See, THIS is why microsoft is a joke unless it is throwing its financial weight around. Users DONT CARE about being able to see the personality of the app on their desktop. They already own it. They know what it does. They just want to have access to it for god's sake.
Those tiles do more than just "show off their personality". The tiles in WP7 and Windows 8 are, for lack of a better word, widgetcons. They serve the purpose of both launching an application, and keeping you constantly updated at a glance. Like your weather icon will display the current temp, email will show you unread messages, Twitter and Facebook will blah blah blah ect ect ect. They're handy.
The only potential downside I can see to them is that, since they take up a fair bit of space, you might have to scroll through a few screens to get to a specific app, depending on what you already have installed. I have yet to use any tile based Windows UI yet, so it might not be too big an issue in everyday usage. This is just a potentiality based off of casual observation and other big words.
Lennholm said:
Seriously, when people say they prefer XP to Win 7 because it doesn't require as much system resources I don't get it. Why stop there? Why not go back to Win 95 or something that requires even less resources?
I don't get it, either. I think it's ridiculous that most everyone can afford 8GB of ram these days, yet get incredibly pissed off when their OS eats up more than 256 meg (exaggeration here a bit, but...you know).
See, when I first upped from XP to 7, I was kind of appalled to see that it ate up 33% of my 4GB of memory right at boot. I thought it was sloppy, and it'd be a little more limited in what I could have running at once in comparison. What I came to realize is that 7 has much, MUCH better memory management than XP did. It's the prefetching thing. 7 sees what you use most, preloads it all behind the scenes during boot, and keeps it memory resident so it loads faster. If you have a program that needs access to that memory, it'll quietly unload it while that program is running, then load it back when you close it. The whole thing is pretty seamless, and I was able to do more faster with the same hardware under 7 than I was with XP.
But some people see that the OS is using X amount of blah, and totally freak out. Dunno why. They just do. I mean comeon. Once again, 4GB of ram is the standard these days, and 8GB is easily affordable. 95% of anyone using a computer won't come anywhere close to using up all that ram. Might as well let the OS take advantage of it.
