Windows 8 Release Preview

Status
Not open for further replies.
Key word: faster. Two clicks is the same as before, and Win-X plus a click is worse than Win key plus a click.
you can right click in the bottom left corner to get that menu, don't need to use that keyboard shortcut. Right click, then click control panel.

well he is right, win+x and a click is slower. I don't know why anyone would use that shortcut anyway when you most likely would use your mouse to select the items.
 
Clicks are too hard to judge, lets agree to use milliseconds from here on out, and then extrapolate that data into time lost per year.
 
Key word: faster. Two clicks is the same as before, and Win-X plus a click is worse than Win key plus a click.
Right click the bottom left corner of the screen to bring the menu up. Sorry, didn't realize that he only mentioned win+X in his post.
 
Key word: faster. Two clicks is the same as before, and Win-X plus a click is worse than Win key plus a click.

Counter Point: Since you spend most of your day in the Control Panel, as you have to do is look up, since you're already there.

No clicks, it's almost like time traveling.
 
I'm surprised people find active screen corners so boggling. Mac users have been using them for years.
they are not perfect on multiple monitors, better than the CP though, but not perfect. Although i have gotten pretty good at it.
 
Not as unintuitive as running the mouse down the side of the screen and going to Settings, waiting for the animations to finish at every turn. And how can you get to the Control Panel faster than two clicks like you could from the Start menu?
You don't need to wait the animation to end. Hit the lower right corner, instantly moving the mouse up to the settings and clicking right away works.
 
Ultimately, Windows 8 is already a write-off from a PR perspective, Microsoft has to hope that it doesn't result in a vocal backlash from consumers (most of whom has never heard of Metro or desktop or any of that nonsense and just want to find the bloody shut down option. Ye gads, hiding the shut down option behind an invisible charms bar is stupid and Microsoft's showing no sign of changing its mind. I sincerely doubt that the majority of people who buys a new PC with Windows 8 is going to sit through a tutorial, so that's probably not going to be much use.)
 
What benefits does keeping it on 24/7 provide?

Keeping it on is useful if you need to access it. I routinely need access to work and home computers when I'm at the other place.

But, I always assumed everybody would just use sleep modes on their computer nowadays.
 
Keeping it on is useful if you need to access it. I routinely need access to work and home computers when I'm at the other place.

But, I always assumed everybody would just use sleep modes on their computer nowadays.

My Win 7 on SSD boots up in seconds, I assume Win 8 is even faster.
 
Key word: faster. Two clicks is the same as before, and Win-X plus a click is worse than Win key plus a click.

Yes, you're right, it's the same, 2 clicks. Some of the things in the control panel are accessible through that menu which are now faster to get to.
 
Search for a file, then drag it to the program you want to open it with, or the folder you want to move/copy it to.

I do all that from the file explorer.

That's clearly not what I was saying. It is just unnecessary to have two shortcuts to the same program just so you can open it directly from the Start screen, when in previous versions you could just have the one on the desktop.

In Windows 7 you have stuff pinned to the taskbar that is also in your Start menu. It's exactly the same. Anyway, I'm not sure why having it in 2 places is an issue anyway. You're complaining that you need to go directly to desktop because you want to launch a program but don't want to pin the program to your Start menu.

It will still never have as many features as desktop Outlook. I think we're going off on a bit of a tangent though. I was just pointing out that you said that the search was better because you could search apps directly, directly after suggesting to the same person that he could just use desktop programs like he used to, even though those desktop apps will never be able to make use of the improvements.

It wasn't a tangent and it's relevant. He's was saying nothing in search was improved, I gave an example of where it was improved.
 
Here's a question - Moving forward, do you think more new software will be written for Metro, rather than the traditional desktop, seeing as how the market for Metro app's should be growing and eventually bigger than just the desktop? In other words, if I was making a program today, why wouldn't I optimize it for, and release it on Metro (or WinRT or whatever its referred to), seeing as how it will function on both tablets and desktops, rather than being restricted to the part of the OS that Microsoft seems to be moving away from, and is only supported on (what I'm guessing anyways) will be a more limited system (the hybrid Surface Pro type devices)?
 
Tech pundits are not very accurate gauges of how the general consumer will react.

Yeah.. In fact I would say that the crowd least likely to appreciate W8 is the same crowd that has had the most exposure to it.
 
noise and lights on the machine are distracting when i'm trying to sleep.
You computer shouldn't be making noise in sleep mode. You could at least hibernate, then you don't have to cold boot all your apps every time.

Obviously do whatever you want, but I always just sleep my computer, and I set it to hibernate after about 12 hours if I'm ever away from the computer for a really long time.
Better for the environment, better for the hardware, better for everything.

According to MS, you actually save power usage by using sleep mode than turning off and cold booting your computer.
 
Here's a question - Moving forward, do you think more new software will be written for Metro, rather than the traditional desktop, seeing as how the market for Metro app's should be growing and eventually bigger than just the desktop? In other words, if I was making a program today, why wouldn't I optimize it for, and release it on Metro (or WinRT or whatever its referred to), seeing as how it will function on both tablets and desktops, rather than being restricted to the part of the OS that Microsoft seems to be moving away from, and is only supported on (what I'm guessing anyways) will be a more limited system (the hybrid Surface Pro type devices)?

I doubt developers will jump quickly on the Metro bandwagon and abandon the desktop completely. Right now Metro is very limited (or maybe the apps I saw were build that way, we will see). For example, I can't imagine my notepad of choice (pspad) implemented with Metro UI. Too many options (and we're talking about a notepad here) to translate it properly. Natural Metro's limitations will probably also be a factor here - a fullscreen calculator (or even calculator snapped to the side) might work on tablet, but it makes very little sense on desktop. I've just tried Calc4Win, the only Metro calculator available currently in Store, and it does look ridiculous.
 
I think Metro apps will get uptake for the kind of things people do on tablets, ie twitter, facebook, email, netflix & kindle. That's pretty much a given, whether or not everything else Windows 7 can do eventually becomes Metro based depends entirely on uptake.

I disagree that it's limited, I think from looking at the API there's very little if anything you couldn't convert, it's all about the cost-benefit analysis of rethinking your interface. Really only time will tell on that one.

In my opinion, Windows 8 is so cheap for Windows 7 users, there's bound to be huge uptake, but the number of those people who really engage with it when they don't have the hardware to make the most of it (ie touch) could be much much smaller, in which case it could fail hard.
 
I doubt developers will jump quickly on the Metro bandwagon and abandon the desktop completely. Right now Metro is very limited (or maybe the apps I saw were build that way, we will see). For example, I can't imagine my notepad of choice (pspad) implemented with Metro UI. Too many options (and we're talking about a notepad here) to translate it properly. Natural Metro's limitations will probably also be a factor here - a fullscreen calculator (or even calculator snapped to the side) might work on tablet, but it makes very little sense on desktop. I've just tried Calc4Win, the only Metro calculator available currently in Store, and it does look ridiculous.

From a business perspective though, does it not make more sense to compromise some functionality, or appearance in order reach the largest user base and maximise profits?

I guess what got me thinking about this was the references to this being like DOS to Windows transition - and I wondered, despite DOS still being in Windows to this day, how much software was written to run in DOS after Windows came out. I realize this isn't a completely fair comparison, but it still makes me wonder.
 
Here's a question - Moving forward, do you think more new software will be written for Metro, rather than the traditional desktop, seeing as how the market for Metro app's should be growing and eventually bigger than just the desktop? In other words, if I was making a program today, why wouldn't I optimize it for, and release it on Metro (or WinRT or whatever its referred to), seeing as how it will function on both tablets and desktops, rather than being restricted to the part of the OS that Microsoft seems to be moving away from, and is only supported on (what I'm guessing anyways) will be a more limited system (the hybrid Surface Pro type devices)?

The way I see it devs wont develop for only one environment if they don't want to. If anything this will bring some devs a bigger audience then they could have gotten over the internet and give new devs a chance to make some money. Nobody is gonna be forced to put apps on the market place (unless your a dev working for a company, in that case quit if you don't like how they do business, or continue to do your job and complain about it on the internet.) i see the metro store as a type of steam store but for windows apps which is geat because indie devs get a fair crack at making money as the big guys.
 
From a business perspective though, does it not make more sense to compromise some functionality, or appearance in order reach the largest user base and maximise profits?

It depends. PSPad, the notepad I brought up earlier, is my notepad of choice because of it vast functionality. If that was scaled down significantly, it would no longer offer me what I want and I would probably stop using it. Also, currently I'm usually using it to make notes out of various articles and reports I'm reading, so being able to have it side-by-side with a browser or a pdf reader is a must. Metro wouldn't allow that unless you have multiple screens.

I guess what got me thinking about this was the references to this being like DOS to Windows transition - and I wondered, despite DOS still being in Windows to this day, how much software was written to run in DOS after Windows came out. I realize this isn't a completely fair comparison, but it still makes me wonder.

The thing is, Windows with its graphical interface offered much more options and possibilities that DOS. You can even make a Windows application with build-in console and thus basically end up with DOS application surrounded by menus, icons and windows. Metro is something completely different. And if you want to target both PC and tablets, you have to go for the lowest common denominator, i.e. tablet. And that can heavily affect the whole UI (the whole UI have to be touch-friendly and fit on tablet's screen).
 
I doubt developers will jump quickly on the Metro bandwagon and abandon the desktop completely. Right now Metro is very limited (or maybe the apps I saw were build that way, we will see). For example, I can't imagine my notepad of choice (pspad) implemented with Metro UI. Too many options (and we're talking about a notepad here) to translate it properly. .

Why would working on the default workspace limit options? That's just a UI problem that can be solved by re organization.
 
After using OneNote MX (the Metro app) I don't see reason why other apps can adapt their complex menus and options to the new interface, that wheel thing on OneNote is sooooo good
 
Why would working on the default workspace limit options? That's just a UI problem that can be solved by re organization.

Heavy reorganization. Do you think Microsoft might pull out something like Word purely in Metro UI without sacrificing anything feature-wise?

After using OneNote MX (the Metro app) I don't see reason why other apps can adapt their complex menus and options to the new interface, that wheel thing on OneNote is sooooo good

I would love to try OneNote MX, but every time I try to launch the app it tries to create a notebook and fails ("something went wrong"). :/
 
I would love to try OneNote MX, but every time I try to launch the app it tries to create a notebook and fails ("something went wrong"). :/

Its a shame that you cannot try it, is really awesome, they have all the options I need (and I am a heavy OneNote user, its more useful to me than Word or another office program for me), and its where I expect the Office suite to go after the 2013 version which has a very rough and incomplete touch implementation.
 
Ribbon helps, of course, but e.g. Word' ribbon has plenty of small icons. And from what I read, the touch mode in Office 2013 still leaves a lot to be desired.

I was more speaking to the reorganization. I think it was done with the intent of W8. As mentioned the One Note demo is great for loaded functionality as far as interaction goes.
 
I think Metro apps will get uptake for the kind of things people do on tablets, ie twitter, facebook, email, netflix & kindle. That's pretty much a given, whether or not everything else Windows 7 can do eventually becomes Metro based depends entirely on uptake.

That depends on how much people like going fullscreen for each mundane little thing.

Personally, the Twitter app I use takes up very little screen real estate, and I like it that way.
 
Every app must have an option to show a 1/3 screen, so yes, I can have my twitter app on one side and a bigger (even a Metro app) app showing at the same time on screen
 
I taught my noob mom and sister how to use windows 8 faster than i did with 7.

There were some great moments when teaching my parents to use Windows 8.

Dad: "Why can't I see the site in internet explorer?"
Me: "Oh, that's because that site uses a java applet. When trying to view that site, make sure you use the other internet explorer."
Dad: "The other internet explorer?"
Me: "Never mind. I'll install Chrome. Just always use it instead."
 
There were some great moments when teaching my parents to use Windows 8.

Dad: "Why can't I see the site in internet explorer?"
Me: "Oh, that's because that site uses a java applet. When trying to view that site, make sure you use the other internet explorer."
Dad: "The other internet explorer?"
Me: "Never mind. I'll install Chrome. Just always use it instead."
you didn't already do that during IE 6/7? honestly the amount of tool bars on my parents computer made me want to pull my hair out so i made em use firefox & chrome and told em to never install toolbars again.
 
So... windows 8 out on msdn next week.

Having just reformated my pc not too long ago, is doing it again for win 8 worth the new little convenience features for desktop side of win8?
 
Every app must have an option to show a 1/3 screen, so yes, I can have my twitter app on one side and a bigger (even a Metro app) app showing at the same time on screen

To be clear, Windows 8 reserves 320 pixels for snap-view for resolutions with a screen width of 1366 pixels or greater. While all applications are required to be able to run full-screen or in the larger portion of the snap-view, there is no requirement that they run in the sidebar portion of the snap-view. An application has the option to present an alternate snap-view interface; a message stating it will not work in snap view, or even take control back from whatever you pushed it out of the dominant view with in extreme cases.

EDIT:

Woohooo! New page! Hopefully the discussion will stay on topic about the features of the OS and not the same malcontent dribble that's stifling intelligent discussion for the past ... all of it :)
 
So... windows 8 out on msdn next week.

Having just reformated my pc not too long ago, is doing it again for win 8 worth the new little convenience features for desktop side of win8?
I'm definitely going to do it, you should test the release preview first though.


I don't know if this has been posted yet but this story seems to have more examples of what Windows 8 start screen backgrounds will look like:

http://www.neowin.net/news/these-are...n-in-windows-8
Not sure which one to pick :o
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom