Why do people constantly complain about Metro when it IS easier to use?

[Guest]

easier if you use a head wond

[Taliseian]

I've used W8 and like it...but only when I don't have to use Metro.

It feels snappier to me, seems to use less resources, but I HATE the Metro UI on the desktop.

Give me W8 and take away Metro and I'll use it - force Metro on me and I'll stick with 7 or go to Linux and Wine.

T

[Brandon H Supervisor]

The ones who are complaining about the Metro UI are power users. I say that because I can't see how any power user would like the Metro UI.

which is what I don't understand, because most true power users I know don't have need to go into the start menu that often, and when they do they either use the search bar to bring up what they want right away (which still works with metro start screen) or to click on computer or control panel (and both of those are in the new power menu)

[PGHammer]

>>I use the Windows key, then the first letter, then the next, until whatever application/game/etc. I want to run shows, then I click on it. Unified Search - works for any installed application, file, or anything else. Faster than even the Windows 7 Start Menu - in fact, the more applications you install, the faster it would be than searching the Windows 7 Start Menu for it.<<

Please explain this to me, exactly how it will get even faster with the more items you have to search, especially since the search is practially identical to Windows 7 and you never have to leave the desktop.

>>If you *can't* remember what programs you have installed, did you actually install them yourself, or are you working from a base image that includes several *default* programs you usually don't use? (The latter is commonplace in enterprises.)<<

While I have no problem with it, expecting enterprise users to search for programs is somewhat ridiculous. If Metro makes it on the corporate desktop, hotkeys and searches will not be the answer. I would assume GPOs will be able to manage tiles as well as turn off the Microsoft Store, etc. This will be a more reasonable solution in the Enterprise.

Search has been integral in Windows (on the desktop) since the addition of Index Server to Windows 2000 Professional (in short, pre-XP).

It's not new even in enterprises (where this feature actually gets used rather heavily).

The only difference between Windows 2000 and the Windows 8 Consumer Preview is that instead of clicking a Start button or Start orb, you hit the Windows logo key on your keyboard. NO mouse usage at all.

(Search is commonly used in enterprises - especially large enterprises - to find networked printers with specific features; again, this goes back to Windows 2000 Professional and the inclusion of Index Server.)

And as far as your wife goes (and other detractors of Metro), it still comes down to the paradigm change. The Start menu has been around since Windows 9x (it predates NT4).

Is it a major paradigm change? Yes, it is. I haven't denied that - neither has any other user that has gotten into Metro with both hands.

It's why I've said (going back to the Developer Preview) that users, not applications, are the biggest roadblock to acceptance of Windows 8.

[migo]

But your claim was that anyone getting a large monitor does so not to use a high resolution and have several windows up on the screen, but just so they can have larger text. That's why I was confused. You seemed to be generalizing to everyone. I would assume that most people getting a large monitor do so exactly because they want to fit a lot of different windows and UI elements at once on the screen.

I didn't say anyone. I said people, you inferred the all - incorrectly.

[Active.]

I didn't say anyone. I said people, you inferred the all - incorrectly.

?

If anyone gets a large monitor it's not to use a really high resolution and have 4 windows open side by side, it's so they can have larger text.

Fair enough though, if you were only talking about a minority of people "who have poor eyesight".

[katilkurt]

Just wondering. Metro is easier to use and understand than any previous Windows Interface. I can't see why so many people are so dead-set against it. It doesn't make it harder to open applications, the start menu is still there, application search works better, ect. Tell me what is so bad about it. People use the phase "Tablet Interface on an OS" all the time and it doesn't really mean anything. Metro is not harder to use just because it can be used on both a touchscreen and a computer.

It's because why people chooses PC over MAC..

[migo]

?

Fair enough though, if you were only talking about a minority of people "who have poor eyesight".

Only a minority of people, period, buy large monitors.

[Dick Montage]

Why do people constantly complain about Metro when it IS easier to use?

How arrogant is this ascertation? Saying it "is" easier is purely an opinion, and yet you slate others for posting theirs. Get over yourself!

[neo1911]

Metro is TOO easy to use and plain boring. Especially with keyboard and mouse.

Some things like system image creation to store on network drive are unnecessarily hidden deep. The classic control panel and Metro control panel have different settings. I get a perception that I have to click 2-3 times more for doing a simple task.

Since I hate keyboard shortcuts andcall myself a mouse warrior, these little things makes me and some family members stressed.

I hoped MS should have shoved up Metro up our asses in Windows 9 and make that X64 only with absolute no X86 code.

[migo]

No such thing as x64 with no x86. It's a contraction of x86-64

[Nashy]

I don't find it easier to use. Why to the Metro lovers find it so difficult to find that not everyone likes it?

[migo]

Oh we know not everyone likes it, we also know that it's because of stubbornness rather than objectivity.

[Southern Patriot]

I didn't say anyone. I said people, you inferred the all - incorrectly.

Yes you did.

If anyone gets a large monitor it's not to use a really high resolution and have 4 windows open side by side, it's so they can have larger text.

[BillyJack]

Interesting analogy. Engine power is still measured in horsepower and the wheel hasn't changed in many many centuries. Things are rolling right along.

Yes. Also the donkey is still used to do work where machines can't get easy access, farms and possible other uses.

[M4nB3arP1g]

For me the problem with metro is I will almost never use it I will be on the desktop +90% of the the time because most of the applications I use will be older desktop applications such as games so I feel there is not reason for me to upgrade from 7. I know there are other updates besides metro but they are not really enough for me to justify upgrading either.

[ow7iee]

Metro is the first UI that feels old before it's even released (on PC)... It's ok to use on phones but seriously... the whole shell is only making it harder to work with a standard mouse/keyboard.

Metro feels like BLOAT... RealPlayer on top of a patched Windows 7 SP-2.... May be helpfull for newbies that wants PC's to be more restricted and work like a menu in a standard DVD player. For powerusers metro is like a joke that needs to be disabled asap.

[Wyn6]

For powerusers metro is like a joke that needs to be disabled asap.

Speak for yourself not others.

[Active.]

Speak for yourself not others.

Let's go with Wikipedia's definition here:

"a power user is a user of a personal computer who has the ability to use advanced features of programs which are beyond the abilities of "normal" users"

What advanced features do Metro apps even have?

[.Neo]

Speak for yourself not others.

Do you really require people to start every sentence with "In my opinion?" / "Personally I think?" / "The way I see it?" etc.?

[Boz]

It's very simple. Microsoft was late on everything and is now trying to sell us this Frankenstein of the OS as innovation when it is clearly a panicked response to Apple and Google being so far ahead in this new evolutionary step in technology and now they are trying to catch up by mixing everything into one.

In other words, Metro has no place on desktop and should have been activated only if running on tablets. Old people and users who have learned one way of using Windows over the course of 20 years are clueless because Metro wasn't designed with user-experience in mind but driven by company politics in trying to catch up in the losing battle where Microsoft is growing increasingly irrelevant.

There is a reason why Apple chose to move OSX into more iOS like OS by introducing features slowly, each year, they bring something from the iOS. I will argue whether or not this is good for tech industry in general and computing but that's for another thread, but at least they think about their users and making it easy for them to adopt. Microsoft doesn't have that time so now they are just trying to push everything together and offer us some half-assed solution where it's a hybrid of regular desktop and Metro touch interface that is completely disconnected from consumer experience. Even a blind man can see that they have made this frankenstein of an OS to try to come out with tablets/phones and other touch devices at once trying to catch up to Android and iOS because if they have not it's game over for them in the long run.

There is a reason why people say "jack of all trades, master of none". Microsoft is trying to do everything at once and is not doing a single thing that's done amazingly well.

It is really again a reflection of complete incompetence of Ballmer and after everything I've seen and experienced with Windows 8, it will be another Vista or worse.

Just a couple of things that are completely retarded:

1. You can't handle multiple windows and switch and drag stuff from one place to another which is the essence of multitasking and productivity. You have to move away from Metro and then go back into traditional Windows environment.

2. Metro is a unproductive, content consuming UI and is perfect for tablets and touch devices on the go and not for productivity.

3. Forcing Metro and then having users jump in and out of it because they have to use years worth of software and productivity app is the most ridiculous thing someone at Microsoft approved.

4. Metro apps built with HTML5/JS/WinRT will never be able to replace apps that we have on traditional desktop. They will be watered down, oversimplified apps that are again designed first for touch devices while having productivity on a desktop as an afterthought.

This all takes us to the reality which is that most people will in fact be spending their time in traditional WIndows environment (that is now basically a frankenstein in itself, missing many features and relying on metro) making you wonder why in the hell Metro was even included and this change was even introduced.

[Growled Member]

Once again Boz hits the nail squarely on the head.

[Anthonyd]

It looks like people thinks that WinRT/metro is the only future of Windows. It's not true.

You'll still be able to run "legacy" apps on the Desktop for many many years. Just look at all the new stuff included in .NET 4.5 for examples. Microsoft isn't abandonning the Desktop.

WinRT might sounds limited now, but it's a 1.0 version. It will improve over the years.

[Ambroos]

If you think about it it's actually funny how half-baked most of Microsoft's stuff always is. The only proper product they made that I can think about is Office. I'm not saying everything is all bad, the core of Windows is amazing, but Microsoft has always been horrible in the UI department. Messy even. And they always abandon so many good ideas. I'm a Microsoft fan, or used to be, and I'm admitting this.

First annoyance: Windows Live (the online services and client apps). They do the job, but that's about as far as it goes. Most Live things look terribly ugly and have an incredibly messy interface. When they replace or update services features seem to come and go completely randomly. Products that work fine (Live Mesh Beta) get abandoned and replaced by crippled new versions (Live Mesh as it is now). Windows Live Mesh and Skydrive do seem to share storage or something, but work together in no other proper way, even though the combination could have been amazingly good. Messenger gets more unstable and annoying with every new release (when there are new releases, looks like they're abandoning it again).

Second: Windows Phone. Okay, it looks and works fine, but it was half-baked when it was first released. A lot of core functionality that should have been there at the beginning wasn't there (copy/paste for example). Everything worked but in quite a limited way. Users couldn't change anything, you couldn't even configure your own APN settings if the phone didn't come with the right ones for your cell provider. Now with Mango it got a bit better, but it looks like Windows Phone 8 will leave Windows Phone 7 owners in the dark again, since I read somewhere they probably won't be able to upgrade to it.

Third: The Windows UI. It's always been a mess. A combination of new ideas and old things they 'forgot' to replace. While it got a bit better with Vista and (finally) a lot better with 7, I still see Windows 2000-style icons and wizards or whatever popping up from time to time. The interface is still a bit of a mess, but it's sort of fine. With Windows 8 we're having this same problem again, but this time a lot worse. Microsoft has this brilliant new design idea, Metro, and decides to mix it with Windows 7. It doesn't work, it's confusing. I wanted to set up my fingerprint scanner on my laptop with use with Windows 8, and I had to first go look if it was available in the 'new' control panel, then find a way to get the old control panel to get it set up. If Microsoft wants a new interface, they have to make sure it doesn't have to co-exist with an old interface just because they didn't want to implement over 10% of the old features.

Fourth: Zune. Mostly the software side, since the hardware was (in my opinion) great. Zune 1.0 was horrible. It was a lousy re-skin of Windows Media Player and was incredibly unstable. The new Zune software looks brilliant, but lacks functionality and intuitiveness. And they're abandoning it - again. No more new Zune, it's all getting integrated into another new limited completely rewritten application in Windows 8.

I mean seriously, why does Microsoft never take a good idea, and stick with it.

As much as I don't like Apple, I admire them for sticking with what is good. When they design an interface, they make sure it's pixel perfect and contains everything you need. They don't replace what's good unless it's necessary, and if they do, they make sure they replace it completely so it's an improvement in every way. Or at least they try to. They don't change the fundamentals of everything every few years.

So again, my conclusion remains, the only properly designed and maintained Microsoft software seems to be Office. And perhaps the servers, I don't have any experience with those to be honest. But anything user-oriented has been and probably always will be a mix of new and old. New incomplete crap, and old incomplete crap. And it's a shame.

--- at the post above:

WinRT might sound limited now, but it's a 1.0 version. It will improve over the years.

That's exactly the kind of issue I'm talking about. If they have a great idea (WinRT is a great idea), then make sure it's implemented properly and completely from the start. Make sure people want to switch over to it right now instead of in a few years.

[MorganX]

Bad news. Windows 8 runs and installs fine on my HP Slate 500, and appears it would actually make it useable. And the Charm and Previous app bar are actually very nice on a tablet, thumb swipes > desktop hot corners. But, it's max resolution is 1024 x 600 so NONE of the Metro apps will run as they need a minimum of 1024x768 :(

Hopefully this will change with RTM. Anyway, For what I can do with it, Metro shines on a tablet. Damn shame. Runs pretty zippy on older Atom and recognized all hardware including Bluetooth. Desktop/Explorer runs fine, but no Metro apps other than the Start Page itself.