|
I figure people will adapt.
Firstly most of the "users" consume media. And that is what the Metro UI is good at.
For the more experienced users that create media, the desktop still is and will continue to be available, but only for said "creators". I've been using Windows 8 since it came out, and can't remember the last time I used the metro UI for anything, except for pressing the windows key, typing the app i want to open and press enter. Which is the same exact method I use in Win7 so no changes there.
Granted, having to mose the mouse to the corner of the screen is sometimes tedious, specially with a big screen, but it's something i can live with, as I really don't do it that often.
I remember the days of the ribbon in the office suite. The IT masses went postal over it. But for the regular consumer, it made sense and made it easier for them to use the basic functions, so they stuck with it. And the "creators" and "supporters" ended up having to adapt.
|
|
|
|
|
> Firstly most of the "users" consume media. And that is what the Metro UI is good at.
The thing is, most people that consume media are moving away from the desktop to tablets and phones.
The desktop as it stands will become a more niche player for developers largely.
I know a lot of people, developers mostly, that have multiple platforms for different use cases. They have a desktop for work, a smartphone for mobile, a tablet for portable work (like taking notes) and media consumption.
A lot of people that have historically had a desktop at home use it for email, media etc. and because it was their only option. Most people who wish to do this kind of thing are realising that space, power and cost of a desktop for this use case is unreasonable.
Metro for desktop use is, in the main, a waste of time. Those that like it will more and more *not* be using desktops.
|
|
|
|
|
True, but remember that Windows 8 is their first step in a unified OS.
Meaning, the same OS in a tablet, desktop or mobile, will need to have the Metro UI for consumers, but will still have desktop for developers.
Because even in tablets, like the surface, the consumers will mainly see Metro UI. But since the OS will be the same everywhere, there still needs be the desktop, so that the creators can just plug in a keyboard and do their thing.
|
|
|
|
|
It's really "Say goodbye to the Windows Desktop"
While the data consumers will be happy, the data generators will have to return to the days of SUN or Silicon Graphics workstations.
There will always be workstations of one sort or another because the data generators will demand it. Microsoft made the audacious move to make workstations commodities. They seem to be back-tracking on that decision. I expect Linux to come to the fore to run workstations of the future, much like the various flavors of UNIX ran them in the past.
What goes around, comes around.
|
|
|
|
|
I among many others agree that Windows 8 for a desktop machine in the hands of a developer is a major step backward. I find zero redeeming value in the Windows 8 UI, none whatsoever. I have 3 big monitors, many simultaneous windows and applications open. In fact if I had the resources I could easily fine use for more monitors. Between running multiple editors, device emulators, monitoring tools, etc, it is a challenge to fit even on three screens. I think this Metro UI is idiotic and I hope that someday the industry will awake from this delusion and return to a sensible approach where not one size fits all.
I hate Windows 8.
|
|
|
|
|
As a media creator, you wouldn't use the Metro UI.
Readmy post above. Using windows 8 since it came out, and I rarely touch metro, as I'm always in desktop mode.
Besides being faster (sometimes by quite a bit) i find no difference using it in desktop mode.
The Metro UI is only used to consume media, and never to develop content. Hence why Windows 8 comes with a desktop mode, for us to develop that content.
Thinking you are stuck with only metro is just stupid.
|
|
|
|
|
I don't anyone is fooled to think Metro is the only interactive mode. But I find the windows 8 desktop mode to be a less productive environment than the windows 7 environment. And I am not simply talking about the Start button/menu. I do use Windows 8 and I can say I don't like it. The metro view keeps wanting to rear its ugly head. I have no issues with this on a tablet or phone platform, only on a big old PC with multiple monitors, keyboard, mouse, etc.
In fact if anyone would have asked for my opinion I would have suggested running the Metro Ui 'within' a classic window on the desktop. But they are trying to force metro upon us. It like they feel it is medicine and should be taken and tolerated.
|
|
|
|
|
Ed Korsberg wrote: I don't anyone is fooled to think Metro is the only interactive mode.
You would be surprised.
I've had no problems with Windows 8 desktop mode. The way the metro app tries to be the default to open music and picture and video files is annoying, but only for 5 seconds until I change it.
Using several monitors also, and I don't see metro anywhere. The only time I see any metro is while pressing the windows key to search for apps, but I only use the keyboard there anyway so it doesn't really matter, and when powering down the pc, and that took some searching.
I honestly can't see any usage I've been doin' that suggests this:
Ed Korsberg wrote: The metro view keeps wanting to rear its ugly head.
Because i never really see it.
|
|
|
|
|
> Because i never really see it.
And this is the key point.
What you're basically saying is that you find Metro fine because you can switch it off.
So, other than some performance enhancements in Windows 8, which are always welcome, what is the point in Metro really on a desktop?
The reality is that people don't want to consume media sat in front of a desktop. They would much rather either sit in the living room with a TV connected to a media server or use a tablet where it is comfortable and convenient.
People sit in front of desktops to do work. There is no logical reason why one UI should be used for both.
It makes sense for the OSes to interact seamlessly with each other, but trying to stitch Metro and desktop UIs together in the same box is pure madness.
|
|
|
|
|
The point is that it needs to be there, for the consumers.
As I said before, this is their first step in a unified OS. Meaning it will be the same OS in desktops/tablets/mobiles.
This will allow to adapt your device to you, no matter what device it is.
For example, 2 people use the surface tablet.
User nº 1 is a media consumer. He/she will only see the metro UI.
On the other hand, user nº2, is a media developer. He can just grab the same exact device, plugin the keyboard, and switch to desktop mode to do whatever they want.
On the same exact device and OS.
That is exactly the point on having both modes on the same OS. One OS, one device, and you can use it however you want it, either to consume or to create.
Yes, desktops are moving more and more to a niche market of content creation. But even on the surface tablet, having the desktop mode for quick work, is a god send.
|
|
|
|
|
You may or may not be true, but the OP is talking about desktops.
Most people take this to mean the big box that doesn't have batteries.
It is a powerful machine use primarily to develop. The principal use case for this is development and not media consumption.
I do sometimes use Netflix on my desktop, but more and more, I use the Smart TV down stairs, it's much nicer and more convenient.
Touch screen tablets that can be used as desktops sometimes by adding hardware are blurring the boundaries between the conventional form factors and I think this is a good thing. Having to "make do" with something because your ideal platform doesn't exist is something that we are seeing less and less of.
But I think that the economics of computing is actually turning people is a different direction from where Surface is heading. Computers are becoming more and more cheap commodity items. So people will increasingly have different devices for different use cases. There will be no need to have a device that fits all of your use cases. People already have phones, tablets, laptops, smart TVs and (maybe) desktops because we can. We do at home and we are far from rare.
I just don't think there is a future for a do-it-all device. Certainly, I think the market bears this out.
|
|
|
|
|
One UI will keep people more focused on content consuming with less chance of escaping media and advertisers message. Until now you had a choice; they do not get your full attention because you have a peek at news on separate windows just for a moment; too short to embed the message or ad in your brain and you already trained yourself how to navigate web to avoid content of no interest to you. And that's where Metro comes in. It is not meant for user enjoyment or productivity but rather as a convenience for media and advertisers. It is backed by research on web usage patterns and user reaction based on individual psychological profile; the preferred way is to train brain-hand reflex on touch screen to control that interaction better.
|
|
|
|
|
Because desktop pc will also become a niche device in the future just like what they're planning with windows desktop.
A lot of people now use touch and light and mobile devices, Microsoft's answer to this is the Metro UI. For the developers, they only need to focus on the desktop and it's basically the same thing with some improvements because after all this will be the source to create the Metro UI apps. Besides you will only see the Metro UI when opening something. We are developers so it should be given that we are already familiar with the keyboard shortcuts to access things we want to accomplish.
|
|
|
|
|
Metro UI is closed platform; you cannot install hello world program on your grandma computer any more without going through store, special sideload license or enterprise windows.
|
|
|
|
|
I think you miss the point of windows 8; If you dont like parts of it dont use them. I find the desktop in windows 8 to be superior to win 7;
The Sales Person at Best Buy complained to me that there is a Desktop on this tablet with tiny buttons (trying to talk me out of buying a win8 tablet). Power users complaint that there are full screen apps on the computer that they dont like. Again, if you dont like parts of it dont use them.
To start and app is the same as in win7 just looks different.
Start->Type->(Arrow)->Enter
For a non full metro ui experience in Win8.1 try
Start+S->Type->(arrow)->enter
As software developers we stress the importance of releasing a minimum viable product then rapidly releasing updates based on user wants and feedback. Is Microsoft not doing this? Keep giving them feedback and letting your wants known. Saying this has no value is a waste. You should be saying this could be better if...
|
|
|
|
|
Ed Korsberg wrote: I among many others agree that Windows 8 for a desktop machine in the hands of a developer is a major step backward. I find zero redeeming value in the Windows 8 UI, none whatsoever. I have 3 big monitors, many simultaneous windows and applications open. In fact if I had the resources I could easily fine use for more monitors. Between running multiple editors, device emulators, monitoring tools, etc, it is a challenge to fit even on three screens. I think this Metro UI is idiotic and I hope that someday the industry will awake from this delusion and return to a sensible approach where not one size fits all.
It's hard to say whether the thing is going to make it or not but to folks like us it's clearly not going anywhere. I can see it fulfilling a purpose in the tablet space (similar to iOS), but you're not going to see the desktop environment go away. It may not be as visible out there, and that's OK. Microsoft and anyone else that understands anything realizes that the desktop environment is where REAL work gets done. Yeah, sure, I'm going to design a SQL database or write a software application on a touch Metro style screen. No, that may be the TARGET of a development effort but it's not going to replace the development environment which is a desktop. VS2013 is a DESKTOP app. I'd really like to see MS put it's developer tools into Metro. Yeah, right!
Microsoft may be trying to fade the desktop into the background all right, but they're not going to destroy the bread-and-butter here. I believe there will always be some kind of desktop system. It may take a bit to get to it but it will be there and it will continue to be supported. The presence of all this mobile technology does not mean that the MASSIVE ecosystem built around the desktop is going to just roll-over and die. That is unless MS plans to do ALL the development itself or is willing to port ALL of it's development tools into "Metro" and force the developer community there. I think that idea is a bit of a stretch!
As for any individual developer, just pick which platform you want to develop to, get the tools and get to work. You can't do everything - don't try to. If you like "Metro" then get VS2013 and get busy. If you don't (like I don't) then do something else. There's a lot of angst over this one which I, personally, think is unecessary.
|
|
|
|
|
First check limitations for Metro apps and deployment methods. Metro is closed platform and you cannot do whatever you want. Content is censored by MS among other things like local storage, interaction with other programs etc. This is the future of programming.
|
|
|
|
|
Member 10088171 wrote: First check limitations for Metro apps and deployment methods. Metro is closed platform and you cannot do whatever you want. Content is censored by MS among other things like local storage, interaction with other programs etc. This is the future of programming. |
Maybe so. If that's the case then I'm just going to fade back and stay where I am for the duration. I've been at this for 37 years and am content supporting a large enterprise application and developing small customized systems that revolve around the desktop. I'm finding plenty to do. If it dries up then I guess I'll hang my hat and go drive a bus or something. I don't need to keep up with all this stuff anymore. Plenty to do back here in the dungeon! It's not worth stressing over. 
|
|
|
|
|
No need for bus driving; your skills will be in demand on Linux platform; after all old good Windows and Linux have much in common.
Please note that closed application deployment is for Metro UI only; desktop app deployment is still the same regardless of Win version.
modified 25-Oct-13 22:10pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Member 10088171 wrote: No need for bus driving; your skills will be in demand on Linux platform; after all old good Windows and Linux have much in common.
Please note that closed application deployment is for Metro UI only; desktop app deployment is still the same regardless of Win version. |
Linux? Naah. I never run into a need for that. I've got everything boilerplated under VS2008 and SQL Server for Windows platforms. The day I can't find someone needs that is the day I start driving a bus or become a beach bum!
|
|
|
|
|
I have some good news to update. First I updated (not upgraded) to windows 8.1 and at first glance I think the UI experience was worse than 8.0. But I had planned on installing "Start is back" so was not worried. See www.startisback.com . I just did this and highly recommend it. It does exactly what is claims to do and now Windows 8.1 works sanely like windows 7 AND allows for a better access to the new metro apps.
|
|
|
|
|
I really find it hard to imagine something like Adobe Photoshop or CorelDraw becoming a Metro app. While Metro has some benefits, IMO it loses the power of the desktop. The Desktop needs to be supported for a good number of years or Windows will fail. Why ?
Everyone talks about how mobile is changing everything and that desktop PC's will disappear and everyone will have tablets in the future. I doubt it. What we are seeing is actually different. When I first started writing custom software for businesses in the late 80's (anyone remember CPM ?) and early 90's computers were very expensive. They were considered a business tool, not a consumer product. A cheap PC cost at least $2000 to $3000 ! In time, the cost of computer hardware dropped significantly and especially with globalization (aka. made in china) prices dropped so low that computer now became affordable by the masses. With this began the consumerization of PC's. Everyone could afford a computer, but there was something wrong with this. The average person who bought a PC, understood it very little. I would find myself helping consumers with their computers and they couldn't do simple things (like copy files). In essence, they had too much power in their hands. PC's now were being used as over glorified game machines, web browsers and email tools. Most consumers did not need all the power of the PC nor did they need overly complex software. So many times consumers when buying a PC would be oversold "power machines" by over zealous sales people (you need more ram, need bigger harddrive, need super duper CPU). Then something strange happened. Apple got the idea that consumers needed dedicated devices geared towards ease of use and designed for consumer needs. First it was Ipods/MP3 players and then tablets. Now everyone wants a tablet, something simple, just touch the screen and no need for a mouse or a keyboard. This new generation of computerized devices actually fit the needs of many consumers (light weight, not complex, just buy apps in an app store). So does this mean the end of the PC as we know it ? Does this mean the Desktop is dead ?
Absolutely not. Why ?
Because of the consumerization of the PC, the market is now dividing itself back towards its origins. PC's were originally intended as business machines, not consumer products. Now that there are consumer products to replace PC's, PC's are falling back to their origin of being a business machine designed to solve business needs. Of course a certain percentage of the PC market will fall to the tablet, but in time I venture to guess that it should level off and PC's will once again fall into the domain of the business world.
Now Metro for the enterprise and small businesses is a different story !!! I find it hard to believe that the sandboxed Metro environment (and even touch for that matter) can fulfill all the needs of business users. No touch screen keyboard could ever replace a quality mechanical keyboard for power users. No touch screen interface could replace the mouse for some power users (ie. CAD, animation, video editing, graphics). The mouse is a unique device which has proven itself over decades and will not be easily replaced. Full screen (unwindowed) apps just can't replace windowed apps, used on the desktop. Power users may have two, three or four apps running at the same time. They may have two or even three monitors connected to their PC. Power users need access to everything the PC offers and can ill afford to be stuck in a sandbox.
Lastly, what about backward compatibility. Backward compatiblity has been Windows biggest strength, despite Apples idea that the old should be disgarded. You see, Windows/PC's are used in business and businesses can ill afford a lack of backward compatibility. Look at how many XP machines are still being used by businesses. Does anyone really thing that all businesses will simply drop not only all XP machines, but all Vista and Windows 7 machines for the sake of Windows 8 and touch and be forced to rewrite every single app they use to a Metro design ? That makes no sense.
The real trick here is for developers to learn how to tap into the new features of Windows 8 (ie better touch and other devices) to design software which is smart enough to run on Windows 8 and get the most out of it, but still be able to run on Windows XP, Vista and 7. By doing this, the desktop should continue for many years to come.
|
|
|
|
|
Just to follow up on my post. This is why for the last ten years I have been learning how to tap into the WIN32 API in a way where I can leverage both the old and the new. Rather than always designing apps for the latest version of Windows (and then it can't run on older versions), instead I find ways to make software run on both. One of the beauties of the WIN32 API is a simple technique of loading DLL's dynamically (LoadLibrary), then poll the DLL to see whether an API exists and if it does use a new feature and if it does not, then fall back and use something all versions of Windows contain instead.
There are also many power features in Windows, which have existed since Windows 95, but many programmers may take advantage of them. For example, the Windows DIB API's are very powerful and allow one to build heavy duty graphic features, which don't require any special hardware and which can run on all versions of Windows.
Simply put, programmers need to push the limits of the desktop further than they have in the past. Software needs to be dynamic, changing based on the needs. Run an app on XP and an app works like normal, expecting a mouse and keyboard. Run it on Windows 8, then it should check for touch, dynamically change to accomodate tablets and mobile devices. Autoscaling whould be built into the apps so it knows how to redesign itself intelligently based on the DPI and the device type. In essence programmers need to design smarter software, which can tap into the power of the desktop and shine even on Windows 8.
This is one of the reasons the Intel/Lenovo app contest is so exciting ! They want to see what we can do with the desktop. They want to see if programmers can push the limits of the desktop further, taking advantages of newer PC's and devices.
|
|
|
|
|
This is it exactly.
Most people who have a desktop do because that was their only option.
They sit in the corner of a room with their own desk, they need power, often they are noisy and they're not portable. You have to wait a minute or two for it to power up and login to. To a large extent, a desktop for mundane family tasks are odious and an inconvenience.
I'm a developer so we have a powerful machine at home that the family has come to use over time. My wife now has a tablet which she uses in preference to the desktop. My son has a smartphone which does most of what he wants. That is the pattern that we are seeing all over the place.
Eventually, I will be the only user of the desktop as it was many years ago.
|
|
|
|
|
I've read through all of the replies and I think there is one thing that Microsoft is missing. Look around the office, any office and you will see a lot of desktop type computers (possibly laptops in docks). Manufacturing, design, development, test and measurement all make heavy use of desktop computers either for the power they provide or the ability to connect to instruments/devices. Not to mention servers.
The desktop is a lot more prevalent than most people give credit to. Tablets have their place in these environments (I see a tech walking around a factory with a tablet so he can monitor the processes or, maybe, turn a piece of equipment on or off - by talking to another machine), but they are not the machine that is doing the real work. Offices need a lot of typing for one thing.
I constantly have multiple applications open that share data between them. Tablets are definitely not good for those types of applications.
I think my point here is that the desktop world is larger than Microsoft appears to be thinking it is. There is room for an OS that adapts to multiple environments. What's that idea? Make the machine do the work of adapting - not the people? What a strange concept - that computers could make our life easier.
Rob Cole
(Yes, I'm a developer from a time when I had to clarify that I did not do photographs)
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
