Windows Windows 8 Marmite thread... Because you either love it or hate it

Exactly. People have abandoned their (usually Windows) PC in droves to adopt (usually iPad) tablets, the OS of which does not look or behave anything like Windows. Problem? Not at all.

 

There has to be more to it than simply: you can and do learn a new method of using a new device therefore you should be happy to learn a new way of using an old device. I mean that reasoning seems too straight forward/simplistic when you take into account the irrational nature of people.

 

Yes, because their tablets are touch devices. The Win8 UI makes sense on touch. It doesn't make sense on a non-touch desktop PC.

There just doesn't need to be a unified UI across different hardware. It makes far more sense to have different UIs on each platform, each optimised to that particular set of hardware. Desktop PC users already know how to use Windows, what is the point in foisting an interface designed for touch on those people? Its pointless at best and massively unproductive at worst.

As for "just install a third party plugin"--- what if you're on a machine controlled by corporate IT? Often enough its hard enough getting them to sign off on buying, testing, and installing software you need to do your actual job, never mind something they know nothing about. They're going to be very reluctant to install some third party OS tweak that may break the next time Microsoft decide to update something.

 

Again, opinion. I'd argue W8 was designed with touch in mind, but not designed for touch. I think it works perfectly fine with a mouse.

 

I personally feel it is hugely important to retain a unified UI across devices. Judging by the trouble some are having transitioning to the start screen, I think it shows just how important having a unified UI is.

What happens when there are yet more ways of controlling a computer? As mentioned previously, there's every chance that in the near future we could be using mouse+kb, touch, voice, gesture (kinect), cognitive input etc. Do you want to see a separate UI for all of those? How does that help MS market a brand? How does that help users productivity.

Stating that the start screen is unusable with kb+mouse is just plain wrong. Your opinion is that it may not be as good as using a start menu, but that's a subjective opinion, and not a fact. I find it perfect usable, easier than a start menu.

 

Why not? I don't get this argument, no-one has been able to give me a reasonable explanation as to why I can't successfully use Windows 8 with a mouse and keyboard.

I'm confused when people are saying that it is people who struggle with computers that are complaining most about moving to Windows 8. It is my experience that people who struggle with computers tend not to have the latest and newest computers and certainly are not in the habit of upgrading to a new OS just because it has been released.

I agree completely that it's ironic that people who are complaining about being forced to adapt to a new system have no issues picking up an Android or iOS device and learning how to use that.

I've said it before but I'll say it again, no-one is being forced to upgrade to Windows 8. If you don't like it, stick with 7 or Vista or XP.

 

I agree. I admit, it's nice that they are trying to enter the touchscreen market, and it's a pleasant surprise to see them not make a complete pig's ear of it (as impar says, it does actually work perfectly well on tablets).

My annoyance stems from their hastiness, I suppose. I feel that the enormity of the transition should have been obvious, given that this Marmite has tasted the same way for over a decade, or as long as most users have known it. I'm surprised Microsoft didn't anticipate these teething issues people are having and didn't try to accomodate all camps, given that it would've been (and will be, in 8.1) so easy to do so. From a smaller company such oversights are normal: Fear 2 grossly misunderstood the success of Fear, and I forgave the developers for not being able to replicate their success, because they were just a bunch of guys and they'd only done it once.

Microsoft is a vast enterprise with thousands of professionals contributing to every decision. Such huge blind spots become difficult to comprehend (although maybe it's just a too-many-cooks thing).

True and true. However, the automotive industry, like all moving industries, progresses gradually. The real difficulty with Windows 8's interface has been the abruptness of the change. With cars, you also have somebody to teach you how to use it; there's no analogue for PCs, because manuals and documentation are increasingly sparse and inadequate.

I mean, I guess as a retailer it's part of my job to explain Windows 8 to people when I sell it to them, but I hate doing it. I'm just not a teachy sort of person, I get very impatient.

As pointed out somewhere above, it's the unexpectedness of the change that gets people. They know tablets are a new thing; they approach it ready and willing to learn. Punters buying a replacement laptop this year got a nasty shock, because they didn't expect such sudden an all-encompassing changes from a company known (and often ridiculed) for its consistency and lack of reform.

Now, this was my other thing, and it's important to try and figure this out, because I don't know what's going on here either. I use Metro Start, and then I use a start menu, and I find the latter hugely quicker and more productive, so I want to pick apart why. I'll try to give you an explanation from my perspective.

The metro start is a fairly handy shortcuts page if you know what you want to use regularly and customize it accordingly. It's easy and fun to pin and arrange your favourite programs and folders, and once you're done, it's easy to use day-to-day.

The problem is the All Apps pane, which you have to go to whenever you want to find and launch something that you don't use every day. Because the tiles layout uses a lot of space, on a more mature installation with a lot of programs installed the All Apps page becomes enormous, involving a lot of sideways strolling. On a touch interface this is fine because you can flick very quickly through them (a weighted free-rolling scroll wheel like on Logitech's premium mice also does this, but not everyone has those).

On a start menu, these groups of icons are condensed into folders, which makes it much easier to find what you need without visually scanning a large number of items. They decreased the ease of use quite a bit with the compacted Programs list in Windows 7, but it was still quite fast to navigate.

I find the All Apps difficult to navigate, partly because I sit fairly close to my screen and like small text and partly because I can't visually scan the huge number of items as easily as I could scan the folder structure of the start menu. The group headings in All Apps don't present themselves to your eye as easily as the start menu's folder list did.

There is also the simple 'clunk' factor of moving into a separate interface, and this does seem entirely to be a matter of taste. I suspect it's a mental thing; some peoples' way of abstracting and thinking about what they're doing seems to be complimented by these various interfaces switching around, but mine is disrupted by it. When dropping between Metro Start and the Desktop, I lose my chain of thought and find it difficult to concentrate on what I'm trying to achieve.

I'd be interested to hear other peoples' usability comparisons, because I really don't get how half of us are looking at Metro and going "so easy to use!" and the other half are going "MY BRAIN HURTS".

 

Ahh ok, that makes some sense. Personally I don't use the all apps list, i type what i want. Obviously with typing, on the "how many buttons have you pressed" speed metric it's slow. Actual time it takes to find stuff, is pretty fast.

 

True, but that doesn't mean that irrationality should be catered to.

I wonder if it is a company culture thing, that partly comes from its humongous size and partly from its leadership structure. On the one hand the picture I get of Microsoft is of a huge number of teams who have all gone a bit tribal; they don't talk to each other, even compete with each other. The left hand not only not knows what the right is doing, it may occasionally try to bite it. Er... (OK, mixing my metaphors here but you know what I mean). On top of that is a management structure rather than a leadership structure, of business types who have no vision of the product, just of how a successful company should be run. Decisions are made by committee, so there is a lot of slow responding to markets, a lack of clear vision and focus and contrary and inconsistent actions from different teams ("Hey, people like MP3 players like the iPod. Let's create the Zune! But wait, do we want to be a devices and services company or an enterprise software company? Oh well... let's think about it for a few years while we arse about indecisively with the Zune... Hey, people like social networking! Let's create the Kin!..."). The problem with really valuing the shiny things is that it gives you a short attention span. Because it is fragmented, Microsoft also suffers from poor following through of its strategies: building a good product is not enough: you have to market and sell it too.

Compare that to Apple. A company ruled with iron fist under the benign(-ish) dictatorship of Steve Jobs. All teams answer to him, and they better play nice with each other as they all work towards one coherent vision crafted and proselytised by the prophet Steve. In-fighting is not allowed. There is a clear focus and vision. Because one man rules the whole company, decisions are made fast and flexibly, responding to changes in the market almost instantly. Occasionally stupid decisions are made because of one man and his beliefs ("No, we won't include our most excellent Ink handwriting recognition software in iOS, because people will want to type on their iPad, and not ever, ever write on it as if it were, you know, an actual pad"), but at least decisions are made, fast, and adhered to consistently. Steve thought ten years ahead. Moreover, Steve believed in following through: building it is not enough; you have to sell it, too. And again, control that process with an iron fist.

That is a marketing problem rather than a design problem.

The All Apps screen is alphabetically arranged, so that helps. But also as you type the first few letters of the application that narrows down the choices progressively.

Besides: how many different applications do you habitually launch most often? I bet it's no more than 10-15 applications at most. Pin them to the Start Screen, taskbar or desktop, and job done.

Personally I found the Start Menu too small, finicky and unwieldy. You have to click, click, click through cascading menus with tiny icons and if you lose focus for a second, the whole cascade collapses and you have to start again. I didn't throw a hissy fit though; I simply installed Rocketdock instead. I cannot understand why other people can't do the same with a Start Menu replacement.

I'll admit that this switch is clunky, and one of the unfinished features of windows 8. I think files should have two different associations: one for a Metro app and one for a desktop app, with the appropriate one launched depending on which mode you are in. Having said that, I do not experience the switch as too jarring. Moreover pinning some icons to the desktop or taskbar solves the problem.

 

I want to use the best UI for the hardware that I'm using. Not one which is some kind of weird mish-mash which is mediocre at lots of things and master of none.

My desktop PC has a different UI to my tablet. My fridge has a different UI to my router. My car has a different UI to my bike. My phone has a different UI to my digital camera. I don't need some sort of magical interface which looks the same on all devices. I want each device to have the optimal UI for that device.

 

Ok but which side is being irrational...

Anyway that wasn't my point. What I was saying is that both you and richcreedy seem to wonder why people can adapt to ipad but complain about the changes in windows 8. (If they can do one thing why can't they do the other) I'm saying you are both skipping over what is clearly something more complex than that train of thought. Which should be obvious I suppose because it hasn't derived any real answer, it just a sort of bemused observation. To sum it up, people's dislike for metro is clearly more than just an unwillingness/inability to adapt to something new.

 

There is a certain irony to this, since Microsoft have essentially cleaved the current user interface in twain.

So you no longer have a unified interface in one device let alone across devices.

 

Unless your camera exists as an application on your phone.

Also, I've seen several 'smart' refrigerators, and I'm sure it would be great if the UI could remain familiar and could sync to your other everyday devices. For example, what if your child finished off the orange juice? Your fridge could survey its contents (e.g. run a scan every 5 minutes looking for certain RFID tags baked into bottles or cans), note that there is no more orange juice, then send an alert to your Windows account. Your account sends the alert to your e-mail, which syncs to your phone. You get the alert while at the office, and set a reminder for yourself to pick up orange juice on the way home. At the same time, your Windows account knows that it has a home budget management application installed, so it adds orange juice to your grocery list and adds the budgets the item accordingly. Since you opted to pick up the orange juice on the way home, your fridge identifies it during a scan later that night. It automatically updates your account to remove the juice from your weekly grocery shopping list.

I love the future.

 

Bad, bad example

 

I think it is a self-fulfilling prophecy. People are told that Windows 8 is crap, so that is the predisposition with which they approach it. Every experience with it is then interpreted through this belief. Positive bits are filtered out; negative bits are amplified in perception.

I used my Surface RT on a week-long residential course a few weeks ago. It performed like a champ: OneNote with handwriting recognition, email, internet, on all-day battery life. Other people, some with iPads, were really interested. They tried the touch cover and were surprised how well it works. One person (decidedly non-techie) wants to buy one now. As I did not want to be responsible for an expensive purchase regret, I made really sure to emphasise the drawbacks as well as the good bits, but she still loves it; it is exactly what she needs and nothing she doesn't.

But a shop assistant would not have given her that demo: they would either not know the product or believe the anti-hype and therefor try to steer her to an iPad instead. 'Cause they're good, right? And people say Windows 8 is crap...

 

I'm something of a jack of all trades on my PC, so it's a bit of a nightmare for me. This is my solution on W7:



Of course, once I migrate my main machine to W8 I'll still be able to do exactly this, so that's fine (I've always done everything through taskbar toolbars, so if they remove those I'm completely screwed) but I frequently use the Programs list in the start menu to dig out other bits and pieces and check what I've got installed (I add and remove software very regularly). My PC is basically a sandbox for anything and everything I find interesting, and I use all of it with a gnat-like attention span - hence the headache that Metro switching gives me (perhaps more than most people, who just go browser/weather/chat/browser/itunes/browser).

I am interested to know the drawbacks of W8 RT on tablets, since you mention it. What are they? And speaking of which, will RT get service packs and build changes the way desktop Windows does?

 

Windows RT is compiled for ARM, and has a locked desktop (which I think, rationale of security notwithstanding, was a moronic decision by Microsoft. People value Windows for being open. Security is optional for enterprise). So you cannot just download an executable from the internet and install/run it --even if you jailbreak the desktop (which I have). There is an intrepid bunch of hackers on XDA who have ported some open source Windows applications to ARM and they run fine on my Surface RT (Audacity, Rainmeter, Quake, Synergy...). But there are no official ports.

No integration of SkyDrive in the desktop file explorer, although there is a simple hack for that (and I suspect Windows 8.1 RT will support it), and no integration of Dropbox.

No Silverlight either (WTF Microsoft?), and no JavaScript, although there is a hack which converts Java to .NET 4.5 which will run natively on Windows RT. No OpenGL though, so I haven't been able to use that to run Minecraft* (which is basically a Java application).

This is a shame, because if the desktop was open, I think that publishers would port their applications. It's a lot easier than rewriting them from scratch in WinRT with a totally new GUI. It would increase the attractiveness of RT and the WinRT apps would follow in due time.

Windows RT follows the same upgrade cycle as Windows 8, and at the same time. All the changes in one will happen in the other.

EDIT: And OMG OMG OMG they are including Outlook in the Windows 8.1 RT update!!!





* Notch is a hypocrite, by the way. He refuses to support Windows 8/RT because "it is not open". Windows 8 is as open as Windows ever was, and he is happy to release Minecraft for iOS and Xbox, which are both very closed platforms. He is just being a grandstanding asshole.

 

You probably wanted to type Java and not JavaScript - a device with no JavaScript support would be pretty useless for any web browsing .

 

Greetings!

What previous basic shortcomings of Windows were solved by third-party addons on such a extent as the current fullscreen Start?

Boot to desktop isnt really a UI issue.
As for the others, I would preferr a Microsoft provided StartMenu than the multitude of StartMenus alternatives I am seeing.

So a 2013 Fiesta doesnt have the same number of wheels as the 1980 Fiesta? Isnt it driven by pedals, steering wheel and gear box? Doesnt it have the same number of seats? The same number of windows? The same basic shape? An ICE? What makes those two cars so different? Surely not the UI.

I meant global search results, instead of the current separated apps, settings and files. Nothing to do with web.

Welcome to W8.1.

Why would it be a problem to learn a touch UI to be used on a touch device?

We are really not discussing W8 here (I think we all agree W8 technicals are better than previous Windows), we are discussing the forced Metro UI, the StartScreen, the charms and the Metro apps. And these were designed as touch-first:

Before you had to manage Desktop, StartMenu and open programs via the TaskBar, now you need to manage those (StartMenu is removed and you get a fullscreen Start) plus Metro apps and the open apps at the left charm. There are two different work environments that dont mix very well. Running aps in windows would help and having a non-fullscreen Start would too probably.

 

You're probably too young to remember the good old days of Windows 98 not handling .ZIP files natively. But you should remember that Windows 7 does not come with an email program as standard. Pretty basic function to me.

That old chesnut. OK: automatic gearbox, clutch-less shift (Saab), pedal handbrake (Renault, Peugeot, Mercedes), paddle gear shift (newer sports cars), digital dash (Honda, Renault, Peugeot), HUD (Renault, Audi, BMW), hands free voice operated controls (Honda, some other makes). Mercedes has lately been experimenting with joystick controls instead of steering wheels. Ironically it works better --faster reaction times, more precise control-- but they worry that people will find it too different to accept.

Furthermore, I disagree that Start Menu is as fundamental as a steering wheel. I have been using Windows Vista for years using RocketDock and File Explorer instead. There are so many ways you can launch program's easily without using Start Menu at all.

Or you could stay in desktop, use desktop applications (there are millions of them), use icons or launch menus pinned to taskbar or desktop, and use ALT+TAB to cycle through open applications as you did on Windows 7. You can all but ignore Metro, and when you can boot to desktop, you can completely ignore it.

Those of us who have hybrid devices can switch GUI modes to suit our needs. Everybody happy, no?