Windows 8 blocks users from hiding Metro Start Screen after logon

[Zilpha]

Are these guys hanging out with the guys from Canonical? This is the same thing that Ubuntu did with their new Unity interface - a new method that wasn't in any way configurable and something no one asked for.

This was a stupid move on Microsoft's part. Why on earth do they think this is a good idea? There's no way that a move like this will increase sales\adoption of the platform, especially with Windows 7 being such a great OS.

 

[wiyosaya]

Personally, I think that M$ is counting on the low cost of the upgrade to "snooker" people who don't know any better (though there will be people who adopt because they like the new UI) into buying the OS. Even at $40, I highly doubt I'll upgrade anytime soon.

The other tact that M$ might be trying to take advantage of is that if they can get a large share of existing desktop users to upgrade with the low price, this would spell certain death for the start menu and previous ways of interacting with the OS in favor of the Windows 8 way. It will be interesting to see what way this goes, however, I am betting that 8 will be at least as much of a flop as Vista, and perhaps as much or worse than Me.

I've been reading that M$ wants to merge the mobile OS with the desktop OS so that developers can write one program that runs on any device, however, past attempts at this have been nowhere near successful. If they do succeed in making this happen, then developers will be happy, however, I am willing to bet that the vast majority of desktop users will not since the human-computer interface for 8 on desktops is so drastically different.

All I have to say is good luck M$; however, I doubt I'll switch again until at least 9 or 10.

 

[Chris Just]

I was running windows 8 all last week and will be telling my clients to stick to Win 7. I will only be moving my some of older clients that I think might make a good fit with windows 8 and the simplicity of Metro. Microsoft has not been on the ball with Win 8 installer even if they want you to believe they are! Making a OS made for tablets with touch screens the 100% default for a OS that will be for all devices is a big mistake! Touch screen PCs will never catch on in the home, I have a 32" Touch Screen Monitor and I almost never use the touch features who wants fingerprints on the screen they read on I, watch most of there media on and game on? Then to reach the top of the screen 24 hours a day is a real workout even if it is only a 22" screen and lets not even go in to kids and touch screen that was a disaster! My point is we all use PCs different Microsoft, allow us to make the changes we want like you have done to all your other OSs before or even people like me will stick to Windows 7. I will never be switching my office over to windows 8 witch is set up for social media and not work.

 

[Chris Just]

Sorry for the Type-Os been up all night working on a new project and trying to stay awake tell I go to sleep tonight.

 

[Guest]

Easy way to get your files? My experience with OSX (and friends familiar with it), is that it is a pain in the *** to view all files, as there are no real file explorer. OSX users need a seperate Android file explorer to view the files on their Android. On the other hand Windows have a real file explorer (Windows Explorer).

Where did you get this? OSX has the Finder (the Mac equivalent to Explorer), and the search function and spotlight work much better and faster than built in search in Windows which feels like it's been broken since XP.

Most of the arguments here against Apple and their 'locked down' attitude really only appy to iOS (iPhones/iPad/iPod) and the hardware restrictions of Macs. OSX on the other hand is a very open OS. And now that Microsoft has practically knocked itself out of the OS race with this garbage version of Windows, OSX stands like a shining beacon of exellence in comparison.

I'm a huge Windows 7 fan- but Windows 8 is just rotten. Metro is one of the worst ideas in desktop computng since Microsoft's BoB. It feels just about as childish and insulting to the user's intelligence as well.

Talk crap about OSX if it's vs. a real OS like Windows 7, but now with 8, sorry, PC users don't really have much valid smack-talking to do while using W8 PlaySkool CandyAss Edition.

 

[sapo joe]

Wow. Microsoft keeps coming up with reasons for the enterprise world to bypass 8.

Agreed. But they didn't need to do this to make me skip Win8. Ditching the user's appeals on the start menu maintenance was enough for me!

 

[Chris Just]

And people thought (including myself), Microsoft learned their lesson when listening to consumers during Windows 7 beta period. They seem to be listening today but not to consumer desires.

I will not be purchasing Windows 8 or a machine that has Windows 8 on it.

If Microsoft wants to sell an OS, they will have to prove it by listening to those who will be using the OS. Forcing change instead of encouraging change is not a good business decision.

I know windows 7 they had us telling them what we wanted and built a great upgrade to there mistake Vista now there making the same mistakes as before and not listening to anything we the clients or the tech world is saying.

 

[Hawthe]

Why all the bickering.. so don't buy it/recommend it. Win8 looks like a casual persons OS to provide familiarity for people who have the OS on a phone/tablet. I don't see Microsoft forcing this on anyone. I am getting a laptop and will drop the 14.99 for the Win8 update for the heck of it.... if it truly sucks Ill go back to Win7. Most of my rigs at home are still on WinXP.

 

[amstech]

Touch capabilites, other then special cases, will NEVER take over a keyboard and mouse.
We have tried it and went back in several departments with state of the art equipment for med scans, bar code readers and dialysis. Touchscreen interfaces are the future for certain devices, not work enviroments trying to run a mix of old software, new software, old devices, new devices and a broad mix of users, permissions and other settings.

There are enough problems getting users to use Outlook/thier workstations properly with basic programs, teaching them Windows 8 is totally out of the question.

 

[Guest]

Microsoft has seriously lost the plot: they are so busy catching up wth or trying to outdo the competition, they've lost sight of their own products' highlights, and as a result, said products are deteriorating in terms of quality. Starting with Vista, the user experience started going downhill; with Windows 7, they took care of some of that but then left some very essential elements suffering, and have failed to address these to this very day. Now instead of improving on those problems and perfecting Windows 7 they simply move on to Windows 8 (anyone ever encounter an entire corporation with ADHD? Me neither), which apparently is a beast of a completely different nature and approach....seriously, who is running this show? Because this is some of the most pathetic misguidance I've ever encountered in a business! It's almost as if they WANT Apple to take over as the leaders in the PC industry. Tell you what, though, I won't be dishing out any more money for a Microsoft product; my dollars from now on go to those companies that actually care about their customer base and show it.

 

[TJGeezer]

I haven't seen a company so determined to shoot itself in the foot since Borland changed its name to Inprise, which nobody could remember, and threw away a whole lot of solid brand name recognition they might have built something on. Eventually they quietly went back to Borland, oops. Maybe MS will quietly restore user choice once all the snarking, mockery and rejection have satisfied their need to hurt themselves.

I switched from Ubuntu to Mint on my Win7/Linux dual boot because it restored my ability to choose for myself how to interact with the Linux OS. Of course, most private PC users seem to accept whatever the big brands sell to them. Maybe that's what MS is counting on. The new OS certainly doesn't seem targeted for the enterprise.

 

[cliffordcooley]

I'd be willing to bet Windows 8 is an educated attempt at pushing people to upgrade their machines to at least Windows 7. The thought of loosing anything even remotely resembling Windows 95/NT4/98/2K/ME/XP/2K3/Vista/2K8/7/2K8R2, will drive the rest of the market into making an upgrade now instead of later. The only way to place fear of loss within everyone, is to completely lock out the old Windows look and feel. A loss that will be inevitable as soon as Windows 7 leaves the market, so upgrade now before you loose your chance.

 

[Zen]

Wow, I'm not stepping in here so much as to offer an opinion about Windows 8, but rather comment on many various Windows Vista hate mongering statements I've seen! At present, I'm a die hard and loyal and unashamed Windows Vista Ultimate (64-bit) user. Personally speaking, I feel that all the hate mongering in regards to Vista is unwarranted! I know I might catch crap about my feelings, but to me, I personally feel that Vista Ultimate (64-bit) is the greatest operating system I've ever used. Trust me, I am a previous Windows XP user, I used that O.S. for quite some time and loved it, but when Vista Ultimate came out and I decided a long while back to run with it, I've been totally satisfied since. I just think that the Vista hate mongering is simply due to peoples lack of understanding of Vista. I personally feel that people who hate talk about Vista are probably most likely to have not given it fair chance to prove itself as a viable operating system. I think most Vista haters more than likely didn't even try it for themselves, and more so went along with public opinion, rather than personal opinion, and made their decision about it that way. I'll admit I had my bouts of "second guessing" myself when first using Vista, but after service pack #1 things got better! And after service pack #2, things got rock solid! I personally don't feel that the majority of people who bash talk about Vista, who may indeed have been prior Vista users, ever waited around for Microsoft to fix the problems, they just had some bad experiences before the fixes became available and jumped ship, all the while thinking that they knew everything about it!

Preconceived notions and pre-fix experiences have lead to the mongering demise of Vista, not any opinions that it wasn't a viable operating system!

I'll shut up now, as to get this area back on topic in regards to Windows 8 conversations!

 

[SNGX1275]

Touch capabilites, other then special cases, will NEVER take over a keyboard and mouse.

They don't have to though. Implement 'mouse gestures' so your pointer works like a finger and click and hold works like actually touching the screen. I've only used Win 8 CP (because RP wouldn't upgrade the CP and I had CP set up the way I liked), so maybe they fixed this and I haven't realized it yet. But in 8 CP you could not click and drag to navigate the Metro interface like you could iOS or Android.

I think most Vista haters more than likely didn't even try it for themselves, and more so went along with public opinion, rather than personal opinion, and made their decision about it that way. I'll admit I had my bouts of "second guessing" myself when first using Vista, but after service pack #1 things got better! And after service pack #2, things got rock solid!

Thats the thing. XP wasn't any good initially either. But instead of UAC popups like in Vista, it just would bsod all the time because of horrible drivers. Something 'broke' in XP's RTM release that made nvidia drivers in particular go into the nv4disp.dll? infinite loop bluescreen. I'm not sure that ever got fixed, and we just grew out of it with newer cards eventually. Prior to the RTM there were no problems (I, as well as many of my friends were running early builds of XP in those days) and none had problems with nvidia cards until the RTM. Anyway, I got off on a bit of a tangent there... XP was crap when it came out, it got better, people eventually came over to it because MS didn't release an alternative and 2k (until about SP4, and even then maybe not..?) wouldn't run 9x games when XP would.

 

[ReederOnTheRun]

While I'm very happy with Windows 8 (once you figure out the UI, its way more functional than Win7), and I'm considering one of the touch enabled laptops; I still think they should've gave users a choice. Literally all of the hate I've seen on Windows 8 has been for the start menu and Metro UI in general. If they had an alternative (nothing fancy, just a standard start button), I'm sure most people would chill out and enjoy the new features.

I'd imagine after some time though, even if they don't give users a choice (bad microsoft!), people will still learn the UI given enough time. Then after some people successfully do it, more will. The only question is how much of the OS market share will they be losing to Apple in the process? I think some, but not nearly enough to send microsoft into bankruptcy, like some people are saying. Plus they'll be gaining some customers (well at least one).

@Zilpha

Canonical isn't as bad as microsoft here though. At least you can still change it however you want in Ubuntu.

P.S. - Cinnamon on Ubuntu is pretty sick, but a little laggy compared to mint.

 

[Zilpha]

@Zilpha

Canonical isn't as bad as microsoft here though. At least you can still change it however you want in Ubuntu.

P.S. - Cinnamon on Ubuntu is pretty sick, but a little laggy compared to mint.

Are you sure about that? Perhaps they have changed it recently, but as of my last run through with Ubuntu we were not able to put the launcher bar whereever we wanted in the Unity interface, and we were not able to revert back to a Gnome gui (I understand this has been corrected but still isn't stable). A developer stated that because devices are all wide screen now, they felt the best place for the launcher was at the left side and it was our job to get used to it, not their job to allow us to put it where we were most comfortable with it. It took extreme hacks and even then it was unstable to move that launcher bar anywhere else, and that's the sort of thing I am talking about. That's essentially what M$ just did to us.

 

[cliffordcooley]

I'd imagine after some time though, even if they don't give users a choice (bad microsoft!), people will still learn the UI given enough time.

Not if it still looks like this and there is no way to customize to be more appealing.

If the squares where translucent and not color coded, I would consider using Start Screen, only if the Start Screen used the desktop background image. I see absolutely no reason why the Start Screen UI cannot be overlaid on top of desktop. What is with this desire to toggle between the two. You say there is more functionality in Windows 8, I would tend to disagree, at least till more apps are designed for use in Windows 8. Who am I to argue though, I've not touched Windows 8 (pun intended), I can't seem to get past how ugly the Start Screen is.

 

[ReederOnTheRun]

Are you sure about that? Perhaps they have changed it recently, but as of my last run through with Ubuntu we were not able to put the launcher bar whereever we wanted in the Unity interface, and we were not able to revert back to a Gnome gui (I understand this has been corrected but still isn't stable). A developer stated that because devices are all wide screen now, they felt the best place for the launcher was at the left side and it was our job to get used to it, not their job to allow us to put it where we were most comfortable with it. It took extreme hacks and even then it was unstable to move that launcher bar anywhere else, and that's the sort of thing I am talking about. That's essentially what M$ just did to us.

You might be right, I don't think you can change it by default. I used ubuntu tweak to change stuff with unity and eventually downloaded the cinnamon desktop to replace unity entirely. I know you can use Gnome too, but I haven't tried it.

Not if it still looks like this and there is no way to customize to be more appealing.

If the squares where translucent and not color coded, I would consider using Start Screen, only if the Start Screen used the desktop background image. I see absolutely no reason why the Start Screen UI cannot be overlaid on top of desktop. What is with this desire to toggle between the two. You say there is more functionality in Windows 8, I would tend to disagree, at least till more apps are designed for use in Windows 8. Who am I to argue though, I've not touched Windows 8 (pun intended), I can't seem to get past how ugly the Start Screen is.

I was talking about stuff for power users. They drastically improved pretty much all of their built in programs (things like the backup system, task manager, and system restore)

 

[cliffordcooley]

I was talking about stuff for power users. They drastically improved pretty much all of their built in programs (things like the backup system, task manager, and system restore)

I'm talking about the reluctance in giving those enhancements a try because of the Crayola Start Screen.

 

[ReederOnTheRun]

I'm talking about the reluctance in giving those enhancements a try because of the Crayola Start Screen.

Simplicity is bliss

 

[tipstir]

Companies will just have to buy/deploy all-in-one systems with touchscreens. To use Windows 8, 9, 10 or higher. Gone is the old way of using Windows with 7.

 

[SNGX1275]

^ I doubt it tipstir. Outside of a retail environment, touchscreens don't make sense for desktop users. Retail environments may all transition to tablets anyway...

You can use Windows 8 metro with a mouse just fine, how is moving your pointer clicking or clicking and dragging any different than using your finger? other than your arm doesn't get tired.

 

[Pan Wah]

Companies will just have to buy/deploy all-in-one systems with touchscreens. To use Windows 8, 9, 10 or higher. Gone is the old way of using Windows with 7.

Nah, companies will just have to switch to OSX & Linux in their droves (mine's certainly looking into it!)