Your observations on Windows 8.1 update 1 (a.k.a. Feature Pack)

By Ice_Blue
in Microsoft (Windows)

 Share

Recommended Posts

Grand Master

macoman

Posted
Posted

Hang on guys, getting my concept ready. It will have the separation between metro and desktop power users want while still having unification with the simplicity of metro without a disable function or a desktop edition.

Any release for Windows Server 2012 R2 users? :rolleyes:

Grand Master

PGHammer

Posted
Posted

...for tablets. It makes no sense to keep it for the desktop. I'm all for Microsoft keeping the Metro Switcher for tablets and having it replace the taskbar, as it makes sense of devices with limited display areas. But the Metro Switcher offers no advantages to desktop users and only gets in the way, whereas the taskbar is well suited to large displays.

 

Having used the Surface 2 I am perfectly happy with the direction that Microsoft has taken for tablets and the Metro Switcher makes sense there - in fact I would argue that it's the best tablet interface out there. However, Metro is a mess on the desktop and the last thing I would want to see is for the desktop to be dropped or merged into Metro. This update highlights Microsoft's realisation that difference UI's suit difference form factors.

theyarecomingforyou, you sound like a fanatic.  What I want to know is "why" are you so fanatical?

 

Modal absolutionists (regardless of platform) only see one way of doing things - they are also the same folks that like layout-locking (forcing screens into either portrait or landscape view) or even developers that do the same, such as all too many Andoid or iOS developers).  If something does not fit your preferred method, you'll protest against it or (figurately) stone it.

 

I'm not all that in favor of touch - I can use it, but it's not a preference.  However, I do know that it isn't about me, or even my generation - not any more.

 

I'm also a Microsoft stockholder - that means that I have a VESTED interest in the company's survival.

 

As a stockholder, I see the future of merely PC technology moving away from traditional PC form-factors - the question is not WILL it happen, but when. (The encroachment has begun, and Windows 8+ had exactly nothing to do with it.)

 

I can dread it all I want - however, I'm smart enough to realize that it's not about me, and, as much as I try to push back, it's a losing battle.  I'm not a fish (and I'm not Aquaman, either) - why should I risk drowning to fight a battle that I WILL lose?  (Thinking otherwise is not merely Pharonic - in denial - but the same train of thought adopted for the benefit of terrorists and homicide/suicide bombers.)

 

Windows 8+ is Windows being Windows - supporting technological advances as each becomes mainstream.  In other words, it's something that Windows as first GUI, and later OS in its own right - has ALWAYS done.  As much as some of you may not like the idea, technology advancement does not stop - ever.

 

Quite frankly, FAILING to follow the trend is why Windows Phone was late, and is still late.  Why should Microsoft compound that mistake by doing the same in their own space?

 

Failure to adapt is ALWAYS fatal - the only question left after that failure is long does it take for the brain, and the body, to get the message that "time's up".

 

RT is the purist OS that you want - however, RT "in and of itself" isn't selling.  What IS selling is the "superset OS" - Windows 8+.  ModernUI may be okay, but even those that use a lot of ModernUI apps want more than that.  (RT was a hedge-bet, and while a good hedge-bet, it apparently is not enough to pull developers in particular away from Android or iOS, where they can be modal absolutists to their hearts content, despite both Android and iOS frowning "officially" at single-mode applications.  Note that the Windows Store does not even permit modal absolutionism in an app.)

Grand Master

theyarecomingforyou

Posted
Posted

theyarecomingforyou, you sound like a fanatic.  What I want to know is "why" are you so fanatical?

 

Modal absolutionists (regardless of platform) only see one way of doing things - they are also the same folks that like layout-locking (forcing screens into either portrait or landscape view) or even developers that do the same, such as all too many Andoid or iOS developers).  If something does not fit your preferred method, you'll protest against it or (figurately) stone it.

What utter nonsense. As I have stated already, the Metro Switcher is great for tablet users but it is objectively worse for desktop users. How do I justify that statement? It can only display a limited number of apps (it will only ever display 8 apps); it is hidden by default, making it harder to select items quickly; it requires a mouse gesture to trigger it; the location of apps lacks consistency, as they change location; you can't manually rearrange the order of apps; if you move your mouse over the threshold it immediately disappears, meaning you can accidentally close it, etc.

 

I'm not all that in favor of touch - I can use it, but it's not a preference.  However, I do know that it isn't about me, or even my generation - not any more.

This doesn't have anything to do with touch. I'm fine with Windows 8.1 on tablets and I'm fine with touch interfaces (I even have a Leap Motion to allow me to use air gestures). It's on the desktop where the problems are.

 

I'm also a Microsoft stockholder - that means that I have a VESTED interest in the company's survival.

That's irrelevant.

 

Windows 8+ is Windows being Windows - supporting technological advances as each becomes mainstream.  In other words, it's something that Windows as first GUI, and later OS in its own right - has ALWAYS done.  As much as some of you may not like the idea, technology advancement does not stop - ever.

And as an early adopter of every version of Windows for the past fifteen years?and as someone who has been registered to test pre-release versions of every release since Vista?I'm am more familiar with that than most. In fact I embrace progress and technological advancement. In fact that was the case with Windows 8, as I have been using it since the Developer Preview and pre-ordered it for release. However, that doesn't mean that I don't have legitimate grievances with the direction taken of some aspects, particularly relating to Metro. And in case you hadn't noticed, I'm not the only one. In fact this update is testament to the resistance Microsoft has faced regarding Windows 8 / 8.1 on the desktop.

 

Basically what you're saying is you disagree. That's great but don't try to pretend that your opinion matters more than mine.
Mentor

gohpep

Posted
Posted

jc7kN44.png

 

8E9ubj8.png

 

Some parts of my concept. Not entirely done, but I wanted to post it to see if I'm getting a good idea of what the general public wants.

 

 

I was thinking if I should put the open desktops list in the bar below it, I could shrink the app previews, or I could make the taskbar bigger. I'm still trying to figure out how pinning would work. Right now, my drawn (still not digitized) concept has the start screen as the only place to pin stuff.

Grand Master

chrisj1968

Posted
Posted

I think having Modern on the desktop will become more important when WP, Surface (and other windows mobile devices) and the desktop can sync. For me, that's when people will see the advantage of Modern.

 

I guess I must be gifted since I have no issues using Modern, while others just can't seem to figure out how to use it with a keyboard/mouse. /s   But seriously, all this moaning is getting a bit tiresome. 

I don't have the links anymore but, there were two distinct articles I saw that stated MSFT wanted modern UI for "consumers." problem is, power users over multiple monitors are boned because of a lack of... oh... vision on the part of MSFT?

 

two distinct Os's for 2 distinct markets Modern UI for tablets and mobile devices like windows phone and then desktop version for desktops or laptops. I think MSFT thought that people would fall head over heels about the modern UI. but all the arguing around here speaks loads to the contrary as simple moaning. It shows how split the user base is on happiness of the OS. I'd hope and pray that MSFT really makes an attempt to rewire the mess of the OS. everyone CAN be happy.

Grand Master

Dot Matrix

Posted
Posted

I don't have the links anymore but, there were two distinct articles I saw that stated MSFT wanted modern UI for "consumers." problem is, power users over multiple monitors are boned because of a lack of... oh... vision on the part of MSFT?

two distinct Os's for 2 distinct markets Modern UI for tablets and mobile devices like windows phone and then desktop version for desktops or laptops. I think MSFT thought that people would fall head over heels about the modern UI. but all the arguing around here speaks loads to the contrary as simple moaning. It shows how split the user base is on happiness of the OS. I'd hope and pray that MSFT really makes an attempt to rewire the mess of the OS. everyone CAN be happy.

I have two monitors. Windows 8 works great on them, both desktop and Metro properly support multi-monitor setup.

Grand Master

+InsaneNutter MVC

Posted
  • MVC
Posted

MS needs to stop trying to build one OS for them all.  EVERYONE, and I mean EVERYONE would have been happy if MS just gave users a choice.

 

Have a first startup screen asking which environment they want to use.  Desktop only (Windows 7 style but better).  Mix (what we have now).

 

I have never heard of a good reason why this should not be done.  Those of you that like the way it is now get to keep using it that way.  Those of us that like desktop only environment can use it that way.  Everybody wins.

 

Exactly, i don't get why choice such a bad thing? everyone's happy and the bad press stops.

 

My media centre PC runs Windows 7, however you would never know / care what OS it runs as the PC logs on and boots directly to Windows Media Center, controlled totally by the remote control.

 

That wasn't even possible in Windows 8 without hacks until 8.1 was released.

Grand Master

PGHammer

Posted
Posted

 

What utter nonsense. As I have stated already, the Metro Switcher is great for tablet users but it is objectively worse for desktop users. How do I justify that statement? It can only display a limited number of apps (it will only ever display 8 apps); it is hidden by default, making it harder to select items quickly; it requires a mouse gesture to trigger it; the location of apps lacks consistency, as they change location; you can't manually rearrange the order of apps; if you move your mouse over the threshold it immediately disappears, meaning you can accidentally close it, etc.

 

This doesn't have anything to do with touch. I'm fine with Windows 8.1 on tablets and I'm fine with touch interfaces (I even have a Leap Motion to allow me to use air gestures). It's on the desktop where the problems are.

 

That's irrelevant.

 

And as an early adopter of every version of Windows for the past fifteen years?and as someone who has been registered to test pre-release versions of every release since Vista?I'm am more familiar with that than most. In fact I embrace progress and technological advancement. In fact that was the case with Windows 8, as I have been using it since the Developer Preview and pre-ordered it for release. However, that doesn't mean that I don't have legitimate grievances with the direction taken of some aspects, particularly relating to Metro. And in case you hadn't noticed, I'm not the only one. In fact this update is testament to the resistance Microsoft has faced regarding Windows 8 / 8.1 on the desktop.

 

Basically what you're saying is you disagree. That's great but don't try to pretend that your opinion matters more than mine.

 

Why is your opinion relevant, but mine (though different) is not?

 

I just explained why mine IS different - whether YOU think it's relevant I have absolutely zero control over, and I don't pretend to.

 

Further, I have pointed out (repeatedly) that Windows is easily the largest bastion of modal absolutism left.  Not the LAST bastion - just the largest.

 

In addition, I have never - as in ever - said that the desktop - which you are insisting is under some sort of siege - is under attack.

 

Desktop applications run in Windows 8+ just fine - even you admit that.

 

I never said that migrating from Windows 7 would be easy - if anything, I stated categorically that some people couldn't do it at all.

 

However, unless you are that fanatical, the way to deal with the multiple modalities of Windows - which I don't dispute it has - CAN be dealt with.

 

Refusing to face that is the equivalent of sticking your head in the sand, and does nobody - least of all you OR Microsoft - any good at all.

 

Microsoft stuck THEIR heads in the sand and got blindsided by smartphones and tablets - they are fortunate that it has also, to an extent, caught Google napping also (and more so the developers than Google) - even Apple has not stretched out an insurmountable lead yet.

 

Ignoring the future direction hardware is going not only does Microsoft not a lick of good, it does a disservice to their customers, the company itself, and to Microsoft's historical vision.  Basically, as much as you would wish otherwise (and so would lots of others) modal absolutism is NOT a valid strategy.

Grand Master

PGHammer

Posted
Posted

I don't have the links anymore but, there were two distinct articles I saw that stated MSFT wanted modern UI for "consumers." problem is, power users over multiple monitors are boned because of a lack of... oh... vision on the part of MSFT?

 

two distinct Os's for 2 distinct markets Modern UI for tablets and mobile devices like windows phone and then desktop version for desktops or laptops. I think MSFT thought that people would fall head over heels about the modern UI. but all the arguing around here speaks loads to the contrary as simple moaning. It shows how split the user base is on happiness of the OS. I'd hope and pray that MSFT really makes an attempt to rewire the mess of the OS. everyone CAN be happy.

Maybe because the markets are NOT so distinct any more?

 

User desires may be distinct, and especially if you have older hardware - however, there has been little in terms of hardware distinctness since the launch of - believe it or not - Windows 7.

 

It was, in fact, the late days of Vista - while Windows 7 was in beta - that the distinctions between different hardware types started to blur.  If anything, the pace OF that blur has only increased, during the rollout of 7, and prior to the Windows (8) Developer Preview.  The blurring HAS made its way to desktops - however, it merely got to desktops last.  (I'm referring specifically to the desktop formfactor - none of this is about software so far.  Any mentions of software, or even Windows, simply points to a time of reference.)

 

Also, starting with 7, the desktop formfactor itself started selling less - and that is something we ALL have noticed.  While the desktop formfactor is still relevant, iit's not AS relevant as it used to be.

 

That is the Ultimate Sixty-Four Cent Question - how long will the desktop formfactor remain relevant.  Nobody has an answer yet - and Microsoft certainly doesn't.

 

Also, interest IN the desktop-formfactor - by all too many consumers, companies, et. alia. is down - WAY down.  It also began before the Windows 8 Developer Preview, and largely has nothing to do with Windows 8+.  It's about expense-shedding -  it costs serious money to maintain those desktop-formfactor PCs, and a lot of them are considerably underutilized.  If anything, as PCs in general have become more powerful, the amount of utilized power per PC has continued to drop. (It's what I used to do in government and enterprises, and it's something I do today, but for home users - so it's something I have had a worm's eye view of.)  You may plan what you need around the Major Application - however, realistically, how often do you use it?  (This is an issue for home users, mobile users, enterprise users - everyone.  Just how often do you REALLY use THE major application that you acquired your PC for?)

 

What we are finding out - as individual users, as enterprise users, if not whole enterprises - basically, all over IT - is that, in quite a few cases, we CAN do more with less - including less of a PC.

 

The desktop-formfactor gets replaced by a notebook, netbook, or other portable.  If you still have a desktop-formfactor PC, it may actually get used less, with some things taken over by other hardware - including smartphones and tablets.

 

Result, the desktop-formfactor has become more of a hub, or even a server to all the augments and other devices.  While still relevant, it's definitely not AS relevant, or even relevant in the same way.  And that is without the PC's OS changing at all.

 

It's certainly not fun; in fact, even though I saw it coming, there is little that a single user can do about it.  Apparently, there is little anyone can do about it, including Microsoft.

 

But whether you are an indivvidual user, or an enterprise, or you're Microsoft, you must certainly face it, and deal with the impact as best you can.  The reason why is rather simple - if you don't you will drown.  Drowning is ALWAYS fatal.

Grand Master

PGHammer

Posted
Posted

Exactly, i don't get why choice such a bad thing? everyone's happy and the bad press stops.

 

My media centre PC runs Windows 7, however you would never know / care what OS it runs as the PC logs on and boots directly to Windows Media Center, controlled totally by the remote control.

 

That wasn't even possible in Windows 8 without hacks until 8.1 was released.

How many users actually have a clue how they use their PC?  How often do users change how they use their PC?

 

I can't think of a single user that uses their PC the same way all the time - regardless of WHAT version of Windows they may be running.  (That has been, in fact, why there have been multiple graduated SKUs of Windows between XP and 8, and why 8+ itself, despite the reduction of SKUs, has multiple modes instead - very few individual users use their PC - desktop or otherwise - the same way over the life of the hardware.)

 

If the user makes a choice - which turns out to be wrong (a classical PEBKAC), care to bet who gets the blame?

 

It's not as simple as A or B - it never is, and hasn't been, since even before Windows, or the GUI for that matter, existed.

 

I go back to mainframes, and it wasn't that simple, even then.  Why would it be any simpler with a GUI-driven OS?  (It's not even that simple with tablets - or smartphones; if it were, why are there multiple forks of Android, and multiple modalities of even iOS?)  Simple in theory, but complicated in practice.

Grand Master

theyarecomingforyou

Posted
Posted

Why is your opinion relevant, but mine (though different) is not?

It's not. You have your opinion, I have mine. That was my point. The fact that you own stock in Microsoft doesn't make your opinion any more valid, which was the impression you were giving.

 

With regards to the taskbar I stated objective reasons why the Metro Switcher is inferior to the taskbar on the desktop and I haven't seen any compelling argument as to why the Metro Switcher should be used on the desktop. And there is no dispute that the way the desktop and Metro interact is clumsy, awkward and inconsistent. Windows 8.1 is still a decent desktop operating system (easily better than Windows 7, imo), I'm just expecting my grievances with certain aspects of it. As I said, I think the direction Microsoft went with Windows 8.1 for tablets is great and puts it ahead of the competition but trying to force those changes onto desktop users was a mistake.

 

Tablet users shouldn't have to use the desktop, like desktop users shouldn't have to use Metro. This update helps by changing the default apps, as for some reason Microsoft thought it was a good idea to make Metro apps the default on the desktop.

Grand Master

DConnell Member

Posted
  • Member
Posted

I'm not a touch user, but wouldn't this behavior be context-sensitive (i.e. get the context bar or menu based on input device that was used)? That seems to make the most sense if that's the case.

 

Touch users keep their context bar; desktop users get context menus. Everyone is happy*.

 

* - not really

 

Very much not really. I'm a traditional form factor user that likes Metro - I don't want to need Metro behaving like the 20 year old desktop UI.

 

The assumption that Metro is touch only is very wrong.

Grand Master

Dot Matrix

Posted
Posted

Exactly, i don't get why choice such a bad thing? everyone's happy and the bad press stops.

 

My media centre PC runs Windows 7, however you would never know / care what OS it runs as the PC logs on and boots directly to Windows Media Center, controlled totally by the remote control.

 

That wasn't even possible in Windows 8 without hacks until 8.1 was released.

The things is, you have the choice. WIN+D, or just click the desktop tile. You say you have none, but that's farthest from the truth.

Mentor

snaphat (Myles Landwehr) Member

Posted
  • Member
Posted

Very much not really. I'm a traditional form factor user that likes Metro - I don't want to need Metro behaving like the 20 year old desktop UI.

 

The assumption that Metro is touch only is very wrong.

Consistency is a UI fundamental. I do want the start screen behaving consistently with the UI I'm using most of the time (WIMP paradigm). The integration and theming is rather off though for the new menus though.

Grand Master

PGHammer

Posted
Posted

Consistency is a UI fundamental. I do want the start screen behaving consistently with the UI I'm using most of the time (WIMP paradigm). The integration and theming is rather off though for the new menus though.

It's still modal absolutism.  A multimodal OS is NOT going to be consistent in every mode - the same issue is true with even iOS and Android (as much as we want to put either, or both in a modal box, neither fits it).

 

Android and iOS are succeeding because they have not tried too hard for modal absolutism - the only areas in either where modal absolutism exists are in applications; quite frankly, I wish it would go away even there.

 

More and more of our HARDWARE is multimodal - and has been for quite a while; desktop-formfactor PCs had the beginnings of multimodal capability all the way back with Microsoft's original multimodal OS - XP Media Center Edition.

 

A single-mode OS demands consistency - a multimodal OS can't afford it.

 

That is, I think, the real conflict with Windows 8+ - it is a multimodal OS that is expanding into the largest bastion of modal absolutism.  Never mind that there have even been multimodal version of Windows before - they also have not been the default.

Neowinian

l_p_4_7

Posted
Posted

Is there any way to have the minimize/taskbar features in metro apps without enabling the "Show Windows Store apps on the taskbar" option? I'd like to be able to bring up the taskbar in a metro app without having any newly opened unpinned apps appearing on my desktop taskbar.

Proficient

TrickyDickie

Posted
Posted

Do you have this setting ticked (Taskbar > Properties > Navigation)?

 

Nope. Found that one lol.

 

The problem isn't with booting, it is whenever I close a Modern app I get taken back to the Desktop rather than the Start Screen.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing