can they just put off the windows 8 crap for a while. and actually think about what they are doing, after all, i dont want a dumbed down PC i want my pc to be a pc so those mac users dont know how to use it and go through my stuff.
Microsoft Making Waves With Tile-Based Interface in Windows 8
- Thread starter Tom Goldman
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Unless they include a 22 inch touch screen free with every copy of Win8 ... i might just as well stick with Win7. It works fine, it's actually perfect for what i use PC for. Tile based UI is not that useful for just launching 3rd party applications i want to run in fullscreen anyway and if i need more things displayed at once i'd rather look at second screen than cut the main one in half.
Looks alot like my windows phone 7. I like my WP7 but I think I'd like to leave all the touchey swipey stuff to my smartphone.
Couldn't imagine all the streak marks on my phone, except over a big widescreen LCD :S
Maybe it's a good time to invest in windex...
Couldn't imagine all the streak marks on my phone, except over a big widescreen LCD :S
Maybe it's a good time to invest in windex...
So long as i can be turned off I won't mind much. The only problem would be another wave of morons who have no idea about the control panel or other useful areas. Remarkably annoying when you're trying to help them fix a computer.
There are people out there who despise and abhor any sort of GUI and think that "real computers" should all have command-line interfaces.
I fully expect their heads to explode when they see this.
I fully expect their heads to explode when they see this.
I'll stick to 7. I'll never use a touch screen with my PC. Who thought that was a good idea? And I hope to god it is only optional.
In contrast to the previous posts, I wouldn't mind taking a gander at the whole "tile interface" thingo deal. Although if the tiles aren't customizable and are stuck like that, count me out.
I think it looks clunky and ultimately counter-intuitive, but I am interested to see how I could customize it to suit my preferences. I'm tired of the same old Windows start bar. Interesting to see where it could go.
Also, if Windows 8 is just a package of new interface designs and some small tweaks to the desktop, screw that for a joke. Might as well call it "Windows Get More Money Off You".
I think it looks clunky and ultimately counter-intuitive, but I am interested to see how I could customize it to suit my preferences. I'm tired of the same old Windows start bar. Interesting to see where it could go.
Also, if Windows 8 is just a package of new interface designs and some small tweaks to the desktop, screw that for a joke. Might as well call it "Windows Get More Money Off You".
Initial impressions say I'm going to stick with Windows 7. I'll still pay attention, and maybe they'll change my mind, but right now I'm not too excited for Windows 8.
At least Microsoft isn't going the route of Apple and Google and other companies with these bullshit names for the updates yet, though. How the hell they expect anyone not familiar with their products to keep up with "gingerbread" and "lion" and all these other goofy names they use is beyond me. Thankfully Microsoft made the smart move this time and got away from stupid names like "Vista" and "XP" and just went back to numbers.
Another? We're still in the one we've been in for years now. There isn't another one looming overhead, the current one simply has no end in sight.THEoriginalBRIEN said:
I guess they're trying to be more like Apple and release a new OS every 2-3 years? I remember my brother just bought that Snow Leopard thing two years ago, and now "Lion" is about to come out? Sheesh. What ever happened to supporting and upgrading an OS with updates?Zhukov said:
At least Microsoft isn't going the route of Apple and Google and other companies with these bullshit names for the updates yet, though. How the hell they expect anyone not familiar with their products to keep up with "gingerbread" and "lion" and all these other goofy names they use is beyond me. Thankfully Microsoft made the smart move this time and got away from stupid names like "Vista" and "XP" and just went back to numbers.
Why would we want "apps"?
Don't we have smartphones for the apps and PC's for serious business?
If they're going to put it on smartphones or tablets, ther's nothing wrong with it.
If you're putting this on a desktop, this interface is useless. Why drag the mouse all the way over the screen if we can just ALT+TAB or WIN+TAB?
Seems like they're trying to focus on tablets instead of PC's...
Don't we have smartphones for the apps and PC's for serious business?
If they're going to put it on smartphones or tablets, ther's nothing wrong with it.
If you're putting this on a desktop, this interface is useless. Why drag the mouse all the way over the screen if we can just ALT+TAB or WIN+TAB?
Seems like they're trying to focus on tablets instead of PC's...
As something that's obviously an optional feature, I don't see what all the bitching is about. For the people who like it, great, and for everybody else, you don't have to use it. The traditional Windows interface is quite clearly still there.
Seriously, this is almost as bad as the time a bunch of people whined that Portal 2 had hats.
P.S. Thanks
Seriously, this is almost as bad as the time a bunch of people whined that Portal 2 had hats.
P.S. Thanks
I'm sure people will complain about "dumbing down" or something, but based on this video I don't think PC users will need to worry. Looking at the part where he uses Excel and opens up a very traditional file system, It looks like this new Start screen is just that: a separate screen for accessing apps and using them. Looks like it's better for tablet PCs and touchscreens, but probably good for casual users with all types of input.
I don't think think this video was targeted at experienced or in-depth PC users, hence why it focused on the additions to the interface meant for casual users.
Alternately, you can keep using Windows 7 if this scares/angers you.
I don't think think this video was targeted at experienced or in-depth PC users, hence why it focused on the additions to the interface meant for casual users.
Alternately, you can keep using Windows 7 if this scares/angers you.
It's interesting that they're putting in this new Start Interface while leaving the old tried-and-true UI intact. The Start Interface actually looks fairly nice, though I imagine you won't be able to get things done as efficiently as you can with the standard Windows UI. Still, If I had a tablet PC or any justification for buying one, I'd actually be a bit excited for this next OS.
I am going to take it that just about everyone in this thread has not even bothered to try a Windows Phone or a Zune HD.
And for those who still run XP: yeah it runs great so long as you create a seperate non-admin user and use only that account for just about everything, otherwise your security model is not all that different than Windows 98.
Windows editions based on kernel 6 (Vista, 7) runs everything as a standard user unless you explictly tell it otherwise, has a much better display stacks/drivers with WPF and WDDM, and native support for nifty SATA features like NCQ. On that last point, Windows 5 (2000, xp, server 2003) basically does IDE emulation over sata by default.
And for those who still run XP: yeah it runs great so long as you create a seperate non-admin user and use only that account for just about everything, otherwise your security model is not all that different than Windows 98.
Windows editions based on kernel 6 (Vista, 7) runs everything as a standard user unless you explictly tell it otherwise, has a much better display stacks/drivers with WPF and WDDM, and native support for nifty SATA features like NCQ. On that last point, Windows 5 (2000, xp, server 2003) basically does IDE emulation over sata by default.
I really like this, I have to admit. I've noticed that with Windows 7 I never use the desktop at all. It's quicker and easier to click on the icons I've chosen on the start bar, and even to search programs on the start menu then fiddling about on my desktop and I was thinking that actually it's a bit of a hangover from an old design that could really be improved on. In a similar way, I want my multiple programs running to work like tabs and have the same usability and functionality of them nowadays.
And if all that touch stuff also gets turned into mouse gestures, that's awesome. Mouse gestures are another way forward. The only problem is that it will be harder for people to just pick up and use. Harder to see what does what, because touch/mouse gestures have no on screen pointer.
Finally, not now, but in the nearish future I can see tablets beginning to overtake PCs in certain areas. So I think it's good that Microsoft are designing for the touch part of the future. It allows the screen to be bigger compared to keyboard area and a lot of the interface commands come more naturally. Touch doesn't have to be learnt in the same way a mouse does (we probably have all forgotten how long it took to first use a mouse properly) and allow for greater fidelity and accuracy. That said keyboards allow for a lot more instant control and it will take some clever designs to really replace that
Why the EF should they have to continue to suffer with it, continue to be ignored by the largest software company in the world, because, what? You want to be superior? You like your interface better? You want them to exclusively served for your needs?
User friendly is NEVER a bad thing. If you don't like it, go get Linux, it's more efficient and you can do more with it. That's where you're meant to go if you want power at the expense of user friendliness. You're catered to, let other people have their share. There is no reason to fear the lowest level of users being able to utilise high tier functions unless you want the power of being one of the few people who can use those functions
And if all that touch stuff also gets turned into mouse gestures, that's awesome. Mouse gestures are another way forward. The only problem is that it will be harder for people to just pick up and use. Harder to see what does what, because touch/mouse gestures have no on screen pointer.
Finally, not now, but in the nearish future I can see tablets beginning to overtake PCs in certain areas. So I think it's good that Microsoft are designing for the touch part of the future. It allows the screen to be bigger compared to keyboard area and a lot of the interface commands come more naturally. Touch doesn't have to be learnt in the same way a mouse does (we probably have all forgotten how long it took to first use a mouse properly) and allow for greater fidelity and accuracy. That said keyboards allow for a lot more instant control and it will take some clever designs to really replace that
Why? Why on earth not? There are still a lot of people in this world who find it so difficult to operate computers, so many people who are afraid of operating them because of the interface.uppitycracker said:
Why the EF should they have to continue to suffer with it, continue to be ignored by the largest software company in the world, because, what? You want to be superior? You like your interface better? You want them to exclusively served for your needs?
User friendly is NEVER a bad thing. If you don't like it, go get Linux, it's more efficient and you can do more with it. That's where you're meant to go if you want power at the expense of user friendliness. You're catered to, let other people have their share. There is no reason to fear the lowest level of users being able to utilise high tier functions unless you want the power of being one of the few people who can use those functions