Windows 8.2 pro:

[Noir Angel]

I'd rather them just do what Google did with Android. Not hit you in the face with a Tablet UI unless you're actually using a tablet. I don't care about "services and devices" because I don't really use their services, I don't care about metro apps because I find most of them useless on my PC, I just want my desktop PC to run a desktop OS with a desktop UX

[Andre S. Veteran]

compared to the metro stuff, its a small amount of attention.

It's what you would expect from such an established and mature technology; it's seeing relatively slow but still meaningful evolution. Hardly a dying technology.

[vcfan]

It's what you would expect from such an established and mature technology; it's seeing relatively slow but still meaningful evolution. Hardly a dying technology.

 

Microsoft is transforming into a devices and services company company. WinRT will be what powers this future. Its clear what that says about win32.

[snaphat (Myles Landwehr) Member]

Microsoft is transforming into a devices and services company company. WinRT will be what powers this future. Its clear what that says about win32.

 

I think it is less clear given that they've moved back to com interfaces and native code. WINRT is a wrapper on top of win32, so you really think win32 is going to go away?

[vcfan]

I think it is less clear given that they've moved back to com interfaces and native code. WINRT is a wrapper on top of win32, so you really think win32 is going to go away?

when I say win32, I mean for developers and applications. win32 will probably continue to exist forever behind the covers.

[Dot Matrix]

Win32 is the new CMD.

[Andre S. Veteran]

Microsoft is transforming into a devices and services company company. WinRT will be what powers this future. Its clear what that says about win32.

Saying that Win32 is dying because WinRT will be the only API is begging the question. I don't see Win32 going away in any foreseeable future: developers are not migrating to it and Microsoft is not deprecating Win32 or halting its development. It's the desktop app API and if anything, Microsoft has been recently trying to re-affirm its commitment to desktop apps.

[vcfan]

Saying that Win32 is dying because WinRT will be the only API going forward is begging the question. I don't see Win32 going away in any foreseeable future: developers are not migrating to it and Microsoft is not deprecating Win32 or halting its development. It's the desktop app API and if anything, Microsoft has been recently trying to re-affirm its commitment to desktop apps.

so when I click the wifi network icon in the notifications area of the taskbar on the desktop,and it pops up a metro options screen, that doesn't mean anything to you?

[Atomic Wanderer Chicken]

Win32 is the new CMD.

:laugh:

That is crazy talk, Win32 is not going away for a long time. There are professionals who work and use Win32 programs everyday for like web design, developing code for software, video editing, Photoshop work, audio editing.

[snaphat (Myles Landwehr) Member]

when I say win32, I mean for developers and applications. win32 will probably continue to exist forever behind the covers.

 

How do you propose they stop win32 development unless they kill off the desktop completely then? If Win32 stays, it stays for developers too (much like all of MS APIs have stayed for the last twenty years even when deprecated). The only way to force a migration is to kill the platform off and they can't do that unless they either kill Win32 or kill the desktop as a whole. Neither they would risk simply because they would kill an ecosystem that has been two decades in the making. It would be simply shooting oneself in the foot if they did.

[snaphat (Myles Landwehr) Member]

:laugh:

That is crazy talk, Win32 is not going away for a long time. There are professionals who work and use Win32 programs everyday for like web design, developing code for software, video editing, Photoshop work, audio editing.

 

This one, bingo. If they killed off win32 and the applications that go with it, I'd have to migrate to Linux as a desktop. I would never use Windows again at that point. I have very little investment in it as it is except for the software ecosystem and ease-of-use. I'm sure the same is the case for the majority of developers out there. We'd go where the tools and ecosystems still exist.

[Andre S. Veteran]

so when I click the wifi network icon in the notifications area of the taskbar on the desktop,and it pops up a metro options screen, that doesn't mean anything to you?

Yes, it means the Modern/Desktop integration is poorly thought out. We've seen small improvements in Windows 8.1 like the ability to disable top-right charms and boot to desktop, and Windows 8.2 looks poised to bring more improvements for Desktop users.

[Auditor]

This.

 

I've said it earlier, but personally, I like what Metro is doing. I honestly feel as if adaptive and dynamic UIs like Metro are the future in UI design, and that the static, dull "workstation" UIs are a thing of the past. Microsoft isn't wrong for trying their hand at it, nor may they get it right the first time around (depending on who you ask), but there's an exciting world just waiting to be developed here. This is something that could make sitting at a desk "fun" again. There's just too many benefits to ignore.

 

Talk about delusional and we have no dearth of that. So you think flat and bald fisher price interface in future. If this is future for MS then no wonder MS is in such a deep mess.  MS took a big gamble with this metro interface and failed miserably. They are slowly coming to their sense and minority metro supporters will keep on rambling the same thing. Touch might be future for consumer device such as tablet but Metro is not and specially on desktop touch is not future at all.  Talk about start menu coming back shows MS still have some functioning brain left but we will see what they really mean by start menu. I will say to all metro lovers, keep copy of win 8.1 handy because that will be last OS with metro crap plastered on desktop unless you plan to use Surface. 

[vcfan]

How do you propose they stop win32 development unless they kill off the desktop completely then? If Win32 stays, it stays for developers too (much like all of MS APIs have stayed for the last twenty years even when deprecated). The only way to force a migration is to kill the platform off and they can't do that unless they either kill Win32 or kill the desktop. Neither they would risk simply because they would kill an ecosystem that has been two decades in the making. It would be simply shooting oneself in the foot if they did.

 

Ultimately,it is the market that will decide the fate of the desktop and win32. Microsoft can use windows though to push users to the RT side of things. If they push RT enough that users start abandoning the desktop, then its a possibility down the line that it can be removed.

 

Yes, it means the Modern/Desktop integration is poorly thought out. We've seen small improvements in Windows 8.1 like the ability to disable top-right charms and boot to desktop, and Windows 8.2 looks poised to bring more improvements for Desktop users.

 

Boy there sure is a lot of redundancy going on between the desktop and metro. Its not simply a case of integration. Why does Microsoft keep adding control panel options from the desktop, to the other side? Its a takeover, man. They are just assembling the army.

[Andre S. Veteran]

Boy there sure is a lot of redundancy going on between the desktop and metro. Its not simply a case of integration. Why does Microsoft keep adding control panel options from the desktop, to the other side? Its a takeover, man. They are just assembling the army.

You seem to know where Microsoft is going much better than Microsoft itself is.  :laugh: You see some kind of master plan to deprecate the desktop, personally I see a lot of poor design and fumbling around. Time will tell how Windows will evolve, in the meantime Win32's alive and healthy, and nothing has replaced it.

 

I'd like to remind you of what Brian Harry said here on Neowin just recently https://www.neowin.net/news/interview-we-chat-with-microsofts-brian-harry-about-visual-studio-2013:

 

Neowin: The Modern UI is now slowly becoming the norm while we are seeing the first signs of the desktop app disappearing. What direction does the Visual Studio team think the future of app development will take and how will the VS tools adapt to it? 

 

Brian Harry: I?m afraid I disagree with your premise. At Microsoft, we absolutely see value in, and intend to continue supporting, both scenarios ? the cloud/device model and the desktop application. Each has its place and will continue to for many, many years to come. Accordingly, while you?ll recognize that our tools and platforms support the technologies predominantly behind apps, such as standard HTML5, JavaScript (and TypeScript) and XAML, you?ll also note that our investments in and commitments to .NET ? the framework for building desktop applications ? continues unabated. In fact, while we recently took steps to unify, simplify and reduce costs for developers who wish to build apps for both the Windows Store and Windows Phone, we also released a significant update to .NET, .NET 4.5.1, on October 17th. (...)

 

 

[xWhiplash]

You do know this is 2013 not 1990 don't you.

I think its not a step back but a giant leep.

 

What are you referring to?  The start menu?  Does one little menu mean EVERYTHING else on the OS is 1990s?  What about SSDs and Trim?  Multi-core and hyperthreading?  Supporting TBs and TBs of storage?  Supporting many many GBs of RAM?  What about DEP, UAC, Code Integrity, and many other security enhancements?

 

Why do you guys freak the hell out every time somebody mentions the start menu.  Having one little UI element does not mean computing is back in the 1990s.  It is JUST a UI ELEMENT.

 

So you guys are saying there is no difference between Windows 95 and Windows 8 OTHER than the start menu/UI changes?  Really?

[xWhiplash]

This.

 

I've said it earlier, but personally, I like what Metro is doing. I honestly feel as if adaptive and dynamic UIs like Metro are the future in UI design, and that the static, dull "workstation" UIs are a thing of the past. Microsoft isn't wrong for trying their hand at it, nor may they get it right the first time around (depending on who you ask), but there's an exciting world just waiting to be developed here. This is something that could make sitting at a desk "fun" again. There's just too many benefits to ignore.

 

Do you guys sit and stare at the basic screen for hours and hours?  Who cares if the standard desktop environment is "dull".  I do not sit and stare at my desktop wallpaper all day.  I have programs open.  

 

Guess what.  If you open a picture in the Modern UI.  It is "dull" if you stare at it too, because it never changes.

 

I do not understand this argument that the desktop is SO INCREDIBLY DULL!  Um, it is SUPPOSED TO BE.  It gets out of my way and leaves my programs able to do their thing.

[+Warwagon MVC]

This.

 

I've said it earlier, but personally, I like what Metro is doing. I honestly feel as if adaptive and dynamic UIs like Metro are the future in UI design, and that the static, dull "workstation" UIs are a thing of the past.

 

So you want to replace this "dull" looking desktop environment

 

 

With this dull UI

 

 

One of the definitions of dull is.

 

"lacking interest or excitement." ... so wouldn't windows 8 be considered dull?

[snaphat (Myles Landwehr) Member]

<snip>

 

So you guys are saying there is no difference between Windows 95 and Windows 8 OTHER than the start menu/UI changes?  Really?

 

I think you are making a strawman of the discussion here. Not of the post you quoted though because I don't think anyone knows what exactly that person was talking about. It was like two lines, extremely vague, and you can't tell whether they were talking about the OPs post, metro, win32, or what exactly :laugh:.

[Dot Matrix]

So you want to replace this "dull" looking desktop environment

With this dull UI

One of the definitions of dull is.

"lacking interest or excitement." ... so wouldn't windows 8 be considered dull?

Windows 8 hardly lacks excitement. The Start Screen is quite nice to use, and more attractive than a static desktop. And yes, id rather have the digital, flat metro look over gaudy flashy UIs. Windows 7 is a great OS, but our machines are more capable than being dull static workstations. I'm talking in the "boring" sense. A grid of icons isn't anything great.

[DConnell Member]

So you want to replace this "dull" looking desktop environment

 

 

With this dull UI

 

 

One of the definitions of dull is.

 

"lacking interest or excitement." ... so wouldn't windows 8 be considered dull?

 

The Win8 Mail screen looks less busy and easier to use to me. Of course, it's also less a lot less powerful than Outlook , but if all you need is email, then that's not a negative.

[xWhiplash]

I think you are making a strawman of the discussion here. Not of the post you quoted though because I don't think anyone knows what exactly that person was talking about. It was like two lines, extremely vague, and you can't tell whether they were talking about the OPs post, metro, win32, or what exactly  :laugh:.

 

 

That is why I asked him what he is referring to.

 

Windows 8 hardly lacks excitement. The Start Screen is quite nice to use, and more attractive than a static desktop. And yes, id rather have the digital, flat metro look over gaudy flashy UIs. Windows 7 is a great OS, but our machines are more capable than being dull static workstations. I'm talking in the "boring" sense. A grid of icons isn't anything great.

 

What exactly is so DULL about Windows 7?

 

"a grid of icons" is what most people treat the start screen as.  I know NOBODY that utilizes these super awesome amazing live tiles.  Everybody I know uses the start screen as a "grid of icons" (myself included since I have NO need for live tiles nonsense).

[zhangm Supervisor]

So you want to replace this "dull" looking desktop environment

 

With this dull UI

 

One of the definitions of dull is.

 

"lacking interest or excitement." ... so wouldn't windows 8 be considered dull?

Just looking at that comparison, I really prefer the app UI because it is simple and to-the-point - at least, if you're running a Mail program for reading mail.

That said, what I don't appreciate about the vast majority of the Metro UI apps is that they've sacrificed a lot of functionality - something as elegant as sending a plain-text message, for example, is no longer an option. If the lost options return in future versions without dropping the no-nonsense interface, then I think I could enjoy using some apps over desktop equivalents.

Trying to swing this back on topic, I'm not confident that the changes proposed here would address any of the app functionality (or usability) issues, which is an important chunk of getting Metro to feel acceptable to some people.

[snaphat (Myles Landwehr) Member]

Just looking at that comparison, I really prefer the app UI because it is simple and to-the-point - at least, if you're running a Mail program for reading mail.

That said, what I don't appreciate about the vast majority of the Metro UI apps is that they've sacrificed a lot of functionality - something as elegant as sending a plain-text message, for example, is no longer an option. If the lost options return in future versions without dropping the no-nonsense interface, then I think I could enjoy using some apps over desktop equivalents.

Trying to swing this back on topic, I'm not confident that the changes proposed here would address any of the app functionality (or usability) issues, which is an important chunk of getting Metro to feel acceptable to some people.

 

The problem with metro applications is that the design lacks any consideration for screen real estate. It's as if MS decided that applications needed to be as minimal and barebones as possible with as little as possible on the screen. So in order to do that they implemented only barebones functionality and put huge fonts and spacing between all UI elements. And unsuprisingly 3rd party developers took MSes lead and went home with it. To be perfectly fair the design decisions make sense for tablet computing by end-users where you don't want complicated applications or hard to use programs with many of bells in whistles. What you want is something akin to phone applications so that's what they (and developers) went for. And the end of the day though, in general, that means the death of configuration and tweakability to get a simplified interface and applications.

 

I don't think you are likely to see a merger between simplified UI design and a larger feature set because doing so would be a very difficult to actually do well. It's much easier to just keep the feature-set small and build the UI strictly from the small feature-set.

[Ambroos]

The fact that there aren't any more advanced Metro apps says a lot about the quality of the platform. The software that is there, even Microsoft's own, is extremely limited in functionality compared to what we had before.