Windows 8 is the first OS that made me downgrade

[PGHammer]

Power users are heavily offended by the existence of automatic, however, even though you could simply choose to use manual.

It's why I made the comment I did above. Power users are prideful in the extreme - most also have the sensitivity of House (or Joy Behar).

[code65536]

Win8 is way more responsive than win7 within the same hardware resources, period!

And that's the sad part. I was looking forward to Windows 8, mind you. I was really excited by it, the performance improvements, the under-the-hood-changes, etc.

And then the Developer Preview came, and I got to experience Metro. Ick. But I was still pro-Win8, since I was under the impression that we can disable Metro, since that was possible in the DP via a registry change.

And then they removed the ability to disable Metro. And the Start Menu was excised. And the ability to boot straight into desktop was clipped. And it was announced that third-party desktop applications are disallowed on ARM. And that's when I soured on Windows 8.

So that's the sad part. That Windows 8 does have lots of great, enticing changes. What breaks the deal for me and most people is Metro and the fact that you can't avoid it and the fact that Microsoft has relegated the proper desktop interface to the position of second-class citizen.

I went from someone who couldn't wait for Windows 8 to someone who is utterly dismayed by how Microsoft has handled the inclusion of Metro. As I argued in this and other threads, I don't mind Metro if I'm using a tablet or phone, as long as it doesn't intrude on my desktop experience. But the way it's shoved at us on the desktop, without even an option to boot straight to the desktop is just egregious.

So yes, Windows 8 is faster, has some cool features (that RAID-like storage thing, e.g.), and all that jazz, but nobody is complaining about that. People are complaining about Metro, and the fact that we are being forced to use it, if we want to access the other improvements in W8.

[ahhell]

i know its hard for you to think, but if you reread my post, i said the windows 8 app, as in whatever windows 8 app he had opened, which used half the screen, and if you did anything but troll and actually read posts, you'd know this.

Stop trolling its, becoming too obvious. no one is that challenged.

I still have no idea what it is you are trying to say but whatever.

To everyone else: So when is Win8 going to be on Technet?

[briangw]

And that's the sad part. I was looking forward to Windows 8, mind you. I was really excited by it, the performance improvements, the under-the-hood-changes, etc.

And then the Developer Preview came, and I got to experience Metro. Ick. But I was still pro-Win8, since I was under the impression that we can disable Metro, since that was possible in the DP via a registry change.

And then they removed the ability to disable Metro. And the Start Menu was excised. And the ability to boot straight into desktop was clipped. And it was announced that third-party desktop applications are disallowed on ARM. And that's when I soured on Windows 8.

So that's the sad part. That Windows 8 does have lots of great, enticing changes. What breaks the deal for me and most people is Metro and the fact that you can't avoid it and the fact that Microsoft has relegated the proper desktop interface to the position of second-class citizen.

I went from someone who couldn't wait for Windows 8 to someone who is utterly dismayed by how Microsoft has handled the inclusion of Metro. As I argued in this and other threads, I don't mind Metro if I'm using a tablet or phone, as long as it doesn't intrude on my desktop experience. But the way it's shoved at us on the desktop, without even an option to boot straight to the desktop is just egregious.

So yes, Windows 8 is faster, has some cool features (that RAID-like storage thing, e.g.), and all that jazz, but nobody is complaining about that. People are complaining about Metro, and the fact that we are being forced to use it, if we want to access the other improvements in W8.

No, you're not forced to use it. You can use Start 8 or add the reg key to boot directly to the Desktop. There will be addons that will fix everyone's gripes because that's what third party devs do when they see an opportunity when people complain.

Personally, it works fine for me. I am an early adopter and I can adapt to change. It's sad that a lot of people can't. That's why I figure I'll survive in a zombie apocalypse! :D

[BoDEAN]

So now that you two have removed Windows 8 from your systems and don't want to or plan on using it, how can you contribute anything useful to this thread besides "Windows 8 sucks" or some variant of that sentiment?

TRUE THAT!

[Alera]

I've just decided to make Windows 8 more like Windows 7 while enjoying the performance benefits that 8 gives us. Cutting out Metro completely and sticking to the desktop, I boot straight into Desktop mode and pretty much never shift-click that start menu to go into Metro/Start Menu. The only things I want to 'fix' now are the Ribbon UI on explorer and somehow making the start menu show recent programs but other than that, everything is working exactly how I like it.

The only way I'd use Metro/Start Menu would be if it supplemented the Desktop by still having the taskbar and Start Menu but with the tiles of the Start Screen on the desktop thus not killing productivity in the way I like to use my OS.

I've seen some of the points that pro-Metro people bring up and I will say that I don't like alt-tabbing all the time, I don't like moving the mouse cursor to the edge of the screen to bring up a current list of all running apps and windows, I don't like alt-f4'ing things to close windows whatever happened to the X button? Did it go out of fashion?. And I don't like having windows snapped and taking up huge swathes of screen.

But to each their own I guess.

- Alera

[Keyboard Cowboy]

To everyone else: So when is Win8 going to be on Technet?

Aug 15th :)

You don't know...but will later. I promise you.

What are you promising him exactly?

[Scorbing]

How can Windows 8 be more simple and easier to use than this?.......I just don't get it.

[notuptome2004]

How can Windows 8 be more simple and easier to use than this?.......I just don't get it.

Well easy and i will post someone elses article here on neowin that can give ya all the down sides and limitation of the start menu. but in the dn you know ther is more to windows 8 then the Metro start screen interface right many end user desktop features and enhacments and hek i even posted one topic on it on this forum from he windows blog multi-monitor enhancements

Original Post by Dot matrix he makes some great points

READ BEFORE POSTING: Before I begin, I wanted to layout the purpose of this thread. It is meant as one user?s (mine) in depth analysis of the current implementation of the Windows Start Menu as seen in Windows 7 vs. the current implementation of the Windows Start Screen (dashboard) as seen in the Windows 8 Release Preview (Build 8400), and why I feel the changes Microsoft is making are justified. Also, this isn't about Metro/RT apps, this is just to focus soley on the Start Menu/Start Screen.

This is not a hate thread against Windows, the developers of Windows, or any one poster here on Neowin, and by no means shall it. I wish that this thread to remain on topic, and civil at all times, and I encourage others to post an analysis if they choose to do so themselves to cover more angles and form more opinions. Please no ?tl;dr? crapola, or outright ?Metro/Windows 8 sux. Lolz.? replies. I took the time to really dig into the menu to see what?s there, and wish that my time be respected.

With so many fighting nail and tooth to save the Start Menu, I wanted to dive in to see what exactly users are fighting to save and compare that to the changes in the new Start Screen.

Mods, I hope this is ok. I deliberated for the better part of a day if I should past this or not, If you feel this should be included in another thread, please feel free to move it.

The Start Menu was introduced all the way back in Windows 95 (?Chicago?), nearly 17 years ago. Back then, things were different. When you bought a PC, it was more than likely a desktop model, complete with a clunker of a monitor, mouse and keyboard. However, if you were lucky enough to afford a laptop, it too, was huge and clunky. You didn?t move much with it, it was heavy, awkward to use, and 802.11 WiFi was just a gleam in someone?s eye, so it too, most likely spent much time sitting on a desk.

Also, back then the Internet was a different place. Home users spent no more than one or two hours at most connected, before disconnecting and enjoying the rest of their day. There was no Twitter, Facebook, or Google for that matter, and to connect, you had to dial in over a 56k modem (fun stuff). Windows 95, just like its predecessor, Windows 3.1, was also mouse intensive. There were very few keyboard shortcuts and the Start Button on the keyboard didn?t exist yet. Back then, there were no touch screens, Kinects, remotes, voice control, controllers, nothing. The mouse was the only game in town, and even by then it took years to catch on. Since this was also the rise of the home computer, Microsoft needed a way for users to easily find what they are looking for, thus the Start Menu was born. Flash forward to Windows 98, 2000, and the Start Menu carried on strong, basically unchanged until XP, however even though XP introduced the ?enhanced? Menu, it still has the same layout it had all those years ago, but by this point, I feel it?s become a mess of epic proportions. It?s that building downtown, which despite repairs, has still managed to decay. Let?s take a look:

This is the Start Menu as we know it today in Windows 7:

On one side, you have either your most recently or commonly used apps, or your static, pinned apps, and the toggle to trigger your ?All Programs? view. On the other, you have a slim selection of system locations and services to choose from, and on the bottom, your machine?s power options. The ?All Programs? list is a carry-over from the original Start Menu in Windows 95, while the ability to pin apps is not. Pinning has made selecting my most used apps hassle free, but what happens when I need to access that one oddity that I don?t have pinned? Sure I could search for it, but some of you here have claimed it takes ?too much effort? to search for it, or you don?t know the name of it to begin with. That means you?re left to browse for it. It?s not a common occurrence anymore, but it does happen.

However, ?All Programs? hasn?t really received any TLC since the 90?s. Upon further inspection, it appears to be a mismatched conglomeration of folders, apps, and system widgets that God only knows go where. This isn?t something your ordinary user needs or really should have to dig through to get to where they want to be.

Some apps don?t have folders, while some do. Some are hidden away in sub-folders of sub-folders, made worse by names that can be intimidating or scary sounding for ordinary users - ?Accessories?, ?System Tools?, etc. Also, since Windows Vista, sub folders no longer fly out over the desktop; users are now literally confined to the tiny space in the corner of their screen for search through the menu, which can lead to problems of its own:

As you can see, the more you dig into the menu, the more space you run out of, something that could be addressed with fixes, but at the same time, do you really want to go back to those awkward flyouts like Windows 95-2000 had? I don?t. It increases mouse travel time, and certainly isn?t touch friendly at all. So what do you do? Do you get rid of it all? I don?t really think this would work as a Start Menu:

Users would never be able to find anything, and power users would be left in the dirt too, unable to be very productive with just a search bar and power options. So, it?s pretty obvious at this point that the Start Menu has many, many fallacies with just the All Programs menu alone, with little viable solutions without a complete overhaul. Microsoft could have cleaned up the All Programs menu, reorganized everything into better hierarchies, but that too would have forced change, and forced users to relearn where everything is, and those little 16x16 icons still aren?t touch friendly. Microsoft could have also increased the resolution of those icons, but that then puts strain on the limited horizontal space the Start Menu is forced to exist by. They could try to extend the Start Menu out horizontally, but according to complaints, this covers more screen space, and could potentially create awkward situations when dealing with subfolders, again due to space limitations.

So, it appears that in order to ?refresh? the Start Menu idea, a series of sacrifices have to be made. But one thing is certain; the menu as we know it today isn?t a viable long term solution anymore. New advances in hardware and the overall way we interact with machines are forcing some changes here. While app pinning in the Start Menu in Windows 7 is a great idea, and one that I could not be without today, it too is limited in how many apps can be pinned, and is also limited by what kind of apps can be pinned. In Windows 7, only individual apps can be pinned, Control Panel widgets and folders are not allowed. However, they are able to be pinned to the taskbar under the Explorer icon or Control Panel icon.

Another limitation to pinned apps is the icons? size. In order to pin as many apps as a user desires, the icon size is limited to either 32x32 or 16x16. While the 32x32 size may be touch friendly, 16x16 is not, and 32x32 is too small of an icon to display any sort of live information. How exactly does a designer deal with these issues? For those arguing that the Start Menu isn?t broken, it is for these reasons, which I respectfully disagree. It?s a good idea, left to decay with each release.

The only thing I can see about the Start Menu that's worth saving is, the pinning abilities, which thankfully, Microsoft carried over to the Start Screen, but on Windows 7, the menu is limited by your screen's size. I can fit 23 apps in my Start Menu on my 22 inch screen. My laptop is even less with 12 apps, my netbook? I can fit 6 apps. The rest have to either reamin buried in the "All Programs" menu, or live on the taskbar (I don't do desktop shortcuts anymore).

Reflecting from my first paragraph, today?s world is different from the world of 1995. We have always on Internet, mobile computing is a booming market, the mouse is no longer the only I/O game in town, and everyday seems to bring about a new change that makes the current iteration of Windows seem outdated and archaic.

A few years from now, chances are my desktop or laptop will be augmented with both touch and motion sensing input. I know many here don?t want that, and will most likely stick to using older systems and monitors to avoid the touch world, but it appears that?s where the market wants to go, and with Windows 8, it seems Microsoft is leading that charge. The outcomes of that I can think of are touch wins and the market and developers accept that, pretty much forcing everyone else along for the ride, or touch fails, however, if touch does fail, I don?t see things returning to the way they are now in Windows 7. Chances are some new form of computing will rise in its place, forcing yet another change in Windows.

I still believe that Microsoft is right in fitting Windows to touch devices, the market has shown that too many versions of Windows leads to confusion (Windows 8 Touch Home Premium Metro Ultimate Edition, anyone?). As a Windows user, I want Windows to be simply Windows. It simplifies things by not dividing the market (Windows, Windows Phone 8, Windows 8 Touch, Windows 8 Non Touch, Windows RT, etc. Which one do I develop for? Which one will get me the most users of my app? Which one has the most long term viability? Yikes, too much going on here!), and it allows Microsoft to concentrate on one platform for multiple devices. Two if you count Windows Phone. They don?t need to worry about multiple editions of Windows anymore, and neither does the consumer (well, unless you count WinRT).

Since Windows now has to play nice with a wide range of devices and input methods, Microsoft had to develop an easy to use, and device neutral way of interacting with the computer. Thus, the Start Screen was born. Many people think of this has a touch only design because of the large tiles, however, they ignore the fact that just because the on-screen elements are bigger, they are by no means touch only.

We all know what the new Start Screen looks like. After a bit of tinkering, we have a clean easy to use and understand layout that can accompany anything and everything you wish. You can pin as much or as little as you want, no longer limited by screen space, if you pin more than can fit on screen at once, the Screen slides off to the left or right. Also new here, are live tiles; these automatically update to present you with the information that matters to you. News, weather, calendar, mail, social updates, and app updates. You name it, it?s there. As you can see, I am now no longer limited by what I can pin. I can pin apps, folders, Control Panel widgets, and Metro focused apps. Better yet, I can organize them any way I wish. I am no longer limited to what I can do. With that said, is it perfect? By all means no, but it does address the limitations of the old Start Menu as described above. Because of this, I feel the new Start Screen is working with you, rather than against you, no matter which device you are using.

The first common complaint is that it takes up the whole screen. While this is true, this is one of those ?rock and a hard place? moments for the designers and users alike. While the Start Menu enabled users to use the menu and keep an eye on things going on at the same time, the Start Menu suffers usability issues because of its limited space. There are a few ways around this, though. First is to pin most commonly used apps to the taskbar. Second is the one I find the best, with using a second (or third) monitor. It allows you to invoke the Start Screen on one, while keeping that special app(s) open on the second.

While this isn?t a perfect solution (especially on laptops) it is a work around that directly addresses this complaint and the limited space seen in the Start Menu. I feel it?s making direct use of the screen real estate available to the select user. Better yet, the Start Screen can be invoked on either monitor, depending which side my work is on.

To address the ?All Programs? issues in the current Windows 7 Start Menu, in Windows 8, Microsoft redesigned the layout of the now ?All Apps? menu. On the left side, you have a list of Metro and pinned apps, while on the right side, you have a cleaner list of all installed apps, however there are a few curious omissions.

Gone are the miscellaneous folders, the conglomeration of ?homeless? apps, and scary sounding folders and sub folders. We?re left with a clean, easy to use list of the installed apps we have on our machines. On the left, we have a list of Metro and pinned apps, and on the right we have a clean list of the rest of our apps we either haven?t pinned, or used. This menu can easily be accessed by pressing Win+Q or by clicking on the Search Charm. A third way is to right click directly on the Start Screen.

However, there are many notable apps missing in this list. Backup and restore is one I feel should be listed here, instead of buried in the Control Panel. Also, Microsoft has moved the shortcuts found on the right side of the current Menu into the Settings Charm which can be accessed at any time by either pressing Win+I or by mousing over to the top right of your screen.

Here you can find easy access to the Control Panel, Personalization features, PC info, and Help, along with the power options, volume control, and Network access.

This change has led to a lot of anger and confusion, but I feel this divorce of options makes the UI cleaner, and more organized, than shoving everything into the Start Menu.

The few downsides to this right now, are that it leaves a lot of ?white space?, and no customization features. The Charms are purely fixed.

Is the new Start Screen perfect? By all means no. I think there needs to be a visual cue somewhere to let the user know it?s OK to type to search, and I think that splitting up the search into three separate categories is a bit odd. I really wish it was possible to automatically go to the category where the thing you are searching for is found, but I have to manually select it for some reason. And as I said before, some of the power features of Windows are curiously absent from the ?All Apps? list.

Also, I think the Start Menu could have greater customization features, like the ability to use a background image instead of awkward colors and patterns.

But it does address the many problems with today?s Start Menu. Again, to those who say it?s ?not broken?, I disagree. Once you dive into the guts of the thing, its problems and limitations become apparent, and many of these are fixed with the new Start Screen. Also, the Start Screen eliminates device ?bias? by being able to play equally with all devices, and input methods. This is something the Start Menu would never be able to do.

After using both the Start Menu and Start Screen on both touch and non-touch devices, it?s apparent that the Start Screen is a needed change if Microsoft wishes to make Windows to work across a wide range of devices. Continuing to use the decrepit Start Menu/desktop only paradigm would have been akin to shooting yourself in the foot.

I?m positive we?ll see a lot more changes and fixes for Metro in Windows 9, but for now, I?m happy to see Microsoft finally coming to terms with Windows, and its lack of long term viability, because I for one would like to see it survive, and would like to continue using it in the future.

[Keyboard Cowboy]

Well easy and i will post someone elses article here on neowin that can give ya all the down sides and limitation of the start menu. but in the dn you know ther is more to windows 8 then the Metro start screen interface right many end user desktop features and enhacments and hek i even posted one topic on it on this forum from he windows blog multi-monitor enhancements

That was a good read.

[BajiRav]

That was a good read.

BUT THERE IS NO START BUTTON AND METRO IS UGLY!!!!!

:rofl:

[EMP~Firestorm]

I love EVERYTHING else about Windows 8 EXCEPT MetroPOS er I mean MetroUI

After starting out with DOS and progressing through Windows, I can honestly say that this feels like a jump BACKWARDS, even as much as its MEANT to SCREAM "TOUCH UI"...

One thing I will say here in "short" fashion (im rather long winded normally, but the "long" version would be much longer, trust me), about the Start Menu, is that Microsoft put out guidelines for the start menu during the change-over from Win XP to Vista/7*, if this guidelines would have been followed, that entire speil by Scorbing would be invalid! Whats the story: Virtually no-one listened... Of the hundreds of apps I use, MAYBE 10~ of them switched to the single program icon! A GREAT example of this is MiniTool Partition Wizard (followed by the edition name... FOR CHRISTS SAKE), The guidelines put out by Microsoft was for a single Application executiable, however, like MTPW, hardly any of the programs I use follow those guidelines, MTPW for example has a folder which contains a Help file shortcut, a URL shortcut, the program's shortcut, AND a shortcut for the uninstaller... and like I just said, this is EXTREMELY COMMON even/expecially among programs that STILL get updated to this very month!

If Microsoft wouldnt have completely pulled a dick move and totally disabled any-way (without significant 3rd party tools) to return to using the Desktop, I would have been on Windows 8 like no-ones business, however, seeing as its now forced down your throat, Windows 8 is Windows ME v2 in my eyes, and always will be.

On a side note, if I wanted to look at tiles, ID GO TO THE BATHROOM, Im one of those who still has tile flooring in my bathroom, I associate MetroPOS/UI with taking a dump, congrats Microsoft, wonderful job!

*Prior to Vista/7/8 the Start Menu would adjust lengths quite a bit, the decision to make the start-menu width static instead of dynamic was a huge design flaw, and to be blunt, DUMB AS HECK, all its doing now is solving one dumb mistake with another...

EDIT: if the option where there to use the Desktop only instead of Metro, I would jump on Win8, however, since the option is to be totally removed for Final, its a "no-go" for me...

[Joni_78]

This is just so retarded. You have a start screen that has 10" apps that are designed to be used on something else than desktop, you have to go to start screen, righ click, then select more programs to access the normal programs designed for desktop.

Someone once said it would be great to have whole Windows UI like 10" Media Center and everyone hated that idea, now you have just that.

[Stoffel]

This is just so retarded. You have a start screen that has 10" apps that are designed to be used on something else than desktop, you have to go to start screen, righ click, then select more programs to access the normal programs designed for desktop.

Someone once said it would be great to have whole Windows UI like 10" Media Center and everyone hated that idea, now you have just that.

So why don't you just unpin all those Metro apps from the start screen and pin apps you actually use. That should solve your problem

[Joni_78]

So why don't you just unpin all those Metro apps from the start screen and pin apps you actually use. That should solve your problem

Why does it have to be set as touchscreens by default? I mean Windows is mainly used with desktops. I shouldn't have to remove touchscreen apps and then add normal ones.

It would have reguired only a question in setup progress to specify if Windows is used on Tablet or Desktop and Start screen would be configured accordingly.

Performance doesn't look good either, which is why I was interested to try this out in the first place. My 6 months old Windows 7 install boots to logon screen in 27 seconds, Clean Windows 8 Professional in 34 seconds. Also didn't saw any performance increase with Cinebench (multicore) or Geekbench even though AMD and Microsoft said Bulldozer would be better optimized with W8.

[notuptome2004]

Why does it have to be set as touchscreens by default? I mean Windows is mainly used with desktops. I shouldn't have to remove touchscreen apps and then add normal ones.

It would have reguired only a question in setup progress to specify if Windows is used on Tablet or Desktop and Start screen would be configured accordingly.

Performance doesn't look good either, which is why I was interested to try this out in the first place. My 6 months old Windows 7 install boots to logon screen in 27 seconds, Clean Windows 8 Professional in 34 seconds. Also didn't saw any performance increase with Cinebench (multicore) or Geekbench even though AMD and Microsoft said Bulldozer would be better optimized with W8.

then there is somthing else wrong with your system because every system i have tried windows 8 on boots faster then windows 7 and performance better all around. a good friend of mine keith who is visualy imparied runs windows 8 on Bulldozer 8120 system and it runs far better then windows 7 did bootup for him is 11 sec from cold boot to login and all the benchmarks i have seen by other sites who have bench marked the CP and RP against windows 7 show window s8 has a good size improvement over windows 7 hands down

[PGHammer]

then there is somthing else wrong with your system because every system i have tried windows 8 on boots faster then windows 7 and performance better all around. a good friend of mine keith who is visualy imparied runs windows 8 on Bulldozer 8120 system and it runs far better then windows 7 did bootup for him is 11 sec from cold boot to login and all the benchmarks i have seen by other sites who have bench marked the CP and RP against windows 7 show window s8 has a good size improvement over windows 7 hands down

My testbed (which I run everything on) is older than Bulldozer - Q6600 with 4GB of RAM - a *desktop* (no touch anywhere). I run *one* WinRT app - everything else I run that is WinRT-based is a game (which, unlike WinRT apps, have no issues with larger than 13" displays - mine is 23"). In terms of straight performance improvements in the applications I use on a daily basis (again, all Win32 applications and mostly Win32 games), Windows 8 beats Windows 7. Period. Basically by all the usual metrics by which an upgrade version of Windows is normally measured, 8 wins. (And that is despite the radically-different UI - which I was just as skeptical about as Windows 8's persistent critics.)

The reality that these self-proclaimed "ubergeeks" can't get their heads around the admittedly-radical UI change is admittedly odd in and of itself - especially when they spew all the vitriol about running OS X (which is far different from Windows 7; more so than even Windows 8) or Android (not only remarikably similar to Windows 8, but the very reason that WinRT as an API, and WindowsRT as an OS, exists) means that while OSes that compete with Windows are allowed to change (even if they break application compatibility in the process), however, Windows itself is not - even if application compatibility is preserved.

Oh no - you can't judge Windows 8 on strictly the merits. You have to find a way to justify *why* you can't get your head around the massive UI change (because you'll lose all the geek cred you have if you actually admit that you fail in that regard) therefore you belittle the UI as a *tablet UI* - utterly failing to face the fact that if it actually WERE a strictly tablet UI, it should, if anything, be *easier* to get around with with a mouse - not harder. Android 3.x and later is easily mousable - and it actually *is* a tablet OS - which itself gives the lie to the whole argument.

[derkim]

Well easy and i will post someone elses article here on neowin that can give ya all the down sides and limitation of the start menu. but in the dn you know ther is more to windows 8 then the Metro start screen interface right many end user desktop features and enhacments and hek i even posted one topic on it on this forum from he windows blog multi-monitor enhancements

bla bla

Oh dear... All issues which you describe are easy to fix.

Also there are a very easy way to make the startmenu more interesting:

- remove "all programs"

- add a scroll bar to the pinned area (like in all programs)

- just allow .exe files to pin

- add separators instead of folders

- do not allow installers to add the crap in there

The most windows programs can be sorted in such of a "servicecenter".

From there you could start disk cleaner and co, like control panel.

this were much more better than the metro crap.

A fullscreen launcher is and will stay an absolutely no-go.

[chrisj1968]

just my casual observation here, is it me or does Windows 8 seems to be geared toward tablets and touchscreens?I just don't imagine seeing myself gaming in the future with a touchscreen. I'm using oracle VM to revisit this to get a feel for what I will be able unable to do. but it seems to be geared towards everyone but computer users by casual first impression. I feel like this is a step backwards if this OS is supposed to use keyboard combos to operate different functions. Is this OS supposed to intertwine windows phone, tablets and Pc on to one platform? the metro sure looks like great for a cellphone/smartphone or a tablet.

oh ok. installing updates now.... hope I can get as close to RTM as possible. hmm.

[CG-88]

just my casual observation here, is it me or does Windows 8 seems to be geared toward tablets and touchscreens?I just don't imagine seeing myself gaming in the future with a touchscreen. I'm using oracle VM to revisit this to get a feel for what I will be able unable to do. but it seems to be geared towards everyone but computer users by casual first impression. I feel like this is a step backwards if this OS is supposed to use keyboard combos to operate different functions. Is this OS supposed to intertwine windows phone, tablets and Pc on to one platform? the metro sure looks like great for a cellphone/smartphone or a tablet.

oh ok. installing updates now.... hope I can get as close to RTM as possible. hmm.

This is what the majority of the argument has been about in this whole thread. How Microsoft has focused or tried to catch up with the touchscreen/surface/tablet market by forcing metro and how it is alienating all loyal Microsoft "since DOS days" fans by doing this.

That above is there opinion, not mine. I love it :D

[Guest LiquidCrystalMeth]

Well easy and i will post someone elses article here on neowin that can give ya all the down sides and limitation of the start menu. but in the dn you know ther is more to windows 8 then the Metro start screen interface right many end user desktop features and enhacments and hek i even posted one topic on it on this forum from he windows blog multi-monitor enhancements

Original Post by Dot matrix he makes some great points

<SNIP>

That was a good read.

Problem with that post was that almost ALL the "issues" raised by the OP were debunked in the following posts

Most of those "issues" can be alleviated by exercising your brain, rather waiting to be spoonfed

For instance my post that followed it pointed out that theres no lock on the All Programs folder, and you can organise your apps into category folders of your own choosing, amongst other 5 second tips.

Lazy users create issues where there dont need to be, nor do they exist most times

Oh and Win 8 sucks and i have advised all users i support that i wont be using it myself and nor will i support it, just as i didnt support Windows ME, of which this is the latest incarnation

MS:

Want to sell a tablet...ok

Want to create a tablet version of an OS for that tablet...OK

Force everyone on non-tablet devices to use kindergarten interface with a hard on for social networking (i personally think anyone with a facebook account or access to a twitter account should be neutered so their shallowness doesnt completely weaken the human genome)....not OK

They will survive to rue the day they were conned by some myopic ****** in their midst at MS who stared over the fence at Apples gear, but why go through with it when the overwhelming feedback even early on was bad? Ignore your userbase at your peril.

Fsck me, id rather us MS Bob than that ****

This is what the majority of the argument has been about in this whole thread. How Microsoft has focused or tried to catch up with the touchscreen/surface/tablet market by forcing metro and how it is alienating all loyal Microsoft "since DOS days" fans by doing this.

That above is there opinion, not mine. I love it :D

Thats the way i feel, i have been with MS since the first MS-DOS, and MS has really lost me with this crap.

[Vextor]

Personally, I don't mind Windows 8 at all. I'm using the Release Preview right now (not going to upgrade to RTM for the moment), and it works the best out of any Windows version I have ever used. I like the Metro Start Screen for it's fast usability , and the fact that I never used the start button that much apart from pinning stuff. Now I have that functionality, but expanded. The Metro Start Screen has been an upgrade for me, not a downgrade. It also gives me more space in the taskbar once you get used to it. Microsoft removed it for a reason, because the start button was barely used (as reported in a Neowin article)

But the main fact over my love for Windows 8 is the huge performance upgrade over Windows 7. It is so much faster on all ends, leaving me with no such 'startup lag', where the system is virtually unusable. The Task Manager is also very nice, and the restarting explorer function is absolutely brilliant. Overall, Windows 8 has been a huge improvement for me and I hope Microsoft continues in this direction. They haven't ignored desktop users at all, taking note of the new keyboard shortcuts, the interface overhaul, the new task manager, etc has convinced me about Windows 8, and using it has convinced me even more.

EDIT: To all the people saying Metro has reduced their productivity, to me it has increased my personal productivity.

[CG-88]

Why should Microsoft slow the process to the next generation down because seemingly people cannot be bothered to use there brain and figure out that windows 8 IS NOT that different in desktop mode. "i hate metro it slows my productivity" dont ****ing use it then!!!

This is the future, in my honest opinion it is not going to be a flop, it is going to be the start of the next generation and will be awesome!

[chrisj1968]

I'm finding my way around but, I'm not too keen on the keyboard combos. desktop to metro using ctrl esc how in the world so I open an app?

the feel seems like a trendy fad. seems like each version. oh well.

[chrisj1968]

do the apps install direct from the store?