Forced to upgrade Desktop to Windows 8.1?

FoxEye · 30 Oct 2013 at 23:11

There are plenty of reasons to dislike 8 besides the removal of the start menu (which I'm not fussed about).

Like Metro apps almost universally being **** versions of the desktop apps. Like having to work with Metro apps full screen. How is that progress? What if I don't want Metro Notepad to take over my whole screen? Oh, that's not what MS wants, so I'm SOL.

And more besides...

Glaucus · 30 Oct 2013 at 23:17

Metro apps dont take up whole screen. Thats what split screen is for. And you still have desktop as well, so how is it a downside? Uppyou are gettin g extra stuff along with what weve always had.

Metro apps can and there are apps far superior to desktop versions. Netflix, audible, kindle etc.
Let alone live tiles, so i know when i get an email rather than logging into a website, basic built in function mobile devices have had for years, finally windows catchs up. Or weather, or a host of other apps that can display live info, without opening it up.

FoxEye · 30 Oct 2013 at 23:23

Glaucus said:
Metro apps dont take up whole screen. Thats what split screen is for. And you still have desktop as well, so how is it a downside? Uppyou are gettin g extra stuff along with what weve always had.

Metro apps can and there are apps far superior to desktop versions. Netflix, audible, kindle etc.
Let alone live tiles, so i know when i get an email rather than logging into a website, basic built in function mobile devices have had for years, finally windows catchs up. Or weather, or a host of other apps that can display live info, without opening it up.

OK, you can have two Metro apps taking up the whole screen

Right, now on my machine at work, I have 3 command windows open, stacked on top of each other, running with different permissions. I have email in the background below them.

On the other monitors I have various RDP sessions slightly overlapping so I can just click the one I want quickly. Then other windowed apps running wherever I fancy putting them. All neatly arranged so I can get the info I want at a glance, without alt-tab, without minimising, without buggering around, bascially.

With Metro you can just have two windows in split screen, or 1 full screen.

It's like "My First Windowed Desktop", or "Windows for Dummies".

Rroff · 30 Oct 2013 at 23:25

spoffle said:
You used a lot of words to say "I don't like it, so it's wrong".

Thats not exactly what I'm saying. Its not whats there that I have a problem with its what they have removed and not replaced the functionality with something thats the same or better. You don't even have the option of adjusting the behavior without reverting to 3rd party apps - which I could understand if it was a niche requirement.

Glaucus · 30 Oct 2013 at 23:28

FoxEye said:
OK, you can have two Metro apps taking up the whole screen

ies".

4 actually.
And i still have desktop as well, i havent lost that ability at all.
So yeah, yet again someone who is cluless.

spoffle · 30 Oct 2013 at 23:34

FoxEye said:
There are plenty of reasons to dislike 8 besides the removal of the start menu (which I'm not fussed about).

Like Metro apps almost universally being **** versions of the desktop apps. Like having to work with Metro apps full screen. How is that progress? What if I don't want Metro Notepad to take over my whole screen? Oh, that's not what MS wants, so I'm SOL.

And more besides...

But they're a choice, which is what we've been talking about. If you don't like them, fine, you're not really forced in to using them though. You don't have to use the modern UI note pad, classic notepad is still there for you to use.

You should know better than to use notepad though when notepad++ is available for free.

FoxEye said:
OK, you can have two Metro apps taking up the whole screen

Right, now on my machine at work, I have 3 command windows open, stacked on top of each other, running with different permissions. I have email in the background below them.

On the other monitors I have various RDP sessions slightly overlapping so I can just click the one I want quickly. Then other windowed apps running wherever I fancy putting them. All neatly arranged so I can get the info I want at a glance, without alt-tab, without minimising, without buggering around, bascially.

With Metro you can just have two windows in split screen, or 1 full screen.

It's like "My First Windowed Desktop", or "Windows for Dummies".

I don't understand how this is an issue when that is entirely a choice. I'd understand people complaining if the classic applications were removed, but it's simply a choice, you can choose to use whichever one you like.

So you don't like modern UI, and that's fine, but it's bizarre that you wish it wasn't there when you don't even use it.

Rroff said:
Thats not exactly what I'm saying. Its not whats there that I have a problem with its what they have removed and not replaced the functionality with something thats the same or better. You don't even have the option of adjusting the behavior without reverting to 3rd party apps - which I could understand if it was a niche requirement.

You've not really explained yourself beyond "It's wrong because I don't like it". What functionality has been removed? Outside of shadowcopy, I don't think anything else has been removed.

FoxEye · 30 Oct 2013 at 23:43

spoffle said:
I don't understand how this is an issue when that is entirely a choice. I'd understand people complaining if the classic applications were removed, but it's simply a choice, you can choose to use whichever one you like.

Because Metro is the future. MS want devs to switch to Metro development, and are restricting certain new features to only work in Metro apps.

You don't think they'll continue to support the desktop in future releases, do you? Having two competing UIs, and having to code two versions of the same app, is hardly a viable long term strategy. You think MS want to have to make two versions of IE? Two versions of Media Player... etc.

Ultimately, MS want Metro to take over, and will likely stop making desktop apps as soon as they can. Even if they don't remove the desktop entirely.

Glaucus · 30 Oct 2013 at 23:46

And you think metro will stay the same. They've allready changed it. Just like the desktop changed over time.

spoffle · 30 Oct 2013 at 23:53

FoxEye said:
Because Metro is the future. MS want devs to switch to Metro development, and are restricting certain new features to only work in Metro apps.

What's metro?

You don't think they'll continue to support the desktop in future releases, do you? Having two competing UIs, and having to code two versions of the same app, is hardly a viable long term strategy. You think MS want to have to make two versions of IE? Two versions of Media Player... etc.

Of course I do, the modern UI is not really conducive to heavy productivity.

They're not really competing either, one is the basic UI the other is for when you need to access more features. It's a preference thing ultimately. There's no reason why they would stop supporting the desktop user interface.

As for having to do multiple applications, well it hasn't stopped software developers yet, they already have to make an iOS, Android, Windows Mobile and Blackberry versions of their software, one extra for Modern UI is hardly a massive issue.

Ultimately, MS want Metro to take over, and will likely stop making desktop apps as soon as they can. Even if they don't remove the desktop entirely.

What's metro? Microsoft doesn't make many of the desktop apps people use on a daily basis anyway, I fail to see how it would be a big issue if they stopped considering they barely do anything now as it is.

Sure, you have the office suite, as well as Skype and a few other applications, but most people will be using desktop applications that MS hasn't had anything to do with in terms of development.

DanF · 30 Oct 2013 at 23:55

8.1 is still a mess really, it's divided opinion like no other software update I've ever seen. There's so few people I know who like the thing, maybe 2/3 people in a floor of 80 seem to like it so far. The scary thing is metro is even being used on server products now like Windows 2012, ungh. Before we'd always install the latest OS without fail, we've simply not bothered this time as there's just no point in a work setting. Nothing it provides increases productivity.

So just try out ClassicShell, go through the options to set it up how you like it,disable all corners, boot to desktop etc. Then just occasionally get really confused when you have to deal with a setting panel that's been Metrofied

DanF · 30 Oct 2013 at 23:58

FoxEye said:
Ultimately, MS want Metro to take over, and will likely stop making desktop apps as soon as they can. Even if they don't remove the desktop entirely.

I'd love to see them make VisualStudio or SQL management studio work in a Metro interface, that would be so full of fail.

spoffle · 31 Oct 2013 at 00:37

DanF said:
8.1 is still a mess really, it's divided opinion like no other software update I've ever seen. There's so few people I know who like the thing, maybe 2/3 people in a floor of 80 seem to like it so far. The scary thing is metro is even being used on server products now like Windows 2012, ungh. Before we'd always install the latest OS without fail, we've simply not bothered this time as there's just no point in a work setting. Nothing it provides increases productivity.

So just try out ClassicShell, go through the options to set it up how you like it,disable all corners, boot to desktop etc. Then just occasionally get really confused when you have to deal with a setting panel that's been Metrofied

I'm still struggling to see what the issue is outside of change.

We had the same with Vista, Vista got an awful reputation for no fault of Microsoft's. OEMs installing it on PCs that weren't specced to run it, people doing the same, installing it on PCs that barely ran XP and then various companies that dropped the ball so hard that they were responsible for a huge amount of Vista BSODs and got themselves a class action for it (nVidia).

I'm also struggling to see the issue with it being used on Windows server, the idea for a server isn't that you're in there using it all the time.

Sure, don't like the UI but for a server OS, shouldn't functionality be prime above whether you like the UI?

MatTheCat · 31 Oct 2013 at 09:20

*** Have a couple of days to calm down *** - Will Gill

I just bought another few hundred quid worth of PC equipment, but I wasn't getting my free delivery from OcUK cos I was banned.....so I took my business elsewhere....

.....just saying.

paradigm · 31 Oct 2013 at 09:26

MatTheCat said:
I wouldn't waste my time trying to explain such a concept to a complete clown.

Right, I've had enough of the constant digging at each other, you can all stop it. Now.

MatTheCat said:
I would never buy it. I would either have it forced upon me or I would steal it.

Bringing up piracy is a no-no.

If you're not interested in Windows 8 and would never buy it, DON'T POST IN A THREAD ABOUT WINDOWS 8 or 8.1

spoffle · 31 Oct 2013 at 09:34

paradigm said:
Right, I've had enough of the constant digging at each other, you can all stop it. Now.

Bringing up piracy is a no-no.

If you're not interested in Windows 8 and would never buy it, DON'T POST IN A THREAD ABOUT WINDOWS 8 or 8.1

Piracy isn't theft. *** regardless of your thoughts on piracy it's very much against the rules here, stay on-topic, stop arguing or find another forum to frequent for a few days!*** - Will Gill

paradigm · 31 Oct 2013 at 09:36

Seriously, what part of STOP ARGUING don't you understand?

DanF · 31 Oct 2013 at 11:25

spoffle said:
Sure, don't like the UI but for a server OS, shouldn't functionality be prime above whether you like the UI?

Sure which kinda suggests that a highly touch optimised UI shouldn't really ever even be present on such products. Again you have to jump between new and old style configuration systems when dealing with it which hasn't resulted in any increase in productivity etc.

spoffle · 31 Oct 2013 at 11:46

DanF said:
Sure which kinda suggests that a highly touch optimised UI shouldn't really ever even be present on such products. Again you have to jump between new and old style configuration systems when dealing with it which hasn't resulted in any increase in productivity etc.

I wouldn't call the Modern UI highly optimised for touch, it's just larger icons to facilitate stabbing at them with squishy fingers.

I use Windows 8 on all of my PCs simply because it gets stuff done quicker. I admit, I really disliked the interface originally, though that wasn't because of the interface itself. It was due to the extreme lack of explanation from MS of how to use it, and what tricks and shortcuts to use to speed up productivity. I think the lack of explanation from MS on how to use the modern UI is the issue, and why people find Windows 8 clunky and hard to use.

Once I learnt the shortcuts, I started getting stuff done a lot quicker. I have found that every piece of software feels clunky and intuitive when you don't know how to use it.

I use various software packages for work, Photoshop (which I'm using on a daily basis at the moment), 3DS Max, ArchiCAD, Sketchup and a few other bits I've dabled in, and with each new software package, I have gone through the awkward clunky stage until I've learnt how to get around properly.

Once I've learnt the "ropes" so to speak, everything moves a lot more smoothly and I get things done. The first time I used each of the above software, I felt completely lost, nothing made sense and I didn't like using the software.

Maybe because I am self taught on all software, I have an appreciation for this sort of thing, but my view is that the biggest issue with Windows 8's interface is that people haven't gotten used to it, as well as it not being explained to them properly.

linktoinsanity · 31 Oct 2013 at 16:05

spoffle said:
I think this is the number one reason, some people just can't get over the fact that it's changed and that's stopping them from seeing any further.

All this nonsense people keep spouting about functionality being taken away is just bizarre, outside of shadowcopy, what functionality has been taken away?

You just don't read threads do you? People have given plenty of reasons why they both like and dislike the new interface, including you in the post above this one. Just because some people disagree with you, does not make their argument nonsense.

And in answer to another post, Vista had a lot of great features, unfortunately it ran terribly on older hardware due to being badly optimized, and UAC kept asking about things so often it became nag ware, rather then helpful, so on my Vista machine I turned it off. On my 7 and 8 machines I don't. - That's why Vista got bad rep.

spoffle · 31 Oct 2013 at 18:05

linktoinsanity said:
You just don't read threads do you? People have given plenty of reasons why they both like and dislike the new interface, including you in the post above this one. Just because some people disagree with you, does not make their argument nonsense.

And in answer to another post, Vista had a lot of great features, unfortunately it ran terribly on older hardware due to being badly optimized, and UAC kept asking about things so often it became nag ware, rather then helpful, so on my Vista machine I turned it off. On my 7 and 8 machines I don't. - That's why Vista got bad rep.

What I called nonsense was the claim that functionality had been taken away. I have asked multiple times now and it always goes back to not liking the interface.

Do you not think that's a fair assessment?

Dislike the interface by all means, but don't pretend that it's the same as functionality being taken away as it isn't.

So tell me more about how I don't read threads.

Also vista's reputation was largely due to being apparently unstable and bloated, sure the implementation of UAC was annoying, but it's not the reason it got a bad reputation.

It also wasn't poorly optimised, it says OEMs running it on hardware that they shouldn't. It has the same requirements as Windows 7.