Microsoft Previews Windows 8 for Tablets and PCs

[AppleScruff1]

i don't like the home screen. plus i forgot that windows doesn't have all the fancy trackpad features so i don't like that, i don't like the log in page, and it took about 4 hours to download ( http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/apps/br229516 ). yes you just burn the iso like you do with lion, and then you part the hard drive or use vmware and test it out. you might like it but i don't. yeah i know its a developer preview but just thought i'd say i don't like it

I thought I read that it had to be a clean install and you only get all installation options if the setup is launched in Windows. And you can't uninstall it, you would have to re-install Windows again. It seems like a lot of time and trouble for you to go though to have such a negative opinion a day later. It doesn't sound like you used it very much.

 

[ct2k7]

That is what Microsoft is saying. You can disable it by changing a registry key. It is pretty obvious that at the moment it is just an extension of the current UI, nothing else. Here is how to disable it: http://www.mstechpages.com/2011/09/14/disable-metro-in-windows-8-developer-preview/

You can change loads of things using the Windows registry. It does not infer that they are layers.

Metro UI is running alongside, that is, when you don't want, the code is not loaded.

 

[petvas]

You can change loads of things using the Windows registry. It does not infer that they are layers.

Metro UI is running alongside, that is, when you don't want, the code is not loaded.

Maybe. I guess I'll do some digging up in the registry to see what is really going on...

 

[linux2mac]

It's says Apple does substantially more with less.

Microsoft has outspent Apple roughly 8-1 in R&D over the last decade. Yes, 8 to 1.

And in that time - roughly 10 years - Apple has produced Mac OS X, Mac OS X Server, lots of groundbreaking Mac models (multiple iMac versions, the iBooks, MacBooks, MacBook Pros, MacBook Air, Power Macs, etc.), iPod, iPod Touch popularized Podcasting, iTunes, iTunes Store, iPhone, iOS, Apple TV, the App Store, Mac App Store, and, of course their current game-changer: the iPad (and now an even bigger hit, the iPad 2.)

Microsoft, on the other hand, for 8x the money, has come up with: another back-asswards Mac OS X clone - a Windows rehash that they're trying to shoehorn onto tablets with varying degrees of failure, some bloated Office retreads, the Zune, Kin, Bing, and Windows Phone 2007. If it wasn’t for the Sony-inspired Xbox (Red Ring of Death included) and a Nintendo-inspired Xbox controller, Microsoft would have nothing but a string of failures to show for roughly 80 billion dollars. The ratio of R&D to revenue for both companies couldn’t be more telling. Of course, they put a lot of R&D into their Enterprise software. Which doesn't function any better today than it has years ago. Lots of folks are still on XPee at work. It's hard to get excited about Exchange and Outlook, and hard to actually enjoy using them. Which no one really does.

That's right. $80 billion for a PlayStation clone, an accessory to make it work like a Wii, an also-ran search engine, and what's left of Nokia.

MS is still stuck doing the exact same things they were doing 10 years ago: Windows and Office.

That isn't innovation (not in a tech world that includes Apple, and now Google.) That's fear of change, and the bad decisions that it causes.

I am surprised Microsoft has any R&D budget when all they do is follow Apple's lead. True to form Microsoft is suddenly abandoning Flash ( or as they like to call it - "legacy plugin technologies") in favor of HTML5.

Microsoft jettisons Flash with 'plug-in free' Windows 8 Metro IE10
http://www.appleinsider.com/article...in_free_browsing_in_windows_8_metro_ie10.html

 

[Bernard SG]

It's a developer preview. Pre-beta. I forgot how buggy Lion release was. I'll stick to Windows 7 then.

I've been using Lion since day 1 of the official release and I have yet to identify any bug.
There are 3rd party apps that didn't get a compatibility update, sure; and not everyone likes the new stuff Apple bought in, especially Mission Control (personally I love it!). The Dropping of Rosetta is also annoying.
But actual system bugs, not really.

 

[divinox]

It's says Apple does substantially more with less.

Microsoft has outspent Apple roughly 8-1 in R&D over the last decade. Yes, 8 to 1.

And in that time - roughly 10 years - Apple has produced Mac OS X, Mac OS X Server, lots of groundbreaking Mac models (multiple iMac versions, the iBooks, MacBooks, MacBook Pros, MacBook Air, Power Macs, etc.), iPod, iPod Touch popularized Podcasting, iTunes, iTunes Store, iPhone, iOS, Apple TV, the App Store, Mac App Store, and, of course their current game-changer: the iPad (and now an even bigger hit, the iPad 2.)

Microsoft, on the other hand, for 8x the money, has come up with: another back-asswards Mac OS X clone - a Windows rehash that they're trying to shoehorn onto tablets with varying degrees of failure, some bloated Office retreads, the Zune, Kin, Bing, and Windows Phone 2007. If it wasn’t for the Sony-inspired Xbox (Red Ring of Death included) and a Nintendo-inspired Xbox controller, Microsoft would have nothing but a string of failures to show for roughly 80 billion dollars. The ratio of R&D to revenue for both companies couldn’t be more telling. Of course, they put a lot of R&D into their Enterprise software. Which doesn't function any better today than it has years ago. Lots of folks are still on XPee at work. It's hard to get excited about Exchange and Outlook, and hard to actually enjoy using them. Which no one really does.

That's right. $80 billion for a PlayStation clone, an accessory to make it work like a Wii, an also-ran search engine, and what's left of Nokia.

MS is still stuck doing the exact same things they were doing 10 years ago: Windows and Office.

That isn't innovation (not in a tech world that includes Apple, and now Google.) That's fear of change, and the bad decisions that it causes.

First, like already stated MSFT, like Xerox back in the days, pursues plenty of base research without clear application for the sake of exploration. Some of the endeavors will pay off, most will not.

As for stuck, i'd love to be stuck selling the fastest selling OS, and the most sold application.

p.s. kinect doesnt work at all like the wii, and will have industry ramifications that the ipad could never dream of.

----------

I am surprised Microsoft has any R&D budget when all they do is follow Apple's lead. True to form Microsoft is suddenly abandoning Flash ( or as they like to call it - "legacy plugin technologies") in favor of HTML5.

Microsoft jettisons Flash with 'plug-in free' Windows 8 Metro IE10
http://www.appleinsider.com/article...in_free_browsing_in_windows_8_metro_ie10.html

You didnt see that part about flash (and other plug ins) still being there in the desktop version of the browser, right? Further, there are tons of plug-ins besides flash (even though i guess the moz. ecosystem is larger), i just guess MSFT thinks many of them could be written as (linked) apps instead.

p.s. this is (a minor slice of) the stuff MSFT is pursuing with their R&D (yes, that is a vision - so naturally, they're exploring the enabling elements):

http://www.microsoft.com/showcase/en/us/details/e7728af1-3fe4-4e25-a907-3dbf689fe11a

 

[coldmack]

I am surprised Microsoft has any R&D budget when all they do is follow Apple's lead. True to form Microsoft is suddenly abandoning Flash ( or as they like to call it - "legacy plugin technologies") in favor of HTML5.

Microsoft jettisons Flash with 'plug-in free' Windows 8 Metro IE10
http://www.appleinsider.com/article...in_free_browsing_in_windows_8_metro_ie10.html

That only Metro version of IE, the standard fail boat version of IE still accepts flash. So, that really means nothing.

 

[divinox]

That is what Microsoft is saying. You can disable it by changing a registry key. It is pretty obvious that at the moment it is just an extension of the current UI, nothing else. Here is how to disable it: http://www.mstechpages.com/2011/09/14/disable-metro-in-windows-8-developer-preview/

except for the simple fact that MSFT has already stated that the desktop UI is "just like an app" and that it doesn't run when you dont have it in front of you.

Tile UI is not an overlay of the desktop in anyway, nor just an extension of the current UI.

----------

That only Metro version of IE, the standard fail boat version of IE still accepts flash. So, that really means nothing.

whats so failboat about it? that its made by microsoft?

 

[divinox]

Does it matter? Google does the job just fine. We're not really looking for amazing User Experiences in search. Like anyone cares about a "Google search monopoly." They've had one for a while now and no one really gives a damn.

Bing is essentially an answer to a question no one asked. Or searched. And is currently a hole that you throw money into when you're too too tired to set it on fire.

We weren't really looking for amazing UX in the mobile space either... = )

----------

I don't see Skype integrated in this version of Windows 8. Hopefully it will appear in the beta.

acquisition has yet to go through. myself, im waiting for the god damn kinect integration. they teased head-motion-capturing at the keynote, now i want the full package. Minority report, here i come!

----------

I bet they sell 100 million copies the first year.

And +300 million the following...

 

[mazz0]

Hmph, I just gave it a go in Virtualbox and none of the apps work

Maybe I'll try it on a separate partition on my gaming PC...

 

[PlipPlop]

Why are people whining about the new interface? If you dont like it press the desktop button or turn it off completely.

 

[APlotdevice]

Hey, whatever it takes. Forcing things on people can be good sometimes. And there most definitely is a reason behind Metro. Microsoft said it themselves. iOS is focused on pictographic designs: icons, graphical metaphors to give users an impression of the look and feel of an app, which is why Contacts for example looks the way it does.

Metro is focused less on graphical metaphors and more on clean, beautiful typography. There is a reason why tiles look and act just like banner ads. And Metro's UI elements in contrast to iOS are flat and are distinguished by simple frames and shapes and outlines of buttons. It's textureless therefore easier to use.

Microsoft's first UI revolution was the Ribbon. Now it's Metro.

And just why does removing analogies automatically make it easier? Couldn't an analogy give a novice user something to compare to, helping them understand the basic concept?

 

[petvas]

Why are people whining about the new interface? If you dont like it press the desktop button or turn it off completely.

If you turn off the interface then you get a somehow improved Windows 7 experience.

 

[jrawsterne]

Not your ordinary PC. Macs behave differently, are marketed differently, and certainly sell differently (under the same conditions) than your average PC.

You've got Macs, and then there's all the rest.



No.

Apple invented the PC!

----------

If Windows 8 is a real threat to Apple you will see it running officially on the next generation iPad or maybe next-next gen iPad.

Then every Microsoft technician will own one and iPad will still be the Nº1 selling tablet and Apple and MS will be $$$$ because at the end of the day, that's what it is all about.

Here we have 2 companies who are dominating their respective markets, each giving the other a glympse of their future and pushing technology and software in new directions. The world would be a sad place if either of them didnt exist and we would be generations behind where we are now still using floppy disks and creaming over Ascii art.

J

 

[nim81]

I am aware it is a beta... and not everything will run as fluid as a final version....and I am not saying everyone has to use it the way I want to personally... i just think some of the desktop features should have stayed the same with improvements... not ruin the way it used to be navigation wise...

Its the navigation thats the issue. I do not care about stupid metro features which are useless to desktop users... its just getting in the way and all the fiddly gestures and rubbish that just blocks loads of the screen whenever you try to use any of them.

My main machine booted up running AVG, and steam launching is using 890mb of ram. Windows 8 has nothing loaded and is using 850. It does feel faster yes but my complain has never been about the performance if you read my posts. Its about the ridiculous UI and the things you need to do to navigate to what used to be very simple tasks with quick steps has now become an adventure of hopelessness.

They should lose the childish metro UI and leave it for tablets. Desktops should just run the way they normally do. I hope they give users the option to turn off all the useless rubbish. Like you said, I have a choice which I already stated myself... I will stick with 7 if 8 remains using the current layout it has on the preview which I believe will be the case.

It seems this tile thing has bloated the head of microsoft its as if the think its the best thing they have come up with and its revolutionary. Its total bollocks.

Autodesk please release Max for Lion .... If I had that running natively in OSX I see no need for windows (In my case)

Windows 8 = Vista with mosaque

Completely agree with that. The live screen just seems to get in the way, it's all very well to say this is a very early release but this is meant to be the fundamental way that this OS works and just feels clumsy, disjointed and pointless.

I can imagine it will work very well on a phone, tablet or even on a 13" laptop, but on a 24" widescreen monitor it all seems like a waste of space.

For me, the tiles are a decent idea, but they'd have been better off being placed on the desktop and getting rid of the usual icons and sidebar, meaning mouse/keyboard users would still have access to the taskbar for easily switching between apps. This could be hidden when running on a touch-based device.

It doesn't matter whether the Start screen is part of the OS or a layer or anything else, the appearance it gives - for me at least - is that it's just an extra piece of bloat getting in the way whenever you try to do anything. It's as if they took Windows 7 and changed the Start button to fire up Media Centre.

 

[KnightWRX]

Metro UI is not running on top.

I think you're confused about how OS and GUI layers are designed.

Any UI runs on top of the stack. Under the UI (Metro, Explorer, Finder, or any Linux WM/DE) there's usually the display server (be it Quartz, X11 or Windows' own) which runs on top of the graphics sub-system (the framebuffer drivers for your GPU, abstracted out) which runs on top of the Operating System kernel, all in user space (though some OSes moved the graphics driver to kernel space).

whats so failboat about it? that its made by microsoft?

For one. However, I'd consider it more "fail" because out of the 5 major browsers out there, it's the one with the biggest financial and corporate backing, yet it is the most lacking in interoperability and standards support, the most basic things when it comes to web browsers.

Microsoft doesn't want to interoperate. They do because they got their monopolistic practices shoved into their face by the DOJ and the EU. But don't get them wrong, their goal is the same as it ever was : Lock down everyone to their stuff and prevent competition from even participating. They want to control the web and any other open platform. They want to close everything down to Microsoft's way so they get to dictate your computing abilities.

It's a good thing they are losing their grip and power over the industry as the years go by, we've suffered enough of their stagnation. Let the PC industry innovate again, we're years behind already because of them.

 

[ri0ku]

Completely agree with that. The live screen just seems to get in the way, it's all very well to say this is a very early release but this is meant to be the fundamental way that this OS works and just feels clumsy, disjointed and pointless.

I can imagine it will work very well on a phone, tablet or even on a 13" laptop, but on a 24" widescreen monitor it all seems like a waste of space.

For me, the tiles are a decent idea, but they'd have been better off being placed on the desktop and getting rid of the usual icons and sidebar, meaning mouse/keyboard users would still have access to the taskbar for easily switching between apps. This could be hidden when running on a touch-based device.

It doesn't matter whether the Start screen is part of the OS or a layer or anything else, the appearance it gives - for me at least - is that it's just an extra piece of bloat getting in the way whenever you try to do anything. It's as if they took Windows 7 and changed the Start button to fire up Media Centre.

Exactly, it feels like a even worse version of media centre loading up and the windows 7 start menu being replaced by this. These numpties posting replies to what I am saying are just giving out excuses... "its just pre beta or preview for developers" etc

Yes... I get that its a preview like I have mentioned Multiple times or i have called it beta at one point (Wow... a mistake i was typing quick but you should know what I mean since its the only available release it cant be confused with anything else)

But...... this preview is supposed to show us the way in which we will be using this new OS... its to give an insight to how we navigate and use the OS... i dont care and am not complaining about performance issues or glitches.. im complaining about the fundamental way in which this OS has to be used... Its flaming ridiculous

 

[divinox]

I think you're confused about how OS and GUI layers are designed.

Any UI runs on top of the stack. Under the UI (Metro, Explorer, Finder, or any Linux WM/DE) there's usually the display server (be it Quartz, X11 or Windows' own) which runs on top of the graphics sub-system (the framebuffer drivers for your GPU, abstracted out) which runs on top of the Operating System kernel, all in user space (though some OSes moved the graphics driver to kernel space).



For one. However, I'd consider it more "fail" because out of the 5 major browsers out there, it's the one with the biggest financial and corporate backing, yet it is the most lacking in interoperability and standards support, the most basic things when it comes to web browsers.

Microsoft doesn't want to interoperate. They do because they got their monopolistic practices shoved into their face by the DOJ and the EU. But don't get them wrong, their goal is the same as it ever was : Lock down everyone to their stuff and prevent competition from even participating. They want to control the web and any other open platform. They want to close everything down to Microsoft's way so they get to dictate your computing abilities.

It's a good thing they are losing their grip and power over the industry as the years go by, we've suffered enough of their stagnation. Let the PC industry innovate again, we're years behind already because of them.

As far as non-compliance with standards go, they need to be shot down if they havent improved the last couple of years (i was under the impression that they had, personally i havent used iex for way too many years by now).

p.s.

the other post you commented on i took as "on top of the desktop UI". That statement would not be true, if we are to believe MSFT that is.

 

[KnightWRX]

As far as non-compliance with standards go, they need to be shot down if they havent improved the last couple of years (i was under the impression that they had, personally i havent used iex for way too many years by now).

They've improved, not because they wanted to. But why are they still dead last behind even Opera which is quite a deal smaller and less financially able ? Why are open source projects leading the charge here ?

The only reason I can come up with is what it always was : Standards are not in Microsoft's best interest. Open platforms, open standards, interoperability breeds competition. Microsoft is about vendor lock-in, monopolies and stagnation. They've always been and don't be fooled by the "New" Microsoft, they still are, they just can't be as opened about it as they were before.

The Halloween documents still remain very true to this day.

the other post you commented on i took as "on top of the desktop UI". That statement would not be true, if we are to believe MSFT that is.

Metro UI probably is not a fullscreen application running on top of the standard Explorer.exe UI indeed. It's probably on the same level as explorer.exe if anything. They've probably finally come up with a way to load/unload UIs dynamically (while it was always possible with Windows NT, it was never configurable as such nor was it ever supported. Sure you could always just kill explorer.exe, bring up task manager and then run a new UI process like litestep or progman or whatever...).

But as far as OS design goes and comments I've seen here, no, it doesn't run in the "Core". It's a pluggable module on top. We're not in 1985 here, OSes are modular and very much a whole made up of parts. Here's the Windows NT 4.0 architecture diagram describing API sub-systems for instance (first one to come up on a quick google search, not bothering to find an updated version for Windows 7) :

I'm sure we could find one for the graphics display sub-systems from kernel to user interface if we digged far enough (not interested in doing it, just run Linux if you want to know about these things, it's transparent about such things in way proprietary OSes are not).

 

[divinox]

Exactly, it feels like a even worse version of media centre loading up and the windows 7 start menu being replaced by this. These numpties posting replies to what I am saying are just giving out excuses... "its just pre beta or preview for developers" etc

Yes... I get that its a preview like I have mentioned Multiple times or i have called it beta at one point (Wow... a mistake i was typing quick but you should know what I mean since its the only available release it cant be confused with anything else)

But...... this preview is supposed to show us the way in which we will be using this new OS... its to give an insight to how we navigate and use the OS... i dont care and am not complaining about performance issues or glitches.. im complaining about the fundamental way in which this OS has to be used... Its flaming ridiculous

The preview is supposed to give developers necessary insight into the upcoming paradigm. Many issues here raised are simply not relevant in this context, hence our comments about running pre-beta software.

----------

They've improved, not because they wanted to. But why are they still dead last behind even Opera which is quite a deal smaller and less financially able ? Why are open source projects leading the charge here ?

The only reason I can come up with is what it always was : Standards are not in Microsoft's best interest. Open platforms, open standards, interoperability breeds competition. Microsoft is about vendor lock-in, monopolies and stagnation. They've always been and don't be fooled by the "New" Microsoft, they still are, they just can't be as opened about it as they were before.

The Halloween documents still remain very true to this day.

Im with you on this, dont worry. Establishing monopolies etc. runs at the very core of enterprises (unfortunately), and this oft-times leads to undesired consequences (for users and developers alike). Call me naive, but i do hope however that MSFT will see this as a war lost already, and just get in f'in line.

If they want to add, or extend, the standard, do so (its their given right), but do so in ways that make sense (e.g. through adding of functionality well beyond the base standard, like with Silverlight, not by messing up the web*)

* granted, one may argue that this would indeed be ****ing up the web (for me, it is, as i cannot run silverlight), but at least the standard as such would remain intact (i.e. lines are not blurred through idiotic extensions and resulting fragmentations of the base, making me have to code browser-specific solutions).

 

[ri0ku]

The preview is supposed to give developers necessary insight into the upcoming paradigm. Many issues here raised are simply not relevant in this context, hence our comments about running pre-beta software.

The layout is what they are planning though.. this is what they want it to be... the keynotes show this they explain this in there own keynote/showcases they explain how the user uses this terrible navigation system.

The preview has all of that included and in my experience and plenty of others the whole thing is a mess and makes the OS more frustrating to use. The whole metro thing with pops ups etc I get it... it works... for tablets and mobiles... but on a desktop that stupid UI shouldnt be getting in the way of working. The OS should determine the machine it is being installed on and if its a desktop it should keep the UI traditional.

 

[ZipZapRap]

I'd consider it more "fail" because out of the 5 major browsers out there, it's the one with the biggest financial and corporate backing, yet it is the most lacking in interoperability and standards support, the most basic things when it comes to web browsers.

pfft.. The average man on the street doesn't give a sheet about "interoperability and standards support"... They care about whether it WORKS to check their mail, browse the web, and run multiple tabs.
Only internet dorks like us even know there are market standards for browsers.

In any case, IE9 is a good browser.. Still not as good as others though, mainly in it's resource management for multi-tabs. It's a freaking pig of memory if you have heaps of tabs and windows open.

 

[divinox]

The layout is what they are planning though.. this is what they want it to be... the keynotes show this they explain this in there own keynote/showcases they explain how the user uses this terrible navigation system.

The preview has all of that included and in my experience and plenty of others the whole thing is a mess and makes the OS more frustrating to use. The whole metro thing with pops ups etc I get it... it works... for tablets and mobiles... but on a desktop that stupid UI shouldnt be getting in the way of working. The OS should determine the machine it is being installed on and if its a desktop it should keep the UI traditional.

They cannot give a preview of something that is not, quite simple. Still, my point remains. Many of the (valid) complaints made here are not relevant in the narrow context of providing developers with a preview of what is to come.

As a developer i really dont need to know how the hell MSFT will sort issues stemming from the "missing desktop start menu". As a user, i do, but this release is not intended for "me the user", but "me the developer".

I have full confidence that most of the issues here raised will be dealt with extensively through the public beta and all other usability testing that MSFT will pursue. MSFT may be a bit grey around the edges, but theyre not daft.

----------

pfft.. The average man on the street doesn't give a sheet about "interoperability and standards support"... They care about whether it WORKS to check their mail, browse the web, and run multiple tabs.
Only internet dorks like us even know there are market standards for browsers.

In any case, IE9 is a good browser.. Still not as good as others though, mainly in it's resource management for multi-tabs. It's a freaking pig of memory if you have heaps of tabs and windows open.

So is firefox though. At least from my own personal experience. Maybe im running some ****** version.

 

[samcraig]

At the end of the day - it all comes down to preference and use cases and budget.

Personally - if I needed/wanted a device that I could video edit on and/or run a full version of Office and that was important to me - I would (at this time) go with a Windows tablet - even if it was more expensive. Why? Because my purchase decision is based on MY use case/needs - and not on some loyalty to a manufacturer.

If I am only going to use a device for media consumption, web surfing and some email - I would go with whatever device offered that based on my budget and feature set. I wouldn't pay 1000 for that device when there are cheaper alternatives.

Thankfully, consumers have choices - and all of these attempts to "kill" or "bury" MS/Windows or Google/Android are just stupid because if there weren't choices - everyone would be at the mercy of one corporation. The world is a MUCH better place with diversity - whether it's technological, humanistic, or whatnot.

No UI or device will work for everyone - so why are some people so insistent on here it should be that way?

Real world news flash: People are happy and content with all kinds of products, clothes, etc that aren't "top tier."

For every person that has a kick butt major name brand TV - there are millions of people who have a "generic" one that they enjoy.

For every person that has a couch from Room & Board - there are people who love their couches from Bob's Furniture Land.

The biggest mistake in this thread is that it was started to begin with. The entire news story is MacRumors flame bait - and predictable as such. I am certain the owners are loving this thread as it's generating tons of traffic and advertising revenue!

 

[kdarling]

First, like already stated MSFT, like Xerox back in the days, pursues plenty of base research without clear application for the sake of exploration. Some of the endeavors will pay off, most will not.

MS even publishes a lot of their R&D. They have a whole website dedicated to their research division. You can download the tablet software (One Note and InkSeine) that inspired the Courier concept.

Unlike some other companies' more limited portfolios, MS also has divisions creating software for automobiles (Sync), embedded control systems, projects like Surface and gaming.

I do wish they'd move more stuff from R&D into mass production.

An obsession is not small for most users is Windows blue screen of death whenever the system detects a serious error and needs to restart.

I think most people haven't seen a BSOD in years. In my experience, I'm far more likely to get caught with a (seemingly eternal) spinning beachball.