I urge you to reconcile with the fact that Metro is optional.
Has Microsoft stumbled?
- Thread starter Tommy Vercetti
- Start date
- Status
I urge you to reconcile with the fact that Metro is optional.
sophie
Break My Heart
Nope. XP experienced serious initial backlash over its interface. People hated the new start menu and tried switching back to the Windows 98 interface as soon as possible.
http://www.zdnet.com/windows-8-is-the-new-xp-7000006095/
hobbsyoyo
Deity
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2012
- Messages
- 26,575
Exactly. I never look at the Metro screen - ever. My Windows 8 experience is exactly the same as my Windows 7 experience, minus the start button. That alone isn't a reason to hate Windows 8 considering it can be added back in.
Plus, Tommy keeps talking about how Windows 8 is a smartphone OS and that Microsoft needs to come out with a desktop OS, a tablet OS and a phone OS. Somehow he keeps missing the point that Microsoft did exactly that with Win 8, Win RT and Win 8 Phone.
Tommy Vercetti
The Don
Difference is XP HAD a start menu and no the start screen and third party replacements don't count. The fact you have to do a lot of modification to Windows 8 just to not put up with Metro is annoying as hell. Metro on a PC is pointless and should not exist as a default option. The Metro UI on PC is an idea they should have left on the scrapheap.
hobbsyoyo
Deity
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2012
- Messages
- 26,575
How many times do you have to be told that you don't have to 'put up with' Metro one bit? I get that you have never used it but if you are going to repeat yourself you could at least do everyone else a favor and pretend to read what's been posted in response to all of your identical statements.
You don't have to put up with Metro. I never use it and I have Win 8.
You don't have to do any modifications.
Just don't open any Metro apps.
The start screen works the same as the start menu.
Archbob
Ancient CFC Guardian
People hate having the start menu fill up the entire screen, its plain stupid.
You have give all the excuses you want on why Windows 8 sales and adoption has been a disaster but the numbers Microsoft spews out and the adoption rates and usage just don't match up. If you take those numbers into account, there s a significant chunk of Windows 8 buyers downgrading to 7.
Your explanations of dropping PC sales and people not buying upgrades simply don't cut it in explaining the horrible usage and adoption rates. PC and laptop sales have not dropped off that tremendously in the last 3 years. MS even tried to sell the new OS at $30, and still no one wanted it. It failed in terms of adoption cause people didn't want to use it. I thought it was pretty decent for mobile, but people obviously aren't buying it there either. Win 8, by figures, has been a total failure so far. People don't want it. You can argue about its efficiency all you want, but the fact is, no one is buying it, and its not only because of laziness. People simply don't want it.
You have give all the excuses you want on why Windows 8 sales and adoption has been a disaster but the numbers Microsoft spews out and the adoption rates and usage just don't match up. If you take those numbers into account, there s a significant chunk of Windows 8 buyers downgrading to 7.
Your explanations of dropping PC sales and people not buying upgrades simply don't cut it in explaining the horrible usage and adoption rates. PC and laptop sales have not dropped off that tremendously in the last 3 years. MS even tried to sell the new OS at $30, and still no one wanted it. It failed in terms of adoption cause people didn't want to use it. I thought it was pretty decent for mobile, but people obviously aren't buying it there either. Win 8, by figures, has been a total failure so far. People don't want it. You can argue about its efficiency all you want, but the fact is, no one is buying it, and its not only because of laziness. People simply don't want it.
Why is that?
God of Kings
Ruler of all heads of state
Former gamer and former loyal Windows user here.
For many years, I have strongly resisted getting a Mac and I was fiercely loyal to Windows. Even Windows Vista was not bad enough for me to consider a Mac.
Windows 8 however was so bad in every single way that I have switched to a Mac. That is how bad Windows 8 is. I am typing this post on my 15" MacBook Pro with Retina Display. I never regretted getting a Mac, even though it is twice to thrice as expensive as a comparable PC. Since getting a Mac, I love Macs and I will never looked back. I do not mind the fact that there are fewer games on the Mac, because I am completely disillusioned from PC gaming in general (and I also no longer have the time to play anyways).
For many years, I have strongly resisted getting a Mac and I was fiercely loyal to Windows. Even Windows Vista was not bad enough for me to consider a Mac.
Windows 8 however was so bad in every single way that I have switched to a Mac. That is how bad Windows 8 is. I am typing this post on my 15" MacBook Pro with Retina Display. I never regretted getting a Mac, even though it is twice to thrice as expensive as a comparable PC. Since getting a Mac, I love Macs and I will never looked back. I do not mind the fact that there are fewer games on the Mac, because I am completely disillusioned from PC gaming in general (and I also no longer have the time to play anyways).
What specific use case was problem in Windows 8, compared to Windows 7?
God of Kings
Ruler of all heads of state
I really hate the Metro interface (which is better designed for touchscreens). Even worse, it requires a third-party mod to remove it (and it requires advanced computer skills to remove the interface fully without creating any new problems).
Yes, when Windows 8 came out, I have tried out the Windows 8 computers (and I find them very unintuitive), and then I went to the stall next to it that has MacBook Pros with Retina Display. I compared them and concluded that the MacBook Pro with Retina Display is better.
Maniacal
the green Napoleon
Its just unnecessary that it HAS to be full screen even if you don't have many items in it.
Its great that it can be skipped and is pretty much completely optional and easily replaced with a regular Start Menu with Custom Shell and other programs though.
Right, you don't like how it looks, but which specific use case is worse in Windows 8 than in Windows 7?
It's unnecessary, but what problem does it cause?
GenMarshall
High Elven ISB Capt & Ghost Agent
It's obtrusive. Try getting a program running while watching a DVD or a YouTube video or worse yet be playing a game in full screen mode and accidentally nudge the windows key. It's like driving down the road and sudenly the airbag spontaneously goes off in your face. Many people arguing against the Metro UI are siding on the side of being inconvenienced with having a menu system take up the whole screen instead of the minimalistic and convenient menu bar that is confined to the bottom left of your screen (or where ever you set it to be). I'm sure if Microsoft kept with the start button feature. along with updating the theme to have the Metro feel (Using the font style and color scheme), there wouldn't be an uproar over the MetroUI.
The bottom line is that we're not arguing that Windows 8 is the worst performer in terms what the OS does (faster, efficient, etc.). We're arguing on the platform of convenience. I understand that there are shell replacers. I'm sure that many of us or knows someone who wouldn't be that savy to know how to install them or the existance of them and/or disable MetroUI, the charms sites.
That's perhaps the jist of the arguments going on while lurking.
Tommy Vercetti
The Don
I agree with this post. This is why Windows 8 will hopefully fail spectacularly. People do not like that Metro crap. The start screen is annoying when you are trying to multi task. Windows 8 will hurt people's productivity with its cripple interface. Once support for XP ends, most of those people will likely upgrade to Windows 7. By the looks of things, Windows 8 looks like it will be a bigger failure then Vista. It might even fail worse then ME failed.
Metro UI on PC needs to join Microsoft Bob, The Windows Sidebar and Active Desktop on the scrap heap or at the very least be downplayed heavily in Windows 9. Microsoft seems to have forgotten people like consistency. Yes people have complained about changes in Windows before but never before have there been changes this drastic and they are all bad changes.
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2007
- Messages
- 9,305
Wasn't there a poll very similar to this a couple years ago?
At any rate, Microsoft isn't "in trouble". Windows 8 clearly wasn't what the market was looking for, at least in the short term. But it's not a financial disaster, and one poorly-received-at-the-start release won't make a trend. The worrying thing would be if Windows 8 didn't recover, and Windows 9 had the same reception.
At any rate, Microsoft isn't "in trouble". Windows 8 clearly wasn't what the market was looking for, at least in the short term. But it's not a financial disaster, and one poorly-received-at-the-start release won't make a trend. The worrying thing would be if Windows 8 didn't recover, and Windows 9 had the same reception.
Is this actually a problem anyone who has used Windows 8 for a decent amount of time has?
If you're opening the start menu and clicking around in there, I don't see how you're going to be looking at a youtube video at the same time...
You've again failed to point out any problem use cases with Windows 8.
Maniacal
the green Napoleon
Easily, that is precisely why I like the smaller start menu, its less intrusive and doesn't cover up what I have up. Especially if I have a group chat or any chat up and I only have certain programs on it that I don't have on my taskbar and don't want to have on my desktop (trying to keep it neat, tidy, and largely to display my wallpaper collection).
Although hitting the Windows key is annoying regardless, especially in a game. So many crashes
Thankfully my keyboard has a sliding button that disables it.
- Status
