Windows 8 thread

[Hemi-Cuda]

I'm a very experienced PC user, it's my job to figure this stuff out and support it in a business. But I still had no idea that you could actually close the Windows 8 apps by clicking at the very top of the screen and dragging down, I had been using the task manager to force kill those apps until I stumbled across an article with that tidbit. That's where Microsoft failed hard, if you're going to introduce a radical change to your core product then you damn well better do a good job of explaining the changes and educating users

[photon]

Blue will be called Windows 8.1 and will be free for Windows 8 users.

http://www.theverge.com/2013/5/14/43...pdate-official

[Inglewood Jack]

Originally Posted by Hemi-Cuda

I'm a very experienced PC user, it's my job to figure this stuff out and support it in a business. But I still had no idea that you could actually close the Windows 8 apps by clicking at the very top of the screen and dragging down, I had been using the task manager to force kill those apps until I stumbled across an article with that tidbit. That's where Microsoft failed hard, if you're going to introduce a radical change to your core product then you damn well better do a good job of explaining the changes and educating users

the whole idea behind that is you're not supposed to have to worry about closing apps all the time. when they're not in use, they go into some sort of sleep/low resource mode in the background, kind of like how people normally don't immediately shut down apps on a phone or tablet when they launch something else.

not having had nearly as much trouble with the jump as other users, I'll go as far as saying that MS made some misguided choices, but I'll give them props for having the stones to try something new either way.

[You Need a Thneed]

Originally Posted by photon

Blue will be called Windows 8.1 and will be free for Windows 8 users.

http://www.theverge.com/2013/5/14/43...pdate-official

Available from the start screen? I'm never going to know when it's available, as I never see the start screen.

[Hemi-Cuda]

Originally Posted by photon

Blue will be called Windows 8.1 and will be free for Windows 8 users.

http://www.theverge.com/2013/5/14/43...pdate-official

I know they're adding in the option of booting directly to the desktop now, but if they don't suck it up completely and re-introduce the start menu as an option then it'll still fail

If Microsoft had included by default what Stardock made 3rd party (start menu, ability to run Metro apps in windows) then Windows 8 would have been a huge success IMO

[zamler]

Windows 8 would have been universally praised if MS gave people a choice. Want ModernUI? Good, you can select it as an option. Don't want it? Fine, you'll be using an improved version of Win7's UI, including the visuals.

And they should have made some useful improvements to the UI and dump the idiotic ribbon style interface. Microsoft is introducing change just for the sake of it, at the expense of concepts that have been well established and just work. If Microsoft was building cars they would change how you steer the car just because they felt to the need to move on from the most basic, tried and true method that everyone instantly understands.

[Brannigans Law]

Originally Posted by zamler

Windows 8 would have been universally praised if MS gave people a choice. Want ModernUI? Good, you can select it as an option. Don't want it? Fine, you'll be using an improved version of Win7's UI, including the visuals.

And they should have made some useful improvements to the UI and dump the idiotic ribbon style interface. Microsoft is introducing change just for the sake of it, at the expense of concepts that have been well established and just work. If Microsoft was building cars they would change how you steer the car just because they felt to the need to move on from the most basic, tried and true method that everyone instantly understands.

Oh but they spent huge money on R&D and all these changes, although widely despised, are actually good ideas we should have liked. Silly us!

[Mazrim]

Originally Posted by zamler

And they should have made some useful improvements to the UI and dump the idiotic ribbon style interface.

Personally, I love the Ribbon in Office products and especially Autodesk products (who followed Microsoft's lead and implemented them into their software). Context sensitive ribbon tabs appearing only when I need them is great and makes it easier to find the commands I want.

[Hemi-Cuda]

I just picked up an ASUS VivoTab Smart, and damn this thing is awesome. Thinner and lighter than an iPad, full Windows 8, 64gb storage standard (with expandable SD card storage), 10+ hour battery life, and all for $450. I wanted a decent budget tablet to tide me over until we start seeing what comes out with the new Intel chips, but this thing has surpassed all my expectations. Having something this small and light with the ability to install VLC to watch any video format you want and with Flash built into the OS itself just makes me look at the iPad with disgust now

[Hemi-Cuda]

On a side note, what exactly was the point of Windows 8 RT? I bought the ASUS with the keyboard and smart cover and still paid $150 less than the Surface RT, and I'm not limited to only metro apps. The Surface RT doesn't offer any performance increases, the battery life is the same, it's not a budget device, and you're severely limited compared to a full Windows 8 tablet. I have no idea what Microsoft was thinking here

[Rathji]

They wanted an OS that could run on ARM devices, allowing identical OS on a desktop device as a tablet.

I have a Surface RT for work, and I like it more than an Android or iOS tablet, but would rather have a full windows device at this point.

[TorqueDog]

The challenge with Windows RT is that it's Windows... but only runs Windows 8 App Store applications. I think the whole appeal to a Windows tablet is that you have access to the full gamut of pre-existing applications that you've already been using for eons.

I do like Samsung's approach (I own one). The Smart PC is an Intel Atom Clovertrail, while the Smart PC Pro is a Core i5. Both can run the same applications as each other, limited only by the application's system requirements. The architectures are compatible.

I would really like a Surface Pro, that said.

[Hemi-Cuda]

Originally Posted by Rathji

They wanted an OS that could run on ARM devices, allowing identical OS on a desktop device as a tablet.

I have a Surface RT for work, and I like it more than an Android or iOS tablet, but would rather have a full windows device at this point.

But why even focus on ARM at all? Atom provides the same if not better performance with the same battery life

[Rathji]

I don't recall the specifics, to be honest, but there were some pretty good reasons why Atom never became a valid ARM competitor.

Intel's new Silvermount Atom chip, which is a complete redesign, will almost certainly change that though.

[photon]

http://www.extremetech.com/computing...the-start-menu

So looks like the Start Menu might not be back completely...

[Hemi-Cuda]

Originally Posted by photon

http://www.extremetech.com/computing...the-start-menu

So looks like the Start Menu might not be back completely...

So they still haven't learned, so stupid. The current Windows 8 interface is perfect for tablets, and the Windows 7 interface is perfect for desktops. Just put both in and make the OS smart enough to look at what hardware it's running on to choose which one to display. In the days of dual screen 24' monitors for offices, forcing users into a full screen start menu is ridiculous

[TorqueDog]

So, what exactly do you do on your PC that inexplicably requires you to spend your entire time using it in the Start menu? I'm only asking, because it seems to me that you're making a VERY big fuss about something that you use for about 3-5 seconds at a time, and only when starting a new application (most people don't even do that, since they pin applications to the taskbar now).

They've added the button back in so people could navigate the operating system properly, since it unfortunately wasn't intuitive (particularly if you weren't the one who logged into the machine the first time around and got the demo on "How to use the new Windows".)

So now...
1. Click Start button
2. Click icon.
3. Use application, Start menu goes away.

How is this still a concern?

[Barnes]

Originally Posted by TorqueDog

So, what exactly do you do on your PC that inexplicably requires you to spend your entire time using it in the Start menu? I'm only asking, because it seems to me that you're making a VERY big fuss about something that you use for about 3-5 seconds at a time, and only when starting a new application (most people don't even do that, since they pin applications to the taskbar now).

They've added the button back in so people could navigate the operating system properly, since it unfortunately wasn't intuitive (particularly if you weren't the one who logged into the machine the first time around and got the demo on "How to use the new Windows".)

So now...
1. Click Start button
2. Click icon.
3. Use application, Start menu goes away.

How is this still a concern?

Meh, people hate change. I much prefer the task bar pinning to launch applications and use the handy right click menu in the lower left corner. It has all the useful stuff that was in the Sart Menu anyways. I barely see the Start Screen at all on my desktop.

[photon]

I never use the start menu, I use Launchy

[Hemi-Cuda]

Originally Posted by TorqueDog

So, what exactly do you do on your PC that inexplicably requires you to spend your entire time using it in the Start menu? I'm only asking, because it seems to me that you're making a VERY big fuss about something that you use for about 3-5 seconds at a time, and only when starting a new application (most people don't even do that, since they pin applications to the taskbar now).

They've added the button back in so people could navigate the operating system properly, since it unfortunately wasn't intuitive (particularly if you weren't the one who logged into the machine the first time around and got the demo on "How to use the new Windows".)

So now...
1. Click Start button
2. Click icon.
3. Use application, Start menu goes away.

How is this still a concern?

Because it's still full screen. There is no need to use up that much real estate for something the traditional start menu accomplished in a fraction of the space. On my work PC I have all my frequent apps pinned to the start menu (I don't like wasting space on the task bar), an expandable Control Panel and Administrative Tools menus, a nice search/run bar, quick links to all my documents, and as an IT admin having the ability to pin numerous remote desktop shortcuts to various servers is awesome. You simply can't do all that with the start screen