News Apple's Cook heaps scorn on Microsoft's Metro UI

It's good to have companies like apple who do things a little bit differently. It's good for innovation, for competition, for the customer, for the market etc. It's just when they take cheap shots at competitors that I wish some other company would crush their pompous ass.

 

They really don't. You'd think so, but the service (and the level of discount available) from Apple is appalling.

 

I'm sure metro is great with a good touch screen but it makes me cringe having that instead of a regular desktop for my keyboard & mouse, I have no interest at all in owning a touch screen monitor, ever, MS are crazy trying to push it.

They need an option for when you install windows for if you want it or not, very simple solution.

 

What's gets me about Apple products, there is no doubt that they are good, it always seems to me that they don't always put everything on them but seem to trickle feed it out with a 'new' version every few months, and all the muppets go out and buy the latest version because it has a couple of new features. I may well be wrong but it seems they hold stuff back for the new version.

 

That took longer than I expected...

I'd love a Macbook but it does seem a waste just to stick in a cupboard and use my android tablet hooked up to my Linux network.... Seriously learn to read your audience. This is an enthusiasts forum not a MS fan club.

 

difference is, there is no desktop environment that are untouch-friendly. to the user, it's a touch device, it's not a mixture.

however, i would say the OS X Lion's launchpad interface is like Metru UI: a refrigetoaster. although it's optional meaning you can use it like a traditional desktop without problem. unlike the stupid Metro UI that always gets in the way.

 

It could have been so easy for MS - give me that old-school "classic desktop" option, like XP had, but falling back to the Win7 desktop. My experience with Win8 was entirely 'the interface sucks hairy balls', but that was just the dev preview, so I was willing to not hate on it just then. From the reviews I've seen so far, it's not much better. As I resisted Win7 in favor of my beloved XP, I think I'll stick with 7 a while longer.

MS jumped the gun - Apple had it right in not cramming them together at once - same core, different UI. See what works well on the new UI (iOS) and gently integrate that to the old (OS X). MS done fcuked this up good - cram them together in a really haphazard, half-assed way, and watch average users flock to Apple because Apple wasn't so stupid as to completely redesign the UI and not even do a good job of it, to boot.

I'm gonna be so pissed if MS pisses away their marketshare based on stupid "how does I wrote UI?" idiocy. I think I'll hate on Ballmer for this - he doesn't strike me as exactly in touch with what the market wants. At least when I design user-facing things, I try really hard to make them idiot-proof. Of course, idiocy knows no bounds, but that doesn't mean I give up and design based on what I think is cool. I do another round of idiot-proofing.

 

Greetings!

 

Sounds like you could save yourself some money for work if you went for an Acer Apsire One 772 netbook.

7hrs battery life and lightweight

 

Although I kind of agree with Cook's comments (it is worrying how Windows 8 seems to be fragmenting with ARM and x86 programs which could lead to programmers losing focus) I do think there is real potential for making the ultimate portable device which combines both an ARM Processor, x86 Processor and the Ultrabook design.

Imagine an Asus Transformer Prime which has all the ARM Processor and gubbins stored in the "tablet" part running the ARM version of Windows 8, that would work great as a fast access tablet since Metro looks fantastic for finger friendly use. However if you needed the legacy support for x86 Programs you can dock it with a keyboard dock, in which an X86 processor takes over and runs standard, non metro, windows. Best of the laptop and tablet worlds in one device

 

I was only half joking but on the good side this netbook has an 11.6 inch screen plus an AMD C-60 dual core CPU, arguably better than an Atom, IMO.

 

That's a scary article, but I don't think anyone is really too surprised. The amount of crap that happened with Apple when I used to sell them was just silly, and I assume the guy in that article is correct, Apple assume that their customers don't know anything and accept Apples answers as truth as they definitely would not lie.
It's sad really, I'm sure all companies screw over their consumers to an extent, but why do they feel they have to? Maybe I'm more biased against Apple because of the crap they did, not that I can actually remember what happened, but still.

As Nexxo said, all gadgets here plus an you must have been listening to Apple propaganda, as an Apple computer is still a PC

 

I use a Macbook, iPad and iPhone alongside a gaming PC etc, and I have to wonder what Cook is smoking. Practically every update in Lion and scheduled update in Mountain Lion is cribbed directly from IOS.

 

I HATE Apple and everything they stand for - don't ask me why (there are many reasons).
So you could say I am Microsoft biased...

However, my phone is an Android and so far this Metro UI is doing nothing for me!

 

Have you had direct dealings with Apple, or joining in with the crowd in Apple hating. I genuinely wonder how you could possibly hate a company. I just don't use them, and don't let them get to me personally.

 

Hell yes. They'll never do this however, because they will likely be afraid that it will dilute the user experience - and create an awful lot more work for them. One of the reasons that OS X "just works" is the relative lack of drivers it needs. If you've got some obscure hardware you may need some extra kexts/drivers here and there, but for the vast majority of Apple machines this is not the case: install the OS and you're away. You can do the same with Windows 7, but you'd still want optimised drivers for things like graphics. You don't need this in OS X. But if it suddenly had to start supporting a much wider range of hardware, that much-vaunted stability and ease of use would start to go out of the window without a huge effort from Apple; it's not likely that they'd make a profitable return on such an investment.

Though I would more than welcome a proper release of OS X for the PC; I've already used my PC as a "hackintosh" (using a proper retail copy and not an OEM disc, before you ask) and I actually don't mind OS X.

You forgot Windows 2000 . I'd argue that was more of an "evolutionary jump" than WinXP was: it was the first OS to combine the ease of use and compatibility of the home desktop with stable, secure and network-friendly workstation features (though WinXP was better for remote access/VPN). It still had the original Win98 style appearance, but had many of the advantages of WinNT4: better networking/domain support, multi-processor/multi-threading support, better memory management, better stability, etc... WinXP was basically the same core OS as Win2000 with some media improvements (as well as some networking changes that weren't really relevant to me then) and a horrible new look; horrible at least in my book - at least you could turn it off. At the time it felt like WinXP just had too much un-needed bloat; lots of little things like built in support for CD burning or WMP which could easily be achieved with third-party applications. It helps that the system requirements were far lower, too: WinXP really needed around 1GB RAM to run smoothly, whereas Win2K could cope on far less. WinXP was definitely an improvement over 2K, but it wasn't quite the "revolution" that Win2K was.

Man, it took me a *long* time to switch from Win2000 to WinXP; as they were essentially the same thing, there was no real reason to upgrade. I only really made the switch when applications I used regularly no longer supported Win2000.

 

My biggest problem with 9x family?

It was insecure. I mean, you didn't even have to log in to have full administrative rights! (Good old "Cancel" button!)

AND, "format C:" was too easy to accomplish.

 

Before Win2K/WinXP, few people were familiar with even the concept of an Admin account...