Windows 8 Metro: The fall of windows or the best invention ever

Fysh

Dean_Mc wrote: »

I don't find the jump jarring. I also think multi touch track pad support is desperately overdue, Apple have had it for years on their machines and it is very appealing. You also state that resource limiting is not an advantage, well as a developer I completely disagree. A well designed app will hydrate itself back to the point you left it, therefore there should not be any difference vis a vis minimising.

In an era when 8GB of RAM is becoming the norm alongside dual- and quad-core CPUs with integrated graphics handling of the sort that 5 years ago was a dedicated low- or mid-range GPU, I question this assertion.

Don't get me wrong, I always have time for developers who are careful about limiting resource usage to what is needed - but what I'm getting at is that a full-fat desktop OS specifically built around multitasking should neither try to push me towards a mobile-oriented "one app at a time" resource model, nor should it force me towards mobile-oriented UI elements such as invisible active screen areas or a full-display "home screen" with limited benefits.

Dean_Mc wrote: »

The fact that you are spitting vitriol shows that this is more of an emotional thing, they are screwing with your coke. You don't want new coke, I get that, but that doesn't mean that others don't want it. Microsoft have also made sure that the only difference that you see is a screen as opposed to a bar, you have lost nothing and gained even more admin functionality on the desktop.

No, I'm spewing vitriol because I'm trying, repeatedly, to convey where I see problems with this "tablet-stuff-forced-on-the-non-tablet-version" (see also Server 2012 only allowing Metro to be disabled if booted into Server Core mode) because it is stuff that I neither want nor am in a position to use, and I keep being faced with responses from you that I'm somehow wrong about both what I want and whether it is any use to me.

Worse, what you don't seem to get is that I would have no objection to it if it were optional. But everything we've seen so far suggests it's not, and yet that doesn't factor, in any way, into your evaluation of comments from myself and others.

Dean_Mc wrote: »

There is also the issue of critical mass in terms of data and it's presentation. We are quickly reaching the point were data is becoming too complex to properly disseminate. Metro is a step forward in terms of managing data complexity. It is far from complete, more embryonic but I can bet you this. From Apple to Google and back to Microsoft, you are going to see a lot more of these types of changes while we find ways to make data more contextual and give it focus.

At least you didn't say "data mashups" :P

I'm sorry, but being able to integrate a television schedule into my start menu, or pin a widget showing the last five minutes of irrelevant nadgery from Facebook is not something that I care about. I can see that providing the option for this stuff to people who want it means that they no longer need Tweetdeck or That Facebook App or whatever other Social Media Bollockery next becomes That Vital Thing You Must Use!, but I don't see that it's going to make a real difference to the actual work many people do, because thus far even Sharepoint is still beyond what many enterprises need, want and can convince people to use for sharing data. Unless your business specifically depends on contextual data analytics, implementing and harnessing such tools is frequently more expensive and time-consuming than is actually worthwhile.

_Kaiser_

Dean_Mc wrote: »

The fact that you are spitting vitriol shows that this is more of an emotional thing, they are screwing with your coke. You don't want new coke, I get that, but that doesn't mean that others don't want it. Microsoft have also made sure that the only difference that you see is a screen as opposed to a bar, you have lost nothing and gained even more admin functionality on the desktop.

I think the point is that there IS no evidence that people want this new coke and plenty to indicate they don't.

Windows 8 is Microsoft's somewhat panicked half thought out reaction to Apple and it's iPad in the same way that Windows Phone is its answer to the iPhone and Android. It offers nothing for PC or especially corporate users that Win 7 doesn't already do just fine.

Leaving aside that Windows Phone 7 and 8 (from what I've seen) is still significantly behind Android in terms of functionality and app support, you cannot compare a PC to a tablet. They're intended for entirely different purposes and trying to shoehorn on a common OS is a mistake.

I don't think anyone would have a problem with 8 if metro was an optional install or if Microsoft hadn't deliberately set out to force it on people by removing functionality that has been proven over the last 15 years!!, or if they'd simply restricted Metro to tablets alone but it's this attitude that "we know what's best for you" and thus making people's daily pc lives more difficult that will prove to be the cause of 8's failure I reckon.

Dean_Mc

Damn, that would have been such a great argument to include Data Mashups

Look, when all said and done there are people on both sides with very strong feelings. I am not going to say anyone is wrong, everyone has their own usage patterns and tolerance for change. I personally think metro is a great thing, albeit far from realised.

The long and short for me is that at long last people are having a discussion, that is the most important part. Even if it turns out that Metro is a wet fish and doesn't take off, the desktop as a concept will be stronger for it.

For instance, I don't think tablet's are going to kill the PC and I am not part of the "Post PC" brigade but I do realise that we are starting to develop a liking for situational devices and Software. The desktop is in a strange position in that it is everything to everyone. I think ultimately the desktop will find it's space as an area for content creators and service administrators were as something else will replace it for consuming or analysing data. Currently I think Metro has a shot at the title but no matter what happens I think this is the model we are going to move to, Metro or Not.

_Kaiser_

Fysh wrote: »

I'm sorry, but being able to integrate a television schedule into my start menu, or pin a widget showing the last five minutes of irrelevant nadgery from Facebook is not something that I care about. I can see that providing the option for this stuff to people who want it means that they no longer need Tweetdeck or That Facebook App or whatever other Social Media Bollockery next becomes That Vital Thing You Must Use!, but I don't see that it's going to make a real difference to the actual work many people do, because thus far even Sharepoint is still beyond what many enterprises need, want and can convince people to use for sharing data. Unless your business specifically depends on contextual data analytics, implementing and harnessing such tools is frequently more expensive and time-consuming than is actually worthwhile.

Completely agree - in a corporate environment I'd think most IT managers (like myself) would want all that social media, messenger plug-in rubbish disabled as Step 1.. unless they WANT to lose hours of productivity on "officially sanctioned" Facebook usage.

Even on a personal level I wouldn't want all that crap on my desktop - especially if it was a shared open-plan office with my 23" monitor.. or does privacy not matter any more?

Dean_Mc

There is a developer poll doing the rounds for Windows 8. If I can get the results I will post them up.

johndoe99

i'm old school, prefer the hands on approach, simpler interface. i wonder will it have the usual switch to standard view.

Dean_Mc

johndoe99 wrote: »

i'm old school, prefer the hands on approach, simpler interface. i wonder will it have the usual switch to standard view.

Hi John, You can go back into desktop and it opens when you open a non metro app but there is no start button and pressing the windows key on your keyboard will reopen the metro screen.

Capt'n Midnight

Fysh wrote: »

(see also Server 2012 only allowing Metro to be disabled if booted into Server Core mode)

http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/evalcenter/hh225126.aspx
180 day trial of server 2012 Release Candidate - 64 bit ISO and VHD image.

I'm reminded of the way previously on servers in the past they've rolled back the interface to the previous desktop interface or at least allowed classic interface as an easy option.

Fysh

A couple of interesting things I just found:

1) from The Metro Survival Guide for IT Pros, I think this visual guide is interesting - not least because it shows all the places on the screen where you're expected to know/learn that specific functions are available even though they're no longer clearly labelled, and

2) From techrepublic, a Guide to Recreating the Classic Start Menu in Win8. Will it still work by the time we get the RTM version? Who knows...

I really do think that for a lot of people being able to turn off the tablet-like functions is going to be a major factor in how well or badly the desktop version is received.

Fysh

Dean_Mc wrote: »

Look, when all said and done there are people on both sides with very strong feelings. I am not going to say anyone is wrong, everyone has their own usage patterns and tolerance for change. I personally think metro is a great thing, albeit far from realised.

The long and short for me is that at long last people are having a discussion, that is the most important part. Even if it turns out that Metro is a wet fish and doesn't take off, the desktop as a concept will be stronger for it.

I'm not sure we are; Microsoft seem hell-bent on forcing this change on everyone, despite the substantial amount of evidence available to them from eg the KDE4, Unity and Gnome3 receptions from their core desktop-based audiences showing that the kind of UI concepts they're pushing for have a marked tendency to alienate a sizeable chunk of the desktop-based audience.

Hopefully they'll be more receptive than they've appeared - but frankly for a company to go from "oh, well, actually we decided that Aero thing we forced on all of you was kind of tatty and a bit silly" to "BUT HERE'S THIS AWESOME NEW THING THAT'S MUCH BETTER, YOU'LL LOVE BEING FORCED TO USE IT" is the epitome of silly, so I don't hold out much hope that they'll pay attention without having their arm twisted first

Dean_Mc wrote: »

For instance, I don't think tablet's are going to kill the PC and I am not part of the "Post PC" brigade but I do realise that we are starting to develop a liking for situational devices and Software. The desktop is in a strange position in that it is everything to everyone. I think ultimately the desktop will find it's space as an area for content creators and service administrators were as something else will replace it for consuming or analysing data. Currently I think Metro has a shot at the title but no matter what happens I think this is the model we are going to move to, Metro or Not.

The thing is - I have no problem with the idea of trying to build better integration or transferability between "full" windows and some tablet-optimised version. IMO, The way to do that is to expand on what you can do with homegroups or domains, though - not by hobbling the desktop version and forcing it to conform to a bunch of design and usage paradigms suited to the tablet version. That, to me, is as silly as optimising a tablet to work best for video playback when it's got an external display.

I still find it baffling that Microsoft are trying to challenge Apple in the tablet arena in a way that is going to alienate a whole bunch of their "reliable" audience - I don't see big corporates spending money and time on an upgrade project that lasts the best part of a year to roll out Win8 over Win7, and even if they're still on XP I can imagine them still only going as far as 7 until some real data on whether Metro gains them anything is available.

johndoe99

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_features_removed_in_Windows_8

just reading on Wikipedia that the Start Menu has been completely removed, that alone will keep me away from Windows 8. Damn that. :mad:

The Blue Screen of Death no longer shows as much technical information about the error that caused the computer to stop. Why do that? Granted the basic home user won't need such info, but I would.

The hardware requirements are good, just 2gb for 64-bit and a 1ghz processor.

Torqay

Fysh wrote: »

I would have no objection to it if it were optional.

being able to integrate a television schedule into my start menu, or pin a widget showing the last five minutes of irrelevant nadgery from Facebook is not something that I care about.

Indeed, Windows has come a long way from a promising operating system to a bundle of more ore less (mostly the latter) useful bloatware.

More cr@p being added to each new release and yet the basic features of an operating system are as shyte as ever, if not worse. Windows file copy is still rotten and no matter how many ribbons they slap on Windows Explorer, its functionality is still on par with winfile.exe... file management from the stone age of computing.

Blowfish

johndoe99 wrote: »

The Blue Screen of Death no longer shows as much technical information about the error that caused the computer to stop. Why do that? Granted the basic home user won't need such info, but I would.

Minidumps show far, far more useful information than BSODS ever do. They are still around on Win 8.

Fysh

Torqay wrote: »

Indeed, Windows has come a long way from a promising operating system to a bundle of more ore less (mostly the latter) useful bloatware.

More cr@p being added to each new release and yet the basic features of an operating system are as shyte as ever, if not worse. Windows file copy is still rotten and no matter how many ribbons they slap on Windows Explorer, its functionality is still on par with winfile.exe... file management from the stone age of computing.

God yes, I've Windows Home Server 2011 on an HTPC at home and Win7 on the various laptops & storage/desktop box. Despite them all being in the same Homegroup, the best guidance I can find for maintaining synchronisation between various directories (eg I rip my DVDs and CDs on the laptop then move them to the HTPC, but I keep a backup copy on the desktop) appears to be via SyncToy rather than an integrated filesystem utility.

Oh, but it's OK, we've got "Libraries"

Blowfish wrote: »

Minidumps show far, far more useful information than BSODS ever do. They are still around on Win 8.

The minidumps that you need a separate Dump Check Utility to read? That isn't (or at least thus far hasn't been, for some stupid reason) included in Windows by default? Yeah, they're very useful for advanced diagnostics - but at least half the time when dealing with a BSOD issue the stop code has been enough for me to solve it. I'm sure we can still get at it via Event Viewer, but I don't see the motivation in removing a useful piece of information from the "Oops, Windows went arse over tit" screen and replacing it with a bloody smiley.

Dean_Mc

.... Actually it's a frowny....

stevenmu

There's a pretty simple reason why Metro is compulsory.

Computing is changing, both in terms of the form factors available and in how people use and interact with their devices. The classic Windows UI paradigm simply isn't capable of evolving to work well across current computing devices and the devices of the next few years. Anybody who used XP Tablet Edition or Windows 7 on a touch device knows this already. So to have a future as an OS, there is a simple choice for Windows:

A) Fragment into different operating systems with different shells, one version aimed at desktops, another aimed at tablets, and maybe others aimed at other form factors.
Or
Change the UI paradigm to one that can work across all these types of devices.

The problems with A (and benefits of are obvious, developers need to create multiple versions of their applications to work on each OS version, users need to be trained up on multiple versions, and they need to deal with possibly having different apps on different devices and trying to share data between them, IT need to manage multiple versions, OEMs need to invest a lot in developing hardware and drivers for different versions, and the list goes on and on. It also removes the ability to have one device perform multiple roles, i.e. a tablet that you can carry around for tablet type tasks, but dock to use as a full-fat laptop/desktop.

So Microsoft went with B. They created Metro, a UI paradigm that can work well across all the modern form factors (desktop, tablet, phone). It may not be quite as good as the old paradigm for pure desktop use, but it's literally millions of times better for touch device use. And importantly, it's a paradigm that can easily evolve in the future to cope with other form factors like smart walls/counters or wearable computing. Possibly more importantly, the frameworks around it will be easily transtionable(?) to the web down the road helping to blur the lines between OS and web if they decide to go in that direction.

The main downside to B is that Metro isn't quite as good as the old paradigm for general desktop use. (at least not yet anyway, I'm sure a lot of work is being done in this area)

And so we get to the reason why Metro must be compulsory. To move to Metro and to make it a success (which Windows must do to survive as an OS), developers need to move with it. They need to make their new apps use Metro, and new versions of old apps need to use Metro. Developers like the obvious benefits of Metro (write one application for desktop, tablet and phone), but the big worry for developers would be that users won't use Metro, they will want to stick with desktop applications. And so to push users to Metro, Microsoft have to push it as the primary interface, with Desktop mode being almost a compatibility layer.

Personally I like Metro, I really don't get what all the fuss is about. All my desktop apps work just as well as they always did. I'm glad the start menu is gone, while Vista/Win7 improved it a lot, it was still an awful paradigm. And, it finally means I can easily have the same apps on my desktop, tablet and phone, and easily share all my data between them.

_Kaiser_

stevenmu wrote: »

And, it finally means I can easily have the same apps on my desktop, tablet and phone, and easily share all my data between them.

What apps are those (genuine question). What do you really share with these multiple devices?

Let's take my own setup.. Android Galaxy Note, Win 7 laptop - No tablet but if I did it'd be Android based so the Note (which is almost a mini-tablet anyway) will suffice for both examples.

- Contacts.. Gmail/Android Contacts

- E-mail.. again there's multiple clients for all the major providers that keep them all in sync effortlessly

- Pictures/music etc.. Wuala on both (or Dropbox, Skydrive, Google Docs etc)

- Apps.. ok this one is tougher but then what apps do people share between these devices as it is? Games? Not likely! Office apps then.. again multiple options available.

About the only integration I'd like that I'm missing is access to my SMS/MMS but even with Windows 8, I doubt this will be available on a desktop/laptop/tablet.. and again, if I'm that bothered, there ARE ways to do this now.

In short, it brings nothing new to the table/desktop except functionality issues. None of the options/apps I've mentioned above would be particularly hard or awkward to use and in fact surely competition is healthy to ensure competitive pricing and innovation?
It's the lack of this that has (one could argue) led Apple to stagnation in its latest releases (Siri is a gimmick that most people won't use after a few days)

Dean_Mc

Kaiser2000 wrote: »

What apps are those (genuine question). What do you really share with these multiple devices?

Let's take my own setup.. Android Galaxy Note, Win 7 laptop - No tablet but if I did it'd be Android based so the Note (which is almost a mini-tablet anyway) will suffice for both examples.

- Contacts.. Gmail/Android Contacts

- E-mail.. again there's multiple clients for all the major providers that keep them all in sync effortlessly

- Pictures/music etc.. Wuala on both (or Dropbox, Skydrive, Google Docs etc)

- Apps.. ok this one is tougher but then what apps do people share between these devices as it is? Games? Not likely! Office apps then.. again multiple options available.

About the only integration I'd like that I'm missing is access to my SMS/MMS but even with Windows 8, I doubt this will be available on a desktop/laptop/tablet.. and again, if I'm that bothered, there ARE ways to do this now.

In short, it brings nothing new to the table/desktop except functionality issues. None of the options/apps I've mentioned above would be particularly hard or awkward to use and in fact surely competition is healthy to ensure competitive pricing and innovation?
It's the lack of this that has (one could argue) led Apple to stagnation in its latest releases (Siri is a gimmick that most people won't use after a few days)

This is predicated on apps that do not exist yet. I have been privy to some amazing concepts that deal with sharing around the same data only in different contexts. While it is completely possible on all platforms the Windows 8 share contracts are going to make this sort of app mainstream.

Capt'n Midnight

Probably not related to them making tablets http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-19062196

Computing giant Microsoft has completed the take-over of Perceptive Pixel, a firm that specialises in making large multi-touch wall-mountable screens.

Used for presentations, the screens, which can be up to 82in (202cm), can be controlled by both touch and stylus.

Microsoft says it hopes to use the technology to enhance its Windows 8 operating system.

One analyst said the move could lead to an upgrade of Microsoft's Kinect motion sensor.

Dean_Mc

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Probably not related to them making tablets http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-19062196

We were talking about this in work. We use Trello for project management and having one of those super touch screens would be a great help... I'd say they are stupid money though!

Fysh

Dean_Mc wrote: »

This is predicated on apps that do not exist yet. I have been privy to some amazing concepts that deal with sharing around the same data only in different contexts. While it is completely possible on all platforms the Windows 8 share contracts are going to make this sort of app mainstream.

Hmm. I've dealt with enough large corporate vendors that buying into an OS ecosystem on the basis of what will totally happen in a year or two, we pinkie swear! is about as appealing as sitting in a sealed room inhaling my own farts after a night out on the beer.

I understand the hypothesis that how we use computers is changing - what I outright reject is the idea of taking a bunch of different device types (all of which have substantially different use cases, form factors and crucially available hardware resources) and using the weakest of the lot as the way to set the bar.

Example - if I have a workstation with 2 CPU sockets, each populated by quad-core i7, with 16GB of RAM and dual SSDs configured to run on a dedicated SSD-capable RAID manager, what's the advantage to me of having an app environment where every developer is spending a load of time trying to ensure that app resource utilisation when not in focus is minimised? My goal is to ensure that I can harness the full power of my hardware, which is going to require some developmental approaches that are diametrically opposed to the power/resource conservation inherent on the tablet/handheld platform.

I get the idea of trying to unify various working spaces for people, what I don't get is forcing a common interface across devices that don't have the same input methodologies - it's like saying that because people understand the concept of physical keys for doors, any electronic device should also have an actual physical key for allowing you in, that works in the same way as your front door key.

I still say that what people want is to access their stuff (be it music, film, photos or save states in games) across devices. Hence my whole backend infrastructure argument. There again, Microsoft don't seem to have a clue what they're doing with Windows Home Server so there's little or no chance of that happening - and presumably they think that without an iTunes store to tie into (and act as another lovely cash cow!) there's no point in building the infrastructure...

Dean_Mc

Fysh wrote: »

Hmm. I've dealt with enough large corporate vendors that buying into an OS ecosystem on the basis of what will totally happen in a year or two, we pinkie swear! is about as appealing as sitting in a sealed room inhaling my own farts after a night out on the beer.

I understand the hypothesis that how we use computers is changing - what I outright reject is the idea of taking a bunch of different device types (all of which have substantially different use cases, form factors and crucially available hardware resources) and using the weakest of the lot as the way to set the bar.

Example - if I have a workstation with 2 CPU sockets, each populated by quad-core i7, with 16GB of RAM and dual SSDs configured to run on a dedicated SSD-capable RAID manager, what's the advantage to me of having an app environment where every developer is spending a load of time trying to ensure that app resource utilisation when not in focus is minimised? My goal is to ensure that I can harness the full power of my hardware, which is going to require some developmental approaches that are diametrically opposed to the power/resource conservation inherent on the tablet/handheld platform.

I get the idea of trying to unify various working spaces for people, what I don't get is forcing a common interface across devices that don't have the same input methodologies - it's like saying that because people understand the concept of physical keys for doors, any electronic device should also have an actual physical key for allowing you in, that works in the same way as your front door key.

I still say that what people want is to access their stuff (be it music, film, photos or save states in games) across devices. Hence my whole backend infrastructure argument. There again, Microsoft don't seem to have a clue what they're doing with Windows Home Server so there's little or no chance of that happening - and presumably they think that without an iTunes store to tie into (and act as another lovely cash cow!) there's no point in building the infrastructure...

I think I see were we differ. I think that hardware is far too powerful for the average and dare I say it, most, people. What I see happening is the move to lower powered devices with high quality audio / visuals / connections. All powered via the cloud.

I still think very shortly you are going to see OS as a service which will simply use a profile definition and a form factor to decide how to serve your data.

_Kaiser_

Dean_Mc wrote: »

I think I see were we differ. I think that hardware is far too powerful for the average and dare I say it, most, people. What I see happening is the move to lower powered devices with high quality audio / visuals / connections. All powered via the cloud.

I still think very shortly you are going to see OS as a service which will simply use a profile definition and a form factor to decide how to serve your data.

That could be a problem in a country where a good portion of the population can't get broadband at all.. never mind broadband decent enough to run all these cloud based services. And I don't mean just pure speed (upload being the biggest concern there) but also usage caps etc

Then there's 3G which is even worse outside the cities...

Can you guess where I'm talking about?

fionny

Dean_Mc wrote: »

I think I see were we differ. I think that hardware is far too powerful for the average and dare I say it, most, people. What I see happening is the move to lower powered devices with high quality audio / visuals / connections. All powered via the cloud.

I still think very shortly you are going to see OS as a service which will simply use a profile definition and a form factor to decide how to serve your data.

Some things yes, but no in others, connectivity still has a LONG way to go before everyone will even consider relying on the cloud for all things computing.

Torqay

stevenmu wrote: »

So Microsoft went with B. They created Metro, a UI paradigm that can work well across all the modern form factors (desktop, tablet, phone).

Windows for PC and Windows on ARM have as much in common as barbecue and sushi. The real worry for Microsoft is making Office work on both platforms and here they can't fool users with eye candy (or a UI paradigm), compulsory or not.

stevenmu

What apps are those (genuine question). What do you really share with these multiple devices?

Well Office is the obvious one. Sure there are "multiple options", but I really just want one that does all the things I need in the same way every time. I don't want to create a document in MS Office and use some particular formatting, then open it in a different app on my tablet and find that I can't edit without losing that formatting, or can't do some other task that I could on my desktop.

Email/Contacts is another, I have my email currently syncing fine across a number of devices and that's great to have, but capabilities like search, rules, task management, scheduling etc vary quite a bit between them. Ideally I'd like full fat Outlook for all my devices, or at least the same email client, the same calendar and the same tasks app.

Development tools would be huge for me, it'll probably be a while before we see a fully Metro Visual Studio, but being able to create or edit code on a tablet or phone would be a massive deal. Obviously it wouldn't be good for all day coding, but to be able to pull down some code and make a few edits, test and debug it, or make a few quick changes to run a demo etc would be really useful.

There's tons of others, for pictures editors on phones/tablets have typically been pretty crap compared to desktop versions, as have media players, browsers and all sorts of other apps.

It's not really about bringing something new to the desktop, it's about bringing the desktop to everywhere else.

fionny

So you think complicated excel sheets are going to work just hunky dorey on your windows phone or your windows tablet?

Nah... quad core PC's have trouble running some of my sheets some times and those are much more complicated then a few columns with VLOOKUPS in.

Fysh

Dean_Mc wrote: »

I think I see were we differ. I think that hardware is far too powerful for the average and dare I say it, most, people. What I see happening is the move to lower powered devices with high quality audio / visuals / connections. All powered via the cloud.

I still think very shortly you are going to see OS as a service which will simply use a profile definition and a form factor to decide how to serve your data.

I think that where we differ is in forcing all users, regardless of usage scenario, to use the same OS

I can see, for developers, the appeal of writing an application once and running it on all environments (especially when you write it once, submit it to one store, and can then sell it to all environments).

I work in a higher education environment, and have previously worked in enterprise support. I don't really care whether it makes life easier for developers, outside of those developers specifically creating products that my users rely upon and which are used to generate revenue.

So, for example, the existence of a windows-based tablet with a full-fat version of Office installed would be compelling - if it had happened five years ago, before the iPad claimed that territory and Office clones like DocumentsToGo emerged as good-enough alternatives to Actual Office.

If you're a developer making games or stuff for the home/casual market, then while I understand what you want to see in your ecosystem, I don't see why the enterprise is expected to put up with functionality and features that are going to be detrimental to them just so that you can benefit.

Or, to put it another way - if Adobe, Autodesk, National Instruments, Mathworks, Wolfram, and RAITH all tell me that they think the unification of the tablet and desktop arenas via Metro is a good thing in terms of providing the products that my users depend on to do their work, then I will start to consider it feasible that this is a good idea.

That's the arena I'm concerned about. I've never much had any interest in the home user aspects of Windows, because either they haven't been any use to me or they've looked so bloody silly I could feel braincells killing themselves just from looking at the damn thing.

As for cloud-based anything, I have no objection to it existing as one of several options, but anyone who tries to force it on me as the One True Way To Happy Computing is getting a non-optional Boot|Nadger Interface Experience

stevenmu wrote: »

Well Office is the obvious one. Sure there are "multiple options", but I really just want one that does all the things I need in the same way every time. I don't want to create a document in MS Office and use some particular formatting, then open it in a different app on my tablet and find that I can't edit without losing that formatting, or can't do some other task that I could on my desktop.

Email/Contacts is another, I have my email currently syncing fine across a number of devices and that's great to have, but capabilities like search, rules, task management, scheduling etc vary quite a bit between them. Ideally I'd like full fat Outlook for all my devices, or at least the same email client, the same calendar and the same tasks app.

Development tools would be huge for me, it'll probably be a while before we see a fully Metro Visual Studio, but being able to create or edit code on a tablet or phone would be a massive deal. Obviously it wouldn't be good for all day coding, but to be able to pull down some code and make a few edits, test and debug it, or make a few quick changes to run a demo etc would be really useful.

There's tons of others, for pictures editors on phones/tablets have typically been pretty crap compared to desktop versions, as have media players, browsers and all sorts of other apps.

It's not really about bringing something new to the desktop, it's about bringing the desktop to everywhere else.

TBH a RemoteFX enabled RDP client would be a better bet for at least half the stuff you're talking about. Or, I dunno, maybe some sort of cloud-based background and cut-down versions of those applications that could run on the handheld version of Windows that's being pushed so hard. Perhaps Windows Phone could use some sort of WinCloud service to copy files to and from your WinSkyDrive, with your full Windows install doing the same thing? Perhaps even a RemoteFX enabled RDP client could be a big selling point of Windows Phone/Tablet, allowing you quick and easy connectivity to your full system when you need to do stuff that's beyond your handheld unit?

stevenmu

Torqay wrote: »

Windows for PC and Windows on ARM have as much in common as barbecue and sushi. The real worry for Microsoft is making Office work on both platforms and here they can't fool users with eye candy (or a UI paradigm), compulsory or not.

They have a lot more in common than that. The big differences are that WoA doesn't have the backwards compatibility of Windows on the desktop (which was pretty much necessary to work on ARM), and it's taking the "walled garden" approach, which I don't agree with.

I'm sure getting office to work well on WoA is a big worry for MS, I haven't tried it but I'm willing to bet it will be good, and a significant improvement over other office style apps on any other tablet/phone.

fionny wrote: »

So you think complicated excel sheets are going to work just hunky dorey on your windows phone or your windows tablet?

Nah... quad core PC's have trouble running some of my sheets some times and those are much more complicated then a few columns with VLOOKUPS in.

Yes, I do. Of course a complicated spreadsheet is going to run slower on slower hardware, I don't see that as a reason to not progress the operating system.

But turn that around for a second, is it better that you just can't open the spreadsheet at all, or is it better that you can at least open it and work with your data in full fidelity just slower?

stevenmu

Fysh wrote: »

TBH a RemoteFX enabled RDP client would be a better bet for at least half the stuff you're talking about. Or, I dunno, maybe some sort of cloud-based background and cut-down versions of those applications that could run on the handheld version of Windows that's being pushed so hard. Perhaps Windows Phone could use some sort of WinCloud service to copy files to and from your WinSkyDrive, with your full Windows install doing the same thing? Perhaps even a RemoteFX enabled RDP client could be a big selling point of Windows Phone/Tablet, allowing you quick and easy connectivity to your full system when you need to do stuff that's beyond your handheld unit?

Well that would require leaving your full system on and connected, unless all your stuff was in the cloud. And it would also rule out having a transforming/docking tablet as your full system. Either way it'd also mean a drastic change in functionality if you had little or no connectivity.