I have no choice in the matter. That is what happens when one platform is the defacto standard or monopoly. Many of us are coerced into running what everyone else is using simply because everyone else is using it, not necessarily due to merit. I would expect every last person in IT to understand this phenomenon, microsoft certainly do.”
Anonymous Penguin started by saying he was forced to buy a laptop with Vista. He ended by saying he bought the laptop because it was a good deal for him financially. So no, he was not forced — and neither is anyone else.
Next, you say you are forced to buy/use Windows because you have to support clients who use it. However, you are not the consumer when you are working providing support for a platform you company chooses to accommodate. So no, again… You, or your employer rather was not forced to buy Windows, they choose to provide support. Not all companies do.
“In the case I outlined, they can and do force you to upgrade windows. The WinXP OEM licenses are not transferable, new licenses of XP are not for sale. This amounts to a forced upgrade on most new systems. Those of us lucky enough to have a transferable license are in the minority, and require technical expertise beyond that of ordinary users.”
The fact will always remain that you are not forced. If you want to run Windows XP then you must either own an existing copy, or buy a used one. Joe User doesn’t care about the technical details of a software license, he only cares if it will work when he installs it. The answer is yes it will.
It’s like you are complaining that VHS recorders aren’t made or supported anymore, and you feel forced to buy a DVD or Bluray. Two problems.. First, you have never and never will be forced to do so, and second no product is supported for eternity.
All the products in which microsoft has a monopoly. What rock have you been living under??
Exactly as I suspected, you decline the request because you can’t come up with one without completely putting your foot in your mouth. Hence, your own edit below.
“Edit: I am not asserting that windows is no good for anyone/anything; I prefer it sometimes even. However why do you deny that a great deal of microsoft’s market share came from business tactics rather then the merit of their product?”
Because it’s simply not true. Windows is a great product and it has transformed the world for the better. The merit of their flagship product is exactly what helped them to the top, not a 30 year run of strong-arming and bullying as you imply. For your you to deny that fact is beyond absurd. What’s next on the list, arguing that the Earth is flat?
Come on.
ilovebeer,
“Anonymous Penguin started by saying he was forced to buy a laptop with Vista. He ended by saying he bought the laptop because it was a good deal for him financially. So no, he was not forced — and neither is anyone else.”
More accurately, they are not “forced” to buy a new computer system, but if they do, it is very likely they will be forced to buy a new windows license along with it. Name one major retail store that sells PCs and without an OS license (either to use an old windows license or another OS)? I don’t know of any. Even online my favorite vendors won’t ship complete systems minus the OS. Most consumers buying new systems will have no choice but to buy new windows licenses every time they buy new computers, even if they wanted to keep their old software.
Hell, even I bought some laptops that came with windows, which was removed. It is a fallacy to claim that new microsoft sales = demand for new microsoft products. Most consumers do not have a choice in the matter.
“The fact will always remain that you are not forced. If you want to run Windows XP then you must either own an existing copy, or buy a used one. Joe User doesn’t care about the technical details of a software license, he only cares if it will work when he installs it. The answer is yes it will.”
You are trivializing the difficulty of transferring windows OS/licenses between (incompatible) machines.
Even if we ignore the legal issues with non-transferable OEM licenses, Joe needs the expertise to install his old XP OS on his new system, is this realistic? If not, he may need a couple hundred dollars to have technical support do it for him.
Considering all this, I think you’ll agree that it’s cheaper just to stick with whatever is being bundled EVEN if he would have preferred to stick with XP.
This is not hypothetical, I do know friends who ended up with Vista despite not being very happy with it.
“Exactly as I suspected, you decline the request because you can’t come up with one without completely putting your foot in your mouth. Hence, your own edit below.”
I did answer the question, I honestly thought you’d understand, but let me answer it in a different way: windows and office.
“Windows is a great product and it has transformed the world for the better. The merit of their flagship product is exactly what helped them to the top, not a 30 year run of strong-arming and bullying as you imply.”
This is debatable. Arguably microsoft has spent a great portion of it’s existence behind the curve, and simply bought or squashed those who were ahead of it, at least until the government interfered.
“For your you to deny that fact is beyond absurd.”
You remind me so much of someone I used to know, did you by any chance go to RIT?
“Most consumers buying new systems will have no choice but to buy new windows licenses every time they buy new computers, even if they wanted to keep their old software.”
This is simply not true. There are plenty of barebones systems available, laptop or otherwise. It’s beyond me why you choose to pretend this fact doesn’t exist.
“Considering all this, I think you’ll agree that it’s cheaper just to stick with whatever is being bundled EVEN if he would have preferred to stick with XP.”
Cheaper? Possibly, depends on the user. Easier? Very likely. But that’s not what we’re talking about. The issue is people falsely stating that Microsoft forces consumers to buy or update their software, and has rendered users with no choices. This is not and has never been true.
“I did answer the question, I honestly thought you’d understand, but let me answer it in a different way: windows and office.”
So you believe Windows and Office to be unwanted products forced onto consumers. If you assume only 1% of people who have bought either of those products likes them, you’ve got millions of people who would disagree with you. And I’m sure you would agree that a mere 1% is a ridiculous number to use as in reality that number is surely much higher.
“This is debatable. Arguably microsoft has spent a great portion of it’s existence behind the curve, and simply bought or squashed those who were ahead of it, at least until the government interfered.”
Behind the curve of what? Microsoft is undeniably largely responsible for bringing the pc into the common household, and incorporating computers into the workplace. The ‘Microsoft is evil’ cries are little more than a red hearing at best. Some people may question the morality of some of their practices, but a negative personal opinion doesn’t change the fact they have had a significant positive impact on the world we live in. Unless of course you’re loony enough to actually believe Microsoft is “evil” — in which case you’ve got far bigger issues than Microsoft-hate.
“You remind me so much of someone I used to know, did you by any chance go to RIT?”
Sorry, no, I never have.
ilovebeer,
“This is simply not true. There are plenty of barebones systems available, laptop or otherwise. It’s beyond me why you choose to pretend this fact doesn’t exist.”
It is extremely difficult to find a new barebones laptop at all from a trustworthy vendor. I build barebones desktops all the time, but this path is not an option to general users.
“The issue is people falsely stating that Microsoft forces consumers to buy or update their software, and has rendered users with no choices. This is not and has never been true.”
You say false, but it’s been a keystone of their business model for years. Even if you like microsoft products, you ought to be aware of this fact.
“So you believe Windows and Office to be unwanted products forced onto consumers. If you assume only 1% of people who have bought either of those products likes them, you’ve got millions of people who would disagree with you.”
We both can agree the 1% figure you came up with is ridiculous. However considering the following statistic, it seems plausible that many/most businesses were not compelled to upgrade. It puts into question whether those who bought new computers wanted vista/win7 or whether they bought it simply because they had no choice.
http://www.maximumpc.com/article/maximum_it/microsoft_74_percent_bu…
Office has similar forced upgrades. When the new ms-office came out, the company I worked at started receiving document attachments which could not be opened with the software we had. So we had to forward all these emails to one person who had the new office in order to convert the documents; this was clearly unmanageable. So the company promptly upgraded all the ms-office software despite having no (other) compelling reason to do so.
In fact I think a majority of companies were pressured to upgrade in this manor.
“Unless of course you’re loony enough to actually believe Microsoft is ‘evil’ — in which case you’ve got far bigger issues than Microsoft-hate.”
I don’t hate microsoft, I hate microsoft’s use of monopoly tactics. I really like ms excel 2003, it’s far superior to any alternatives I’ve tried (including the newer versions). It doesn’t mean I have to approve of microsoft’s vendor lock and forced upgrade tactics.
“It is extremely difficult to find a new barebones laptop at all from a trustworthy vendor. I build barebones desktops all the time, but this path is not an option to general users.”
Using google, and contacting vendors directly if need be has never been “extremely difficult” in my book. Barebones laptops aren’t the mythical creatures seen by only a small handful worldwide you make them out to be.
I’m not sure why you think building a desktop is not an option to general users. I know plenty of people, none of which possess any extraordinary skills, who have done just that. Look at the popularity of things like overclocking, case modding, water cooling, bla bla bla. I would venture to say there are tons of average users who have managed to build their own desktops. Were this 10, 15, 20 years ago you would have a much stronger case.
Regarding Microsoft, nothing I would say now is something I haven’t already. That being the case, I won’t bother repeating myself.
“Using google, and contacting vendors directly if need be has never been ‘extremely difficult’ in my book. Barebones laptops aren’t the mythical creatures seen by only a small handful worldwide you make them out to be.”
This tells me that you haven’t tried. I have contacted some of my usual vendors directly and I’ve found that no, they will not sell their laptops minus the OS license, at least not to ordinary consumers. I haven’t tried recently, but this is my experience circa 2008.
It *is* true, many linux users purchase a laptop which is “designed for windows” and pay the windows tax. Don’t go misreading this as a significant portion of windows licenses get tossed in favor of alternatives, my point is merely about the lack of choice.
“I’m not sure why you think building a desktop is not an option to general users.”
Because I’ve helped many of them with their computer problems. You’ll have to take my word on this one.
It is interesting that you think general users can build their own computers, and at the same time the general idea behind metro is that windowed interfaces are too complex for general users.
“Regarding Microsoft, nothing I would say now is something I haven’t already. That being the case, I won’t bother repeating myself.”
You can disagree with my opinion, I merely objected to your portrayal of my opinion as being wholly inaccurate. The question shouldn’t be “if” people buy new ms software without wanting it, but rather “how many”. However you haven’t even budged an inch on the “if” part.
“This tells me that you haven’t tried. I have contacted some of my usual vendors directly and I’ve found that no, they will not sell their laptops minus the OS license, at least not to ordinary consumers. I haven’t tried recently, but this is my experience circa 2008.”
Your assumption is wrong but I sense that’s not a surprise. You should know vendors don’t typically sell to consumers directly. But they are always helpful in directing you to retail outlets where you can find what you’re looking for.
“It *is* true, many linux users purchase a laptop which is “designed for windows” and pay the windows tax. Don’t go misreading this as a significant portion of windows licenses get tossed in favor of alternatives, my point is merely about the lack of choice.”
There IS choice. Laptops can be purchased with Windows, Linux, OSX, or not OS installed if you like. It’s not a debatable point, it’s plain & simple fact.
“I’m not sure why you think building a desktop is not an option to general users.”
Because I’ve helped many of them with their computer problems. You’ll have to take my word on this one.
Taking your word is something I absolutely can’t do as it’s in direct conflict with my real world first-hand experience. I too have helped countless numbers of people with computer problems and my assessment is that the average user in 2011 is not the uninformed inexperienced bungling computer idiot you portray them to be. I suppose if your primary demo is 60+ year olds, that perspective might make sense. Or if this was 1991 rather than 2011.
“It is interesting that you think general users can build their own computers, and at the same time the general idea behind metro is that windowed interfaces are too complex for general users.”
So basically you have no clue what the metro ui is or was designed to do. And the idea that windowed interfaces are too complex for general users, when probably 99% of the computer-using world works in them is beyond laughable. With all these outrageous claims, I’m finding it very hard to believe you’re not just jerking my chain to pass the time.
“You can disagree with my opinion, I merely objected to your portrayal of my opinion as being wholly inaccurate. The question shouldn’t be “if” people buy new ms software without wanting it, but rather “how many”. However you haven’t even budged an inch on the “if” part.”
I’ve never argued against the idea that some people buy something they don’t want. However, to suggest that it’s forced on them, they have no choice, or no alternatives exist is blatantly not true. There’s a very distinct difference between people not bothering to look into their options, and there not being any. This conversation will always come back to the truth that there are options and nobody is forced to do anything. It’s an inescapable fact.
ilovebeer,
“There IS choice. Laptops can be purchased with Windows, Linux, OSX, or not OS installed if you like. It’s not a debatable point, it’s plain & simple fact.”
Your claim doesn’t agree with the experiences of linux users everywhere, who end up buying windows and re-formatting. It is so notoriously difficult to buy consumer laptops without windows that it has lead to some interesting news in the media about how some linux users are trying to get a refund for the windows license they never wanted. The choice of hardware becomes highly limited when we restrict ourselves to the obscure vendors who do not bundle windows with their hardware.
“I too have helped countless numbers of people with computer problems and my assessment is that the average user in 2011 is not the uninformed inexperienced bungling computer idiot you portray them to be.”
They are my friends, please don’t speak derogatorily of them. I did not portray them to be idiots, some are doctors, others are musicians, another works in retail, one is a mechanic. These are normal people who cannot build their own PC. Oh sure they physically could, but they’d be afraid enough of doing something wrong that they would not try.
“So basically you have no clue what the metro ui is or was designed to do. And the idea that windowed interfaces are too complex for general users, when probably 99% of the computer-using world works in them is beyond laughable.”
Maybe you missed it, but they’re not my claims, they are the claims of others in this very thread.
“This conversation will always come back to the truth that there are options and nobody is forced to do anything. It’s an inescapable fact.”
I’m beginning to think that you are selectively dismissing such things because you have a predisposition to microsoft and you don’t want to hear the truth that microsoft’s monopoly hurts consumer choice.
Usually this kind of denial comes from the apple users, it’s rather unusual to find such deeply rooted denial from a microsoft user. Now that I’ve just dissed the two largest computer camps, I’ll make a quick dash for the exit.
Seriously though, nothing I’ve said about MS limiting consumer choice is all that controversial. If you’ve ever worked in IT none of this should be news to you. Even in microsoft shops, a large portion of us (possible majority?) tend to get annoyed with microsoft’s control. It just doesn’t make sense to deny it unless you are financially affiliated somehow or maybe you are astroturfing…?
Edited 2011-09-20 19:38 UTC
“Your claim doesn’t agree with the experiences of linux users everywhere, who end up buying windows and re-formatting.”
Maybe somebody should inform those Linux users that you can buy laptops with Linux pre-installed. If the distro of their choosing isn’t available pre-installed, they should further be informed you can buy laptops with no os installed.
“They are my friends, please don’t speak derogatorily of them. I did not portray them to be idiots, some are doctors, others are musicians, another works in retail, one is a mechanic. These are normal people who cannot build their own PC. Oh sure they physically could, but they’d be afraid enough of doing something wrong that they would not try.”
I haven’t said anything derogatory towards your friends. Regardless of their professions, you portrayed them (as being average users) as incapable. At least half of the people I have to help have already gone through the basic checklists when troubleshooting. From a hardware standpoint they have no problem dealing with screws and connectors.
I understand there are still people terrified to touch software and/or hardware, but they are no longer the clear majority. Computers, and working with them is no longer the scary thing it used to be.
“Maybe you missed it, but they’re not my claims, they are the claims of others in this very thread.”
If you don’t subscribe to others beliefs, you shouldn’t repeat them as if to be your own as well.
“I’m beginning to think that you are selectively dismissing such things because you have a predisposition to microsoft and you don’t want to hear the truth that microsoft’s monopoly hurts consumer choice.”
I haven’t made a single comment regarding whether or not I think Microsoft’s monopoly hurts consumer choice. I’ve simply pointed out that consumers do in fact have choices. Whether or not they use them is another story but the choices are there.
“Usually this kind of denial comes from the apple users, it’s rather unusual to find such deeply rooted denial from a microsoft user. Now that I’ve just dissed the two largest computer camps, I’ll make a quick dash for the exit.”
Maybe you could explain how acknowledging facts somehow magically makes a person in denial. Wait, let me guess…. because the facts aren’t in line with your personal opinion.
“Seriously though, nothing I’ve said about MS limiting consumer choice is all that controversial. If you’ve ever worked in IT none of this should be news to you. Even in microsoft shops, a large portion of us (possible majority?) tend to get annoyed with microsoft’s control. It just doesn’t make sense to deny it unless you are financially affiliated somehow or maybe you are astroturfing…?”
This is the first post where you have mentioned consumer choice being limited as opposed to being non-existent as in your previous posts. I, on the other hand, have been completely consistent in my posts because as I’ve already pointed out, I am doing nothing more than acknowledging fact. The “denial shoe” doesn’t fit my foot but you may want to try it on.
For the record, I am not on the Microsoft payroll — I’m just not silly enough to believe they’re an evil empire who rose to the top and stayed there for the last 20+ years all thanks to bullying the world.
ilovebeer,
“Maybe somebody should inform those Linux users that you can buy laptops with Linux pre-installed. If the distro of their choosing isn’t available pre-installed, they should further be informed you can buy laptops with no os installed.”
As I said before, back in ’08 I couldn’t find a single vendor carrying a linux laptop. Maybe they existed, but they didn’t come up in my search. Today of course there is a shortlist of merchants who will actually sell consumer linux laptops, but we have a very limited choice of hardware to choose from. In a truly competitive market, we would be able to buy whatever laptop we wanted along with whatever OS we wanted with no forced bundling.
In any case, there are still no brand name stores offering alternate OS choices.
newegg
dell
tigerdirect
wallmart
staples
circuitcity
target
bestbuy
kmart
samsclub
frys
costco
…?
At least it used to be that microsoft contractually forced vendors to buy a license for each and every unit sold, regardless of the installed operating system. I think this was deemed illegal. However they can still offer steep discounts to vendors who sell exclusively windows PCs.
In effect, microsoft has a near complete monopoly on all the traditional consumer outlets, which like or not restricts consumer choice.
“I haven’t said anything derogatory towards your friends. Regardless of their professions, you portrayed them (as being average users) as incapable.”
Go re-read your passage, you said/implied that my computer help was only needed by a “uninformed inexperienced bungling computer idiot”.
“I haven’t made a single comment regarding whether or not I think Microsoft’s monopoly hurts consumer choice.”
Well gosh, that’s the whole point isn’t it? Do you think microsoft’s monopoly hurts consumer choice or don’t you?
“This is the first post where you have mentioned consumer choice being limited as opposed to being non-existent as in your previous posts.”
I asserted that there was no choice when I purchased my last laptop in 2008, I maintain that assertion. And even today the typical consumer still doesn’t have a reasonable choice.
“For the record, I am not on the Microsoft payroll — I’m just not silly enough to believe they’re an evil empire who rose to the top and stayed there for the last 20+ years all thanks to bullying the world.”
I never said they were evil, you are the one who continuously points out that they are not evil, while simultaneously associating the term “evil” with bullying the world, which is precisely how they’ve risen to the top. So in a conflicted way, maybe you do believe they are evil. Just a theory. Most probably you are just a diehard MS fanboy.
Edited 2011-09-21 07:23 UTC
“Today of course there is a shortlist of merchants who will actually sell consumer linux laptops, but we have a very limited choice of hardware to choose from.”
We can stop right there. So after all this, you do in fact acknowledge the truth and what I’ve been saying all along.
“In a truly competitive market, we would be able to buy whatever laptop we wanted along with whatever OS we wanted with no forced bundling.”
Personal opinions on what a “truly competitive market” looks like is completely irrelevant to the subject at hand – whether people have choices or not.
“In any case, there are still no brand name stores offering alternate OS choices.”
You may want to check your list again, but regardless, brand name stores has nothing to do with anything. So if Macy’s, for example, doesn’t care a particular shoe you want, in your mind that shoe doesn’t exist when the truth is you can go to a different store down the street and buy it.
“Go re-read your passage, you said/implied that my computer help was only needed by a “uninformed inexperienced bungling computer idiot”.”
I don’t need to re-read anything as I know what I’ve written. That is how you have portrayed them so if you have a problem with that, maybe you should be more selective with your words.
“Well gosh, that’s the whole point isn’t it? Do you think microsoft’s monopoly hurts consumer choice or don’t you?”
That is neither the point, nor what our discussion has been about. I guess I have to point out, again, that you claimed consumers have no choice and are forced to buy Windows.. And naturally I called BS because in reality it is BS. Whether or not Microsoft has a monopoly, and if they do how does that affect consumers is a different conversation entirely and one we have not been engaged in.
“I asserted that there was no choice when I purchased my last laptop in 2008, I maintain that assertion. And even today the typical consumer still doesn’t have a reasonable choice.”
First you claim consumers have no choice. Then you claim they have limited choices. Now you re-label it as not having a “reasonable choice” (whatever that is supposed to mean. Why do you keep trying to dance around the fact that there are choices available to the consumer, plain & simple, period? It’s like you know you’ve got to admit you’re wrong but you’re trying to put spin on it so you don’t have be straight-forward about being wrong.
“I never said they were evil, you are the one who continuously points out that they are not evil, while simultaneously associating the term “evil” with bullying the world, which is precisely how they’ve risen to the top. So in a conflicted way, maybe you do believe they are evil. Just a theory. Most probably you are just a diehard MS fanboy.”
No, that is not how Microsoft rose to the top. No, I do not believe they are evil. And no, I am not a “diehard MS fanboy”. That you are attempting to entertain such utterly absurd conclusions let’s me know that you’re reaching for any defense you can as a last resort. So far you’ve been wrong about the facts, your assumptions, and basically everything that isn’t personal opinion. Maybe it’s just best that you stop while you’re behind.
“Personal opinions on what a ‘truly competitive market’ looks like is completely irrelevant to the subject at hand – whether people have choices or not.”
In a non-competitive market, people loose choice. It’s as simple as that. You are denying what everyone knows to be true, simply because you are an MS fanboy. Choice has everything to do with competitive markets.
“So if Macy’s, for example, doesn’t care a particular shoe you want, in your mind that shoe doesn’t exist when the truth is you can go to a different store down the street and buy it.”
I guess this is an attempt at a straw man because it’s not what I said.
“I don’t need to re-read anything as I know what I’ve written. That is how you have portrayed them so if you have a problem with that, maybe you should be more selective with your words.”
This is as idiotic as me accusing your friends of being retards, and then claiming that you said it. Seriously uncool.
“That is neither the point, nor what our discussion has been about.”
It is precisely the point, if MS was not a monopoly, consumers would have alternative choices at the stores. The question is relevant: Do you think microsoft’s monopoly hurts consumer choice or don’t you?
“I guess I have to point out, again, that you claimed consumers have no choice and are forced to buy Windows.. And naturally I called BS because in reality it is BS….First you claim consumers have no choice. ”
You keep on omitting the fact that I qualify that with the year 2008. If there were any, they were very difficult to find. If you have evidence to the contrary, either put up or shut up.
“No, that is not how Microsoft rose to the top. And no, I am not a ‘diehard MS fanboy'”
MS has a history of screwing others over to get ahead. They may deserve credit for that, but only a die hard ms fanboy could deny that they are a bully.
“Maybe it’s just best that you stop while you’re behind.”
Only in your mind, there is just no reasoning with fanboys like you. But your right that it is best to stop.
Edited 2011-09-21 10:54 UTC
Alfman,
You can not escape fact. Every time you’re confronted with fact (true in 2011, 2008, and earlier), you change your story and try to buffer your pride from being hurt by simply admitting to your faults, inaccuracies, and flat out BS. When that doesn’t work you actually try to sneak in a change-of-topic in hopes nobody will notice. And when that doesn’t work, your last ditch effort/line of defense is textbook predictable — a display of childish name-calling and lying.
You’ve made a complete fool of yourself. Congratulations, and I feel sorry for you.
I haven’t lied, you’re just not interested in the truth. Either you are a fanboy, or you are trolling.
“I haven’t lied, you’re just not interested in the truth. Either you are a fanboy, or you are trolling.”
You may be describing yourself there, but you certainly aren’t describing me Not even close kiddo. See my previous reply — it still applies, and probably will indefinitely.
Urgent: we need a logo for our campaign “Awesome Garden Designer Pro 2003 ready” our our new ARM laptops.
All graphic designers are free to submit their logo up to this year end.
Thanks.
…where all the cool, well-dressed people hang out.
If Microsoft can demonstrate an useable Office on the Metro interface, then this could allow them to break-away from the Win32 legacy.
Unfortunately, severing the Win32 legacy would not be good for ReactOS and WINE. Essentially, these projects would be caught in a race in becoming obsolete before becoming complete/fully useable.
Maybe an open-source WinRT backbone project should be iniated now?