• Microsoft reportedly working to block apps that re-enable the Windows 8 Start button
    447 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Morgen;36156909]We shouldn't give any feedback at all then unless we like it then right? Calling it Metro I will quote BrettJay from the Windows 8 thread: Yes we can stay on Windows 7 but it would be better if Microsoft could give the best of both worlds. The start screen is designed for a touch input rather than the Mouse + Keyboard which is the problem here.. Why would I want that on my desktop?[/QUOTE] I'm not talking about feedback - give them all the feedback you want (but the Windows 8 blog might be more appropiate for that), but you're talking about the new UI [I]being forced.[/I] Now, I'm totally with you on that it's being forced in their new product, but so is every other change they made. If you don't want to be forced to use it, don't buy the operating system. If few enough people like it and buy it, you might even be lucky that they drop it and go back to a more conventional UI. But don't talk about it being "forced" - you're buying an OS, and they don't want you modifying their software. Simple as that. You're completely entitled to your own opinion, and so is everyone else, but can we [I]please[/I] stop acting like Microsoft is forcing their software down your throat? And I'd quote Panda X with his response just a little later in the Windows 8 thread (and you must have read it there too), but he got here before me.
Vista 1.13
[QUOTE=JustExtreme;36157741]Vista 1.13[/QUOTE] If anything, Windows 7 was Vista 2.0. There wasn't all that many changes, but the general user experience was much improved. Windows 8 is actually a pretty large overhaul, and while I can't tell you to like the new start menu, the other improvements are actually quite substantial.
[QUOTE=JustExtreme;36157741]Microsoft BOB 2.0.[/QUOTE] FTFY.
Not gonna read all this posts in this thread so I'm sure someone will have said this. First off it's bad that they take it out when probably the majority of people want it. But it makes it so much more annoying that they're going to block any sort of option to put one on.
With the taskbar and desktop icons I rarely use the start menu except to get to my computer for folder stuff.
[QUOTE=Rage.;36158215]But it makes it so much more annoying that they're going to block any sort of option to put one on.[/QUOTE] They aren't, this article is bullshit.
[QUOTE=King Tiger;36155118]Wow. You people are pathetic. I actually thought they had removed the start menu. You're butthurt over a new system they're using that accomplishes the samething, and you're mad because you just don't like new things? Garry was actually right. Why bother asking people about changes made when they just complain about any change?[/QUOTE] No. I don't want a fullscreen start menu type thing which Metro seemingly is. If the new start menu takes up the whole fucking screen, that's going to make it really inconvenient for me with my current work style. I have two windows open, each one aligned to a side of the screen. [t]http://i.imgur.com/ePqKr.png[/t] Now on windows 7, if I open the start menu up, it only covers the screen partially, not the whole damn screen, so I can still see what's going on in twitter or if I'm watching a video, I would still be able to see it. [t]http://i.imgur.com/ebvD1.png[/t] But if the new start menu in windows 8 takes up the whole screen, it's inconvenient. I don't like change if I find that it's a seemingly pointless change from my perspective. It's a simple thought process, does it affect my current style of use on the computer? If it does like Windows 8 seemingly does, then I won't like the change. However, if the change provided enough good things to counteract the negatives, I would consider the change as a good change. You've even said it yourself, "accomplishes the same thing.". Well if it accomplishes the same thing, is there really such a need for a change? No! Unless the change is absolutely brilliant and provides a much more intuitive way of doing things, I'm not going to accept the change. I've tried Windows 8 on a friends computer, Metro is clunky, pointless and not designed for desktop PCs. The best thing Microsoft could do is simply give desktop PC users the option on whether they would like to use Metro, or use the older (and in my opinion: better) system. They shouldn't force users down one path. Look at the screenshots of my desktop, you'll notice that I use the more XP-Like windows layout because I dislike the chunky cubes that came with Windows 7. But I wasn't angry at that change because with a few simple clicks, I could easily change it back to a preferred way which I find easier to use. But it seems that with Windows 8, you're not given this choice. Therefore: it's a bad change.
Installed it on a VM holy jesus fucking christ, theres bad kerning EVERYWHERE obligatory: [img]http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/kerning.png[/img]
[QUOTE=Tobba,;36158546]Installed it on a VM holy jesus fucking christ, theres bad kerning EVERYWHERE obligatory: [img]http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/kerning.png[/img][/QUOTE] Where are you seeing bad kerning at?
I think it's a bad design decision to mix metro and aero together. Instead of the start menu that fits into the OS you get something that looks and acts radically different. Metro is like a totally new OS of it's own. It feels wrong because it doesn't fit into all other windows aero elements. I also can't see why they couldn't make metro for desktops aka make it not fullscreen, make icons smaller and other optional settings. But then again, they could've left the start menu in. Metro window is not a start menu though. It acts like one but I don't think it mentions anywhere that it's start menu so calling it that is wrong. Otherwise tablet mode is start menu...
[QUOTE=Panda X;36158585]Where are you seeing bad kerning at?[/QUOTE] Cant find any good examples now for some reason, but the spacing on the : annoys the everloving fuck out of me on this [img]http://dl.dropbox.com/u/4838268/ZScreen/2012-06/Screenshot-2012-06-01_20.48.19.png[/img] [editline]1st June 2012[/editline] The font they use for the big letters fucks with my OCD horribly in any case so i guess
[QUOTE=AceOfDivine;36158662]I think it's a bad design decision to mix metro and aero together. Instead of the start menu that fits into the OS you get something that looks and acts radically different. Metro is like a totally new OS of it's own. It feels wrong because it doesn't fit into all other windows aero elements. I also can't see why they couldn't make metro for desktops aka make it not fullscreen, make icons smaller and other optional settings. But then again, they could've left the start menu in. Metro window is not a start menu though. It acts like one but I don't think it mentions anywhere that it's start menu so calling it that is wrong. Otherwise tablet mode is start menu...[/QUOTE] Aero is [url=http://www.winsupersite.com/article/windows8/windows-8-release-preview-rip-aero-20032012-143133]being removed[/url] from the final builds.
[QUOTE=barttool;36152045]can you point out things that make Metro terrible? Because if we must compare, I'm rather glad we're finally moving out from the cheesy poor looking glass effects of Aero. Metro, when applied correctly, can provide extremely good looking designs, in all formats and through any media. these are some pretty good examples: [IMG]http://4.mshcdn.com/wp-content/gallery/screenshot_skypewinphone02_web/screenshot_skypeWinPhone04_web.jpg[/IMG] [thumb]http://catalog.zune.net/v3.2/en-US/image/9809de4b-7b89-43eb-82f1-d1fcd43e2bfe?width=1280&height=720&resize=true[/thumb] [IMG]http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b292/littlemax9/n66i4k.png[/IMG][/QUOTE] Yeah no it looks like shit. Aero was pretty dank in my opinion.
The last one looks really awful in my opinion. But the first one is lovely.
Yea, the last one looks like a Flash interface with a gradient background, it's not doing it for me.
[QUOTE=nicatronTg;36158918]Aero is [url=http://www.winsupersite.com/article/windows8/windows-8-release-preview-rip-aero-20032012-143133]being removed[/url] from the final builds.[/QUOTE] Jesus fuck that looks ugly imo. It's all flat and monotone and ugh. Looks like OSX's retarded brother. Shame they're going for such a flat look. I use aero theme albeit with transparency off but it has these lines and stuff and looks nice. That looks like squared classic with a different color scheme.
I don't like Metro only because I'm never going to use those apps. I don't want to check the weather on an app, I can turn around and look outside my door. I don't want to play cut the rope. I don't want to check up on my non-existent stock portfolio. The only programs I really use are Chrome, Steam, and Sibelius 7. Everything else is practically useless to me. When I build my PC over the summer, I'm sticking with 7, at least until I see a fair amount of reviews. The start menu issue is petty and people can grow the fuck up about it not being there. If not, they can download something to put it back in.
[QUOTE=nicatronTg;36158918]Aero is [url=http://www.winsupersite.com/article/windows8/windows-8-release-preview-rip-aero-20032012-143133]being removed[/url] from the final builds.[/QUOTE] The metro theme replacing Aero is not the same metro used in the full screen metro apps. It's more like a recolored aero with different icons.
[QUOTE=AceOfDivine;36159402]Jesus fuck that looks ugly imo. It's all flat and monotone and ugh. Looks like OSX's retarded brother. Shame they're going for such a flat look. I use aero theme albeit with transparency off but it has these lines and stuff and looks nice. That looks like squared classic with a different color scheme.[/QUOTE] Don't worry, I'm sure the theming community will jump on and bring back Aero within hours.
To be fair I'm not worrying at all as I'm not planning to switch to W8.
[QUOTE=AceOfDivine;36160090]To be fair I'm not worrying at all as I'm not planning to switch to W8.[/QUOTE] It seems like you worry a lot, though.
i just still don't have a clue why they are using metro on windows server 2012 where the tablet user base will be literally 0.
[QUOTE=luckyg;36161411]i just still don't have a clue why they are using metro on windows server 2012 where the tablet user base will be literally 0.[/QUOTE] It's not like there's a lot of tablet users in the desktop market either. Or a lot of Windows users in the server market. The metro start menu is what it is - the new start menu. And it's pretty functional, whether you're on a laptop, tablet, desktop or whatever.
[QUOTE=GoDong-DK;36160136]It seems like you worry a lot, though.[/QUOTE] I am not worried, I am disappointed. Because sooner or later I will have to switch to windows 8 or 9. But this is not the direction I want to see windows go. I mean come on, going flat theme and mixing this tablet junk, making OS "user friendly" by removing and further hiding more advanced features. Just my opinion and you don't need to combat it as there is no need to.
[QUOTE=AceOfDivine;36161543]removing and further hiding more advanced features.[/QUOTE] That's by biggest complaint about 8 to be honest. Arbitrarily hiding stuff under the idea "let the user find it" is just really nonsense.
[QUOTE=AceOfDivine;36161543]I am not worried, I am disappointed. Because sooner or later I will have to switch to windows 8 or 9. But this is not the direction I want to see windows go. I mean come on, going flat theme and mixing this tablet junk, making OS "user friendly" by removing and further hiding more advanced features. Just my opinion and you don't need to combat it as there is no need to.[/QUOTE] Where did they remove or hide advanced features? The control panel is exactly the same, and I haven't seen one setting out of place. What's your source on that? The theme can be changed, much the same way you can with Windows 7. Someone will port Aero in a heartbeat. How much time have you actually spent using the DP or RP? [editline]1st June 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Panda X;36161609]That's by biggest complaint about 8 to be honest. Arbitrarily hiding stuff under the idea "let the user find it" is just really nonsense.[/QUOTE] Where have they done that? It's a real point, but I really haven't encountered it, or heard anything about it.
Also what the fuck were they thinking when they changed the "BSOD" Old one was drawn with the console mode because everything ever supports that perfectly no matter how hard everything crashes, the new one has a resoloution beyond what the standard VGA hardware handles and looks like uses some kind of font rendering As in its completely fucking pointless now because most crashes will cause the screen to fail to display properly anyways
[QUOTE=GoDong-DK;36161613]Where did they remove or hide advanced features? The control panel is exactly the same, and I haven't seen one setting out of place. What's your source on that? The theme can be changed, much the same way you can with Windows 7. Someone will port Aero in a heartbeat. How much time have you actually spent using the DP or RP? [editline]1st June 2012[/editline] Where have they done that? It's a real point, but I really haven't encountered it, or heard anything about it.[/QUOTE] Stuff like the start menu, charms, the app switcher. Sure we know about it since we read through the development of it, but to the average user, they're not going to know that any of this exists. Example the start button. While it's still there, there's no visual indicator that it's still there, hell look how everyone went to shit when the news came out "they "removed" the start button". People going to shit asking "how will I open the start menu/screen" etc. [editline]1st June 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Tobba,;36161672]Also what the fuck were they thinking when they changed the "BSOD" Old one was drawn with the console mode because everything ever supports that perfectly no matter how hard everything crashes, the new one has a resoloution beyond what the standard VGA hardware handles and looks like uses some kind of font rendering As in its completely fucking pointless now because most crashes will cause the screen to fail to display properly anyways[/QUOTE] It falls back to 640x480 if it can't be displayed at that resolution, and I believe if it doesn't work then it falls back to a black screen with the error on it.
[QUOTE=Panda X;36161709] It falls back to 640x480 if it can't be displayed at that resolution, and I believe if it doesn't work then it falls back to a black screen with the error on it.[/QUOTE] Still fucking retarded because the thing will probably triple-fault before it fallbacks properly
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.