Discussion in 'News' started by qubit, Dec 8, 2011.
The title says Windows 8...
Metro is just one of Windows 8's features...
metro is windows 8, the entire point of windows 8 is to release a touch interface:metro , which is irrelevant for pc users.
Why would anyone want to use a mouse?
Why would anyone want color displays?
Why would anyone want to use lasers in a copier?
Why would anyone want to transfer files via Ethernet, why not floppy disks?
Why would anyone want more than 640k of ram?
You clearly don't know the history of computing at all. Over the years people have misread and gone with what they know. When all the innovations above came into the computer market, it changed the market forever, and for the better. Remember, the mouse was originally for business execs who had no idea how to type, but became something much more.
Better example: IBM's PC and Xerox's Alto. The Alto was far superior in every way to the original IBM PC, however people said that color monitors were useless, Ethernet was useless, and mice were useless, even though the power of this device was incredible. Enter the IBM PC, which has none of these things, but is a huge success. Shortly after PCs start getting the things that the Alto had, and while people are confused at first, these new additions take off, and the PC becomes more of what the Alto was. The Alto paved the way.
Think of Windows 8's UI as a gateway to something new in computing. It might not be a huge success (the Alto wasn't outside of Xerox's PARC labs), but it might pave the way for some awesome UI in the future. Don't discount it.
Let's say ^ is true (Metro = Windows 8) which I disagree.
Let's say the average pc users have a 20" screen.
- How many icons can you put on it? Many.
In fact, it's too many it becomes harder to locate the icon you want.
- Beside creating shortcuts and widgets and starting at your wallpapers, what do people actually use their desktop space for?
I will let you answer ^.
Personally, I have a clock and weather widget with no icons on my screen (24") because I want to look at my wallpapers every time I turn on my PC. I have my most used programs on my task bar. When I need to use other programs, I press the "Start" key and start typing the first 3 letters of the program I want to use.
While I don't like losing my task bar, I think Metro is a step to a right direction. I'm sure the final version will make more sense.
All the things we have been trying to make work since 1998 like voice recognition, speak to text and many other items are finally being brought together with a OS that makes it work and everyone is still stuck on metro?
All the cool shit that we see in movies like facial recognition that works, biometrics, and other items that we have wanted and......durr hurr metro looks stoopid. It can be turned off just like Aero and other stuff can be so you can have your precious XP look.
I got my copy right as my partnership was ending. I then signed up for Technet for a year, and will probably sign up again when Win8 and Office 2012 comes out just to get the keys for those and then let the subscription expire again.
big difference - mice are on a horizontal plane. until our monitors are built into our desks and we look down all day, a touch interface on a desktop pc isn't feasible.
as i said before, windows has been lacking them for so long, i've already BOUGHT third party software or found perfect free software to handle it. i'm not going to drop my current software unless windows provides a feature i can't get or does one better - and why upgrade if there are no added benefits?
the only thing left in my mind is to see the true speed benefits of a retail version. if it's faster, i'll bite the bullet and buy it. otherwise the feature list is not impressive imo.
You missed the point of my whole comment.
Windows XP served me well for 8 years, now I pretend to make good use of my retail license of Windows 7 for at least 6 more years
that people thought those innovations were unnecessary and even crazy until they were invented? I didn't miss it, i explained why touchscreens are not the same thing. unless of course that wasn't your point... then maybe i did miss it
they are a different innovation than mice and keyboard. i recognize they will have their day, will become ubiquitous and just be normal - but they are not feasible as your sole input when you have a monitor vertically in front of your face, your arms tire after minutes.
and i love how people will note that you missed their point - but not reiterate it! explain yourself
Who in their right mind wants that interface for their desktop?
Not me, that's for sure.
I really like two OS's -win xp and win 7.
they are very stable .
and I don't like win8's interface .and I don't like any of it's features. in short I don't need a new OS .
Then this thread is relevant to you how?
Thread crapping. Good job.
Motion activated and voice activated features of your PC or first person shooters with you as the controller must seem really dumb too. To much moving around and stuff.......I wanna just sit here and do nothing.
If you have a touchscreen you wouldn't position it like a normal display, see Wacom Cintiq.
thats kind of his point. office workers for example, use desktop machines - and windows 8's metro interface will be just as useless to them, as it is to gamers.
its designed for touch screens, and touch screens are useless for almost all of the environments desktop PC's are used for.
yeh im not getting down with that at work
and even with kinnect pc attached id get sic of wavein me arms about quick they Need to incorporate easy switches to switch back to a normal desktop but then again the start button could do with another said easy switching option as i like the effin start menu
i'm just hoping windows 8 has more to it than metro: i really like the idea of tablets/laptops/desktops/phones all sharing a common OS with common software. buying an app for your phone and having it activate on your home machine as well would just be awesome.
metro is whats irrelevant to desktop users, i just really hope windows 8 has enough other things going for it, that the OS in entirety is not irrelevant.
Corporate IT environments are not exactly the place to look for progress and advancement, irrelevant to 8's market even. Every place I ever worked used XP, almost none are fully patched and plenty of them didn't even have proper drivers(1024x768 on 5:4, ugh).
yeah but look at how new systems are sold, even in small business or home office. you buy a new machine and get a new OS - and if that OS has a dumbed down interface designed for a touch screen interface the system doesnt come equipped with...
its an impossible situation, so we know MS will have some trick up its sleeve. odds are metro will either be heavily tweaked for desktop use, or it will simply come with an easy on/off toggle.
I would like to know what the improvements are over W7. I am aware of the "stability" update but that can be debated when some hacker finds a back door.
Also, I would like to know what Microsoft is going to do to get business and the public sector to switch over to the the new operating system.
For example in my hospital alone there are some 12000 computers all running XP. The system is all tied in together, and so can only work as fast as it's slowest component. In this case the NHS trust would have to upgrade the computers, then upgrade the OS, and then upgrade the software that is being used. This all takes vast amounts of money. To which Microsoft seems to be leaving untapped.
There is no improvement over W7. If anything W8 is dumbed down W7. M$ can say all they want, but W8 is targeted first at tablets and second at PC desktop. Frankly nobody in the right frame of mind who own XP or W7 should switch to W8 unless you have nothing else to do with your money. In that case send it to charity or.... me! Don't subsidize Bill Gates retirement fund by buying W8. One OS in 5-10 years is enough. W8 is even more cumbersome and user unfriendly. If you are power user then definitely XP was last good OS from M$. It is not big surprise that since W7 was launched 3rd party freeware called 'Classic Shell' was downloaded by millions of users. Testament to M$ useless developers.
seriously if you think XP>W8 you have a problem
XP is better is the software that is used does not work on higher Operating systems, and/or the overall cost would be gigantic to the firm to make the switch.
But in general, it is stupid to say it would be a waste of money to upgrade from XP to W8. Besides, he said that anyone who has XP and upgrades to W8 is wasting their money
and it doesn't make XP better, it just makes XP cheaper and more practical in a certain situation.
Which is why Windows8 is irrelevant to PC users. If you describe PC users as the people that use them at work.
Separate names with a comma.