|
johannesnestler wrote: there is a new API and the store thing
People have been writing cool things for Windows for years. Windows survived all sorts of interesting things (like DirectX) without screwing up the desktop experience. There's nothing wrong with creating a new API. The store thing? It's an app!!! I can't imagine any reason something like that would require a new API.
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
Hi Marc,
I agree with your comments on "cool things ... without screwing up Desktop". And I don't want to discuss if the new API and UI is "good". But It's a fact that there is a new API for WindowsStore Apps (and Windows RT for ARM based devices). Couldn't quickly find a "better" summary - but main points are touched:http://msmvps.com/blogs/burrows/archive/2012/05/05/windows-8-metro-and-winrt.aspx
So the "store thing" is not just the app.
Of course I understand that your perspective is valid for a "user-only" view to the topic, but here we are on a programmer platform, and from a programmers perspective I can "understand" MS decision for a new API with no legacy concerns. But the "force to new Metro UI" is for shure a marketing decision, and regarding this I think your critic is valid (there should have beeen some option "boot to Desktop and let me alone with your Metro UI and new application infrastructure" from the first Win8 version on).
Kind regards Johannes
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: So the "store thing" is not just the app.
...but it should be.
- I would love to change the world, but they won’t give me the source code.
|
|
|
|
|
hehe - good answer - and I have to agree...
|
|
|
|
|
It's funny...I heard the same whining and moaning when Windows moved from 3.x to Win95/NT4.0
In order to progress, something has to change.
|
|
|
|
|
incipire wrote: In order to progress, something has to change.
Progress and change are not synonymous. Frequently enough, they are orthogonal. 
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
All of my clients do business work on their PC. The so-called Metro interface is a hindrance to their getting actual work done. Accounting, scientific data acquisition and data processing, word processing, advanced graphics: none of these have any reason for a telephone+ interface or applets, etc. These users need the desktop and the Start Button and not touch or motion-detecting screen oriented interfaces. They use Metro-like on their phones and tablets, not the PC.
Charles Wolfe
C. Wolfe Software Engineering
|
|
|
|
|
"The hunter that chases two rabbits catches neither"
I remember it from playing Civilization IV years ago, now I understand the meaning! 
Seriously though, I can understand what's happening, I guess. It started over a decade ago with introduction of .net. At first it seemed like a framework, but reality is that it's way more. It's more like another OS inside Windows. It has it's own threading system, application domains and boundaries, file system APIS, memory management, graphics system, etc. Maybe it was so good and so successful that they decided to make it part of the operating system, not a layer on top and thus the new Runtime and new set of APIs.
I believe the problem started when they decided on hybrid OS wishing to get part of device market, dimming the light of the new nice platform they were creating for "developers"! At least this GUI does not seem like a good way of chasing two rabbits, if any GUI ever can do it. 
[Edit]
P.S. Nice job on the free 'Unit Testing Succinctly' book. I enjoyed reading it a few weeks ago. Thanks.
[/Edit]
Planning to move to Germany, looking for a job there!Looking for a Windows desktop programmer? I look forward to hearing from you!
|
|
|
|
|
Actually the new UI is entirely written in native code (C++) - it would be horrendously inefficient otherwise. There are managed APIs for programming it, but there are also C++ (COM) APIs.
I like this, I don't like the closed and controlling nature of the marketplace and I don't like the lack of start menu - but its easy enough to install a third party utility for this purpose.
"If you don't fail at least 90 percent of the time, you're not aiming high enough."
Alan Kay.
|
|
|
|
|
Rob Grainger wrote: new UI is entirely written in native code
Yes, that's my point. Am I missing something here? I was saying that with WindowsRuntime, MS is providing an equivalent of .net as native OS API.
[Edit]
Start menu is really not my concern either. There are bigger issues on desktop.
[/Edit]
Planning to move to Germany, looking for a job there!Looking for a Windows desktop programmer? I look forward to hearing from you!
|
|
|
|
|
I agree with the "controlling nature of the marketplace" comment. I see Metro as a copy of Apples locked down model. I enjoy the freedom of downloading whatever I want from where ever I want as well as offering my apps on what ever market I want, be it my own market or elsewhere(i.e my own website) without needing to code sign it or get it approved by anyone for posting.
|
|
|
|
|
Hamed Mosavi wrote: <layer>At first it seemed like a framework, but reality is that it's way more. It's more like another OS inside Windows.
And interestingly, there's Singularity[^], an experimental Microsoft project to create a managed OS. A quick google also revealed Cosmos[^], a CodePlex C# open source managed OS (hey, and OS managed OS!) that someone started.
Hamed Mosavi wrote: P.S. Nice job on the free 'Unit Testing Succinctly' book. I enjoyed reading it a few weeks ago. Thanks.
Thanks for the feedback!
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
Marc Clifton wrote: Singularity
Interesting! Interesting name too. So the idea of mixing the two started long ago, although by reading part of Singularity project motivation, I'd say it aims very high, far from just an OS with well designed APIs.
You're welcome! Thank you for the effort of providing the book. Easy to read and to the point. I liked it.
Planning to move to Germany, looking for a job there!Looking for a Windows desktop programmer? I look forward to hearing from you!
|
|
|
|
|
Hear Hear
"Rock journalism is people who can't write interviewing people who can't talk for people who can't read." Frank Zappa 1980
|
|
|
|
|
Metro should go away from desktop completely. Microsoft should spin Win RT and Phone into fun/toy and communication divisions. Win RT should just snap into view when user of such device is in proximity of desktop and wants to use some of apps on the desktop or take some docs from desktop on the road.
|
|
|
|
|
For now, the desktop user interface is still the better choice for a wide variety of content creation activities. It will probably remain so for a good long while yet.
We can program with only 1's, but if all you've got are zeros, you've got nothing.
|
|
|
|
|
patbob wrote: the desktop user interface is still the better choice for a wide variety of content creation activities.
Totally agree with you
There are no secrets to success. It is the result of preparation, hard work, and learning from failure. Colin Powell
|
|
|
|
|
I'm expecting there to be a class action suit in a few years from millions of RSI sufferers. In most enterprise systems I've seen the users keep their hands on the keyboard, and don't even like using the mouse. A 'modern UI' will be totally inappropriate.
|
|
|
|
|
Personally, I would rather switch to Norton Commander than use the metro UI (or whatever they call it).
Norton Commander is still more productive.
What MS should have done is give an option to install/uninstall either metro and desktop UIs. People that like both can install both. People who like only one of them can uninstall the other. Problem is solved. It all comes to a personal choice.
|
|
|
|
|
meta_berkut wrote: What MS should have done is give an option to install/uninstall either metro and desktop UIs. People that like both can install both. People who like only one of them can uninstall the other. Problem is solved. It all comes to a personal choice.
If I was the MS CEO I would be sacking a few execs and offering you a position......
"Rock journalism is people who can't write interviewing people who can't talk for people who can't read." Frank Zappa 1980
|
|
|
|
|
meta_berkut wrote: What MS should have done is give an option to install/uninstall either metro and desktop UIs.
What you're mistakenly assuming is that the UI design is meant to benefit users. The reality is that MS is forcing metro on us because they believe it benefits them.
The difficult we do right away...
...the impossible takes slightly longer.
|
|
|
|
|
As Developer I would prefer tradition UI for quick access.
|
|
|
|
|
The desktop UI needs to remain on the PC
Support
The desktop UI needs to remain on the PC
Hello World!
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise no Visual Studio, no Traditional Desktop applications.. etc. then what the hell? Any way people not aware with this metro UI. Most of them hate that
|
|
|
|
|
I use only the desktop (Win8.1) via a mouse. My wife uses an iPad and is comfortable with the touch screen only UI. Both UIs' have their place. UI selection is a user choice, depends on a which UI one finds most user friendly (human factored). I do use the "modern" UI, as a searchable program entry point (menu) for those programs not on my taskbar. The touch screen UI is not efficient when entering a lot of text. Vote, keepem both, can't massacre all the mice.
Larry Hobbyist
modified 28-Oct-13 22:18pm.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
