Windows 8 Consumer Preview Thread

[theheyes]

Well the fact that they developed iOS and didn't just try to work OSX into something that would work in a touch environment. I mean there was the risk that Apple users would just reject it en-masse simply because it wasn't OSX.

But look where Mac users are now. They are in a far worse position than Windows users since the iPhone and iOS arrived and they refocused their efforts. How long have we been waiting for iMac and Mac Pro updates? Lion was a joke and Mountain Lion just about amounted to a fix. At least with the weird duality of Windows us desktop cronies are getting dragged along for the ride.

I do tend to think he got the overall plan correct though, even allowing for the fact that some of the smaller parts of iOS do need work. I just don't think OSX with (for example) the Applications folder replaced with a whole different OS geared towards a different input type would have worked at all.

Yes, it's difficult to imagine. I was convinced Microsoft were going to use Windows Phone as their tablet OS. But they didn't, and quite frankly I don't think they get enough credit for what Windows 8 actually is.

I can take exactly the same installation bits and install it on a tablet which I'll get 10 hours of battery out of and it will work great, or a high end workstation with oceans of RAM, beefy graphics card, RAID setups yadda yadda and it supports all my existing software and hardware. It's almost unbelievable.

If the desktop is archaic, then fair enough - leave it to those with the archaic Mouse and Keyboard, and give the touch users a pure touch screen OS. I can't see how adding a mouse to a Microsoft Surface would help it at all - you'd just be better sticking totally in Metro, after all things like Office are still going to work if you keep the underlying kernel.

It's about choice. You could fumble around in Office 2013 but it's a pretty rubbish experience even with touch mode enabled. I'd rather use a full keyboard and mouse, and I can. I have the option.

I think that the vision of one OS is a hell of a gamble, yes. But there are ways that Metro and Desktop could have been combined better, and I think that the way they are combined is a bit of a "bodge".

Granted it is a bit of a frankenstein release. I really don't know how they will replicate all of the existing functionality in Metro. I think it will always have a desktop mode personally.

Metro is still Windows! Just have everything load over Metro like IE can, and do away with the Desktop for tablets altogether.

Metro is Windows in Microsoft parlance, but to the rest of us there is a very real difference between the two. Metro IE is a pain in the ass on the desktop.

I really don't see why anyone would advocate removing the desktop entirely when you could simply unpin it from the start screen and forget about it. It's an essential fall back for things you can't do in Metro.

Because to me, Metro is faff when i'm using a keyboard and mouse. I don't want the bother of learning a new interface, the majority of whose features I won't ever use. I just want DirectX to run as fast as possible, in a clean, familiar interface. I know that is purely subjective but surely you can appreciate where i'm coming from?

I know what you're saying, and yes it is subjective. People don't like change and if you're not motivated to adapt then it compounds the issue.

I would say, however, that as a gamer you must have adapted to a multitude of different keyboard commands, shortcuts and cognitive demands that are far FAR in excess in what Windows 8 requires you to learn.

And by virtue of being designed with tablets in mind, it's not all bad news for gamers. The OS boots faster for starters and it no longer harasses you for pending updates. And it is at least as fast as its predecessor in terms of raw performance.

It really isn't the death knell for enthusiasts that people make it out to be.

 

[V F]

I know what you're saying, and yes it is subjective. People don't like change and if you're not motivated to adapt then it compounds the issue.

Change for the better is worth it but change for the sake of it is not. I've noticed since Luna, Microsoft keeps changing things like a test bed then scrap it. Like they're supposedly going to scrap aero in the future. Sometimes it's like watching them not have a plan and make the rules as they go along but with a plan for touch devices.

At least with Apple they've more or less had the same UI since OS X began. It's just been refined upon each release. Less gloss and everything is quite flat and usable. But it's still more or less the same UI just refined. They don't go from one extreme to another.

 

[DeathStorm]

I'm not trying to be obtuse, I just don't understand why you would turn a tablet into a desktop computer by adding a mouse or trackpad. If you took the Surface to work, surely you'd add a keyboard to make typing easier and then just stick in Metro to do everything you need to do?

What about Windows 8 do you find makes it a bad desktop? I've been using it on my main machine and I don't miss Windows 7 at all, while you'd think the start menu/screen is a big deal in reality it makes little to no difference.

While there's still some things I don't agree with at all like the default browser being forced into Metro mode I think Microsoft has otherwise pretty much nailed making a great touch interface while also keeping their traditional desktop intact.

I know you'll claim flexibility, but to me it just screams overcomplication, and I can't see it being used that much either.

What's complicated about it?

Plus you're forgetting one key market - hardcore gaming. At least for the moment, tablets are still quite far behind in terms of GPU power. What about those people? Is it fair to cast them out on their ears?

Those people install Windows 8 on their computer and continue to use it in much the same way they've been using Windows 7. Please explain what they lose in this process?

I'd say they're a "tech" company as the smartphone sales and revenue are still only a part of their overall portfolio. I mean there's the iPad, and the fact that (at least where I went) education institutions still prefer the Mac for graphical work.

And lest we forget, they do love a nice pitched court battle.

In 2011 iPhone accounted for 41% of their revenue and iPad 26% but laptop and desktop combined only managed 11% so there's a reason they've not been bothering to focus on OSX. That they do well in education and design is only due to the legacy where Windows simply wasn't an option (colour management, design software etc).

But still, I do expect if they could have gotten OSX to work as a touch interface, they would have done it. I expect you'll disagree, but it's cheaper than developing iOS, and that's all that matters to a company like Apple.

Why should we care what's cheap for Apple? I want companies to burn fortunes giving us the greatest innovations possible, Apple got where it is today by doing just that with the iPhone so it should be easy to understand why doing this is both good for us the consumer and the company doing it.

It's failed so far because prior to Windows Phone 7, their phone OS sucked big time. Windows Phone 7 was and is utterly excellent, and I see no need to combine it with the desktop OS at all. All it needs is investment in the App Store and updates to keep pace with the likes of Android and iOS and it'll be absolutely fine.

Instead we have Microsoft taking risks with it. And there's just no need for that at all. Windows Phone 7 was ambitious, and was working, albeit slowly.

Windows Phone 7x was/is a dead end, I'm sure they could have done more with it but even if they had, would it really have brought anything you can't already get from iOS or Android? While it's my favourite phone UI it's just not enough to make the platform a success.

The bigger risk for Microsoft would have been to continue as things are, think about it in say 5 years time do you think the traditional desktop market is going to be growing or shrinking? It's probably shrinking already but thanks to what Microsoft has done they've unified their platforms and have a mostly coherent business vision for their core business (which big corporations often screw up in IT). Nokia is a good example of what would happen if they'd just continued with things as is.

As an added bonus they're dragging Windows phone along so even if they do as bad a job as they did with 7.5 by virtue of the Windows desktop market share the apps will come in. Not enough to make Windows phone a success but it's half the battle.

Because Microsoft could have two operating systems, one excellent for tablets and one excellent for mouse and keyboard. Instead we have a single one that is excellent for neither because we're playing trade-off.

Yes there are issues but I don't think they'll matter too much to anyone who is task focused as opposed to jumping around the OS trying to tweak things, consider these questions and if you don't have any major issues then what's the problem:

What would you have changed to make it a better tablet OS?

What would you have changed to make it a better desktop OS?

 

[mmj_uk]

For me personally it's pretty simple:

What would you have changed to make it a better tablet OS?

Nothing, perhaps remove the desktop although as its an optional application launched on top of metro it's not doing any harm in being there.

What would you have changed to make it a better desktop OS?

Remove all things metro related and have a conventional desktop/start menu, there's no point in fixing something that isn't broken and making changes for the sake of making changes.

There's no reason why they couldn't have had it just ask which device you were using it on during installation except them wanting to push metro down peoples' throats.

 

[HangTime]

Been using this for a few days in preparation for the launch later this month:

+Very fast install, I didn't time it but it only took about 10mins?
+Fast boot/shutdown (kinda weird, it shuts down so fast I now hear my external HD spinning down after the PC has shut off!)
+I think I will like the Explorer Ribbon when I get used to it
+Task manager defaults are improved, clear way of seeing cpu/ram/disk/network usage by app/process

-Gets really confusing when I have a fullscreen Metro app, I can't figure out how to close it!
-Feels very cumbersome to run programs from the desktop interface if I haven't setup a shortcut
-Few minor software incompatibilites (not Win8's fault per se but still a negative)
-Dunno if you can customise the scaling etc but some of the built in tiles feel very Fisher Price, massive text with not much on the page etc

 

[Glaucus]

-Gets really confusing when I have a fullscreen Metro app, I can't figure out how to close it!
-Feels very cumbersome to run programs from the desktop interface if I haven't setup a shortcut

Metro apps don't need. To be closed down, they have extremely aggressive idle manga et which will use zero CPU. So you go top left to switch between apps o. Bottom left tote start screen. You'll soon et used to it. If you do want to close it, grab it at top and pull it all the way down to the bottom.

Just use the metro start screen if you don't want to pin. Think of it as a full screen start button, just click where it used to be and lick on the pinned software. Or if its not pinned an very rarely used software, click to get to metro and just start typing the name.

 

[theheyes]

Change for the better is worth it but change for the sake of it is not. I've noticed since Luna, Microsoft keeps changing things like a test bed then scrap it. Like they're supposedly going to scrap aero in the future. Sometimes it's like watching them not have a plan and make the rules as they go along but with a plan for touch devices.

At least with Apple they've more or less had the same UI since OS X began. It's just been refined upon each release. Less gloss and everything is quite flat and usable. But it's still more or less the same UI just refined. They don't go from one extreme to another.

Going from Luna to Aero glass in Windows isn't any different than going from pinstripe to brushed metal to flat grey in OSX. The start menu/task bar/system tray have been around for the best part of 20 years. This is the first major change for a long, long time and it's come about through necessity and not for the sake of it.

 

[ic1male]

OH those were the days. I still prefer the look of Mac OS X 10.1 rather than the mish-mash muck that we have nowadays.

 

[theheyes]

Those were the days indeed, I kind of miss my old Mac. My G4 iBook was probably the best behaved of the lot.

 

[Gimpymoo]

Has anyone else here forced themselves to use the tile UI? I have, and regardless of how much I try to like it/use it, there is a voice in my head saying "this just isnt right". Just seems too "holding my hand" esque for my liking but that is my hang up, not a design flaw.

Dont get me wrong, I REALLY like Windows 8 and have it pre-ordered.

It is not a resistance to change, nothing of the sort, it is just for me personally, using dual displays, the tile interface seems to be a backwards step, the way the apps work (from a technical standpoint) is also a concern as a power user but the fact is, the tile interface is not for power users.

I understand I am one of the seven percent who MS are not aiming this release at and I understand that commercially, they are onto a winner for many reasons and I tip my hat to MS for finally producing something new. For too long, computers have not been for people, they have been for computer users. I think this makes them accessible to most people. A definite game changer.

The fact is, for 93% of people, the tile UI will suit them down to the ground. Not many people multitask on their systems, they simply play angry birds or are watching iplayer or on Facebook, for those people, the new UI makes perfect sense.

For me, I will just not use the tile UI (Well, maybe occasionally as a guilty pleasure, it does make reading the news rather easier on the eye than a traditional web page) while enjoying the improved kernel... WIN.

 

[HEADRAT]

For me, I will just not use the tile UI (Well, maybe occasionally as a guilty pleasure, it does make reading the news rather easier on the eye than a traditional web page) while enjoying the improved kernel... WIN.

I agree with your post and your sentiments.

 

[ic1male]

Has anyone else here forced themselves to use the tile UI?

No, there's nothing to be done via Metro that I don't find faster with the desktop software. It's useful for when you first start the computer as you can see at a glance how many mails, calendar events, etc. But then I proceed to the desktop and that's it for the rest of my time until shutdown.

 

[dbeckett]

Ive been using windows 8 for the past fortnight, I love it, however if it wasnt for shortcuts it would be a different matter. Knowing the basics like alt tab and win+D makes it nice to use, but if you didnt use these then the navigation would be confusing.

I find the start menu interface confusing, I find it hard keeping track of where each app/widget is located, only metro apps I use is the mail and calendar, only other time Im in the start menu is to search for a program, win key +start typing.

Windows 8 is the way forward, but there is a big change and unless you start using shortcut keys, it will slow you down

 

[Nismo]

I watched this video earlier, which is a 40 minute-ish look at how the Start screen integrates with everything.

From watching it, I now have a better understanding of what's going on in Windows 8, and is definitely looks like there are some major annoyances. Having to have 2 instances of certain apps, and not carrying settings between each for example? I like the idea of the Start screen, but for a desktop or laptop is doesn't seem powerful enough to be a complete replacement, and is too focused on being Tablet-friendly.

Anyway, I found it useful, but folks here who have used it might be able to point out if there are any mistakes...

 

[DeathStorm]

For me, I will just not use the tile UI (Well, maybe occasionally as a guilty pleasure, it does make reading the news rather easier on the eye than a traditional web page) while enjoying the improved kernel... WIN.

I'm fine with the start screen change, we've lost nothing of any real importance and gained a design that works well with touch interfaces.

What I'm less happy about is the half hearted effort Microsoft has put into app development, I can see moving between Metro and Desktop working quite well in the long run but we've typically only got 1 version of each type of app. I want to write something, gotta use notepad/wordpad on the desktop, I want to do mail gotta use Metro mail, I want to use the calculator I gotta use the desktop etc.

I just think it's a missed chance to provide a better out of the box user experience as it doesn't matter how well they design metro or the desktop, metro doesn't work well on a personal computer and the desktop doesn't work well on a tablet so give me the tools I need to use either happily when I want to.

 

[ic1male]

What I'm less happy about is the half hearted effort Microsoft has put into app development, I can see moving between Metro and Desktop working quite well in the long run but we've typically only got 1 version of each type of app. I want to write something, gotta use notepad/wordpad on the desktop, I want to do mail gotta use Metro mail, I want to use the calculator I gotta use the desktop etc.

This will just happen over time though. There will be Metro versions of everything as Windows RT needs them.

 

[Gimpymoo]

Having to have 2 instances of certain apps, and not carrying settings between each for example?

That is really the lesser of two evils.

Apps are for the most part, "self contained". This is a good thing as it makes troubleshooting them MUCH MUCH easier and also cuts down on potential conflicts. Also removes the registry from the equation.

If an App stops working, simply remove it, reinstall it, fixed.

Windows 8 is all about creating a seamless user experience for the average Joe. Self contained apps is one of the many steps they have taken to achieve that.

Many average joes will say that "Macs do not crash as much as PC's". That is partly true but mainly owing to the "open-ness" of the Windows platform as been one of its biggest problems if that makes sense.

Remember .dll errors

 

[ic1male]

It's one thing I haven't investigated yet - but where do the Metro apps live on your hard disk? How do you back them up to preserve game saves, for example?

 

[Nismo]

It's one thing I haven't investigated yet - but where do the Metro apps live on your hard disk? How do you back them up to preserve game saves, for example?

...and is it configurable?

I wondered this too, when I've seen someone downloading something from the Store it just downloads and installs automatically.

 

[DeathStorm]

This will just happen over time though. There will be Metro versions of everything as Windows RT needs them.

I expect so but I want more than just a good selection of Metro apps, I spend more time working on the desktop so I need the desktop versions too, I shouldn't have to wait till Windows 9 when this is the direction they've chosen.

They were smart enough to release a metro and desktop version of IE, what about all the rest?