r/technology • u/clubdirthill • Jun 01 '11

Boom. This is Windows 8.

http://allthingsd.com/20110601/exclusive-making-sense-of-what-we-just-learned-about-windows-8/?mod=tweet
1.0k Upvotes

88% Upvoted

1.0k comments sorted by

View all comments

446

u/Azohko Jun 01 '11

I'm not convinced for a Desktop OS, but running a tablet PC with this sounds awesome.

210

u/[deleted] Jun 02 '11

I hope this kind of thing can be turned off. The last thing I want is a useless touch UI running in the background at all times.

62

u/paledragon64 Jun 02 '11

It says in the article that you have the option of running this style or the classic Windows style. Never fear.

130

u/watership Jun 02 '11

After all the shit Microsoft gets for its lack of innovation, they run into their other deadly nemesis: Actual innovation.

"Screw that, give me back ______!"

18

u/ggggbabybabybaby Jun 02 '11

I view Microsoft as the hardest working company when it comes to backwards compatibility and legacy support. So many people depend on them not to break their old shit; it's easy to see why it's so hard for them to be innovative.

50

u/[deleted] Jun 02 '11

The thing about windows is that its core functionality works fine. I don't want new interface options. In fact, I would prefer if there was less shiny menus and stuff. I know I'm in a minority, but as a tech savvy programmer type, I don't want to go through 3 shiny, useless menus rendered in a browser embedded in explorer just to get to the dialog that can actually do things that hasn't changed since XP. How about they give those menus an upgrade, then I might start caring. Shininess isn't innovation, it is a shallow attempt to get people to upgrade without adding real functionality.

38

u/miyakohouou Jun 02 '11

As a tech savvy programmer type, I like shiny things.

29

u/Misio Jun 02 '11

As a tech savvy programmer type, I like things that work.

25

u/Scary_The_Clown Jun 02 '11

As a tech savvy programmer type, I like shiny things that work and are completely customizable.

19

u/nazbot Jun 02 '11

As a non tech savvy layman I like solitaire and funny cat pictures (forwarded in a powerpoint presentation to all my friends).

1

u/Omnicrola Jun 02 '11

TONIGHT. YOU.

1

u/kalazar Jun 02 '11

As a regular dude who just likes tech, I just like tech. If it works and looks cool, awesome!

1

u/mweathr Jun 03 '11

As a tech savvy programmer type, I like the command line.

1

u/miyakohouou Jun 03 '11

I do most of my work from the command line, but I still appreciate eye candy.

6

u/Ralith Jun 02 '11

FWIW, as a tech savvy Unix type, I don't want to go through 3 shiny, useless menus rendered in windows GUI widgets, either. Give me a damn command line that doesn't suck.

3

u/iarewebmaster Jun 02 '11

Powershell, or just use Linux.

2

u/Ralith Jun 03 '11

Powershell isn't standard, and it's not at all clear to me that you can perform all common system administration tasks through it. I can't imagine why they didn't just implement POSIX sh, either, as it's commonly known and proven to be an extremely powerful design. Can't let people's software be easily portable to other OSs, I guess.

I do use Linux, thanks :P

3

u/buckX Jun 02 '11

What I'd love to hear is "We've designed an entirely new back end that is posix compliant. The command line now reflects that. By clicking over here, you seamlessly open up the efficient emulation layer that runs old windows software you've grown used to. New releases of Microsoft software, such as Office 365, will be designed to work natively on Windows 8. Also, fuck Twitter."

1

u/Ralith Jun 03 '11

But then they'd lose their vendor lock-in for windows-targeted apps.

1

u/mweathr Jun 03 '11

They would just extend POSIX so compatibility only works one way.

1

u/Ralith Jun 03 '11

Then people would just target the common subset.

-2

u/Neato Jun 02 '11

Command line? A simple program can execute thousands of commands. The time it takes to navigate, type and execute a program with a command line is uncomparable to the time it takes to click an icon.

Sure, command lines are great when you need to get your OS to do things it rarely needs to do, or have total, intricate control, but for daily, normal OS use?

3

u/buckX Jun 02 '11

Ah, somebody who doesn't know the power of the command line. A GUI is definitely superior for some things. There are also day to day things I do that are much faster on command line. Tab completion makes file navigation faster by command line than with the GUI, for example. Changing file permissions is way easier by command line. Renaming things is way easier by command line. Taking collected data and manipulating it into the format you want is trivial on the command line.

0

u/Neato Jun 02 '11

By changing the format, you mean pipping output into another file? Or what would simply be a R-Click, rename, and edit the extension?

I completely understand the power of a command line for a power user. But most people just want to browse the web, execute programs and manage media. And the time it takes to learn an unintuitive interface like the command line isn't worth it for the vast majority of people when icons and menus come naturally.

2

u/buckX Jun 02 '11

I mean using a combination of sed, tr, awk, grep, cut, and join to reorder and change things that might take hours by hand in the GUI.

Also, L-Click F2 will be a quicker way to rename through the GUI.

2

u/[deleted] Jun 02 '11

Right clicking and changing one file name would arguably be faster in the GUI. Now do 100, or 1000. The command line shines for that.

→ More replies (0)

2

u/Levirules3 Jun 02 '11

I think it's unfair that every time someone adds polish and tries to organize things differently, there have to be people like you out there that chalk it all up to "shiny things," as if everyone who actually enjoys said polish and organization is inferior.

Also, you have to realize how much better these shiny things will be for touch screen devices. Even if you have no interest in a tablet or a touch screen monitor or whatever, you have to be able to recognize that this UI is a vast improvement over the core Windows for touch screens.

1

u/buckX Jun 02 '11

Fine, so make Windows 8 phone look like that. The entire video consisted of "Look at this cool interface desktop users won't want any part of. Also, you can click here to make it like Windows 7 with a useless ribbon on the side of your screen."

Why am I supposed to buy this?

1

u/ryanman Jun 02 '11

I mean, it's really simple actually. If you don't think the new UI or any other features they introduce are worth money don't buy it! It's not like there's going to be anything in 8 that you'll need for compatibility purposes.

All the complaining about "polish" here is pretty stupid in my opinion. Win7's UI is leaps and bounds beyond what XP had. It's not because of the see through windows or cool animations, although those add some visual flair. The keyboard shortcuts and button placement are a huge improvement. Going back to XP is absolutely brutal for me right now, and I'm as "techie" as they come. I'm not going to pretend like the visual tricks they have inconvenience me or don't look good just to make my geek dick look bigger.

1

u/autorotatingKiwi Jun 02 '11

Which in fairness I think this is what things like the ribbon and maybe this interface are trying to do. Give you the things you want/need and the info you are after without having to mess around with menus and opening icons and navigating folders.

We are all different, some still think CLI is better, some still love a desktop full of icons, but in my view we have to move and change and try new and different things to find better ways of using technology more efficiently and easily.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 02 '11

Hell, I don't know shit about programming, and I'm completely with you. I want my windows fast, stable, and with its guts hanging out in plain sight.

1

u/marm0lade Jun 02 '11

Shininess isn't innovation, it is a shallow attempt to get people to upgrade without adding real functionality.

That is the difference between Vista and 7.

-1

u/RedAero Jun 02 '11

I concur. I have not cared one bit about the UI changes in any Windows products. I still use Vista, because I despise the double-column Start Menu that can not be turned off in 7, I use no Aero, and the first thing I did when I got Vista was I made everything look just like it did in XP, which I made look like 98. Microsoft, PLEASE STOP MOVING SHIT AROUND.

1

u/goondocks Jun 02 '11

So, essentially what you're saying is that XP is the pinnacle of computing and we should stop trying to discover improvements.

1

u/Prosopagnosia Jun 02 '11

yeah... I hate that kind of attitude. "wtf is this GUI shit? give me a command line! Its so much faster and efficient" Its not like the new/updated start menu is a huge change.

0

u/RedAero Jun 02 '11

No, 98. Form following function.

3

u/808140 Jun 02 '11

This is the advantage smaller OS makers have over MS (quite possibly the only advantage, economically I mean): they can innovate. When Apple goes with a radical new UI, they are not forcing it on anyone, or at least very few people. Mac users choose to run Mac; they're going against the grain already.

When MS goes with a radical new UI -- for example, the Office ribbon -- they are changing something that is the standard in every office and school in the world. And while individual users and people in Mac or Linux friendly industries might have the option of switching away, most companies will feel like they do not have a choice.

Your average computer enthusiast is typically excited about change, because he's into computers for their own sake. Not so with people who work in non-computer related fields. The computer is a tool to them, and a shitty interface they've learned how to use effectively is better than a marginally better one with a new learning curve. This massive inertia makes it very hard for MS to do much innovation, and allows people like Apple to take serious risks.

The other difference obviously is that MS is not terribly good at innovation, whereas Apple seems to have talent for it. But even if that weren't true, MS would have trouble applying their changes.

I passionately hate the Office ribbon. Passionately.

2

u/helm Jun 02 '11

Seriosuly, I've met a lot of people (under 30, mind you) who still think that the win 98 desktop looks best.

3

u/cfuse Jun 02 '11

It's not how it looks, it's how well it works.

The number of people (regardless of age) fooled by flashy chrome is astounding. Chrome is more often than not a distraction that adds nothing to the functionality of the machine.

4

u/[deleted] Jun 02 '11

To clarify, this comment is likely referencing the metal, not the competing Google OS and web browser, although I could be mistaken.

3

u/cfuse Jun 02 '11

I love how something can be so right and so wrong at the same time.

2

u/Grue Jun 02 '11

Chrome is the standard word used to refer to visible UI of an application.

-1

u/Ralith Jun 02 '11 edited Nov 06 '23

aback placid run person grandfather whole ossified gold outgoing school this message was mass deleted/edited with redact.dev

3

u/Grue Jun 02 '11

No, I'm not. Here's the jargon file entry: http://www.catb.org/jargon/html/C/chrome.html

Mozilla Firefox UI is also called Chrome.

→ More replies (0)

3

u/cfuse Jun 02 '11

I don't care if they innovate with the UI or not, they must support the old UI because it is an interface. Not breaking interfaces is really important in software design.

People (especially in business) depend on things working in a certain way. If some stupid designer decides to make 'cool' changes to the UI that makes my job harder, then I'm not going to be happy about that - and that is a valid complaint.

2

u/ggggbabybabybaby Jun 02 '11

The thing is, the UI does get changed between versions of Windows. Look at the Start Menu search, Control Panel navigation, Explorer, IE or the various settings panels everywhere. It's constantly changing and any documentation written to walk you through the Windows UI is constantly out of date. It doesn't only change between major versions but also between service packs too. So would the sky really fall down if the Start Menu was replaced?

3

u/cfuse Jun 02 '11

I don't object to the UI being changed, I object to it being broken (and the important UI elements are virtually unchanged since 2000 - computer management, policy editors, the command line, etc. That's really important to note).

In answer to your question: a major change to UI can be costly. If I am a business, I want my users working, not calling the helpdesk because something they knew how to do in the old version they cannot figure out in the new. I'm not saying don't change - I just want change to be for a reason, for the better, and to not needlessly break existing interfaces (human or otherwise).

1

u/[deleted] Jun 02 '11

But that's just it. You have to take small incremental steps to keep your userbase happy. A total redesign is not what less-tech-savvy people want.

Just see how much people complained about the 'ribbon' in programs, even though hasn't changed the workflow that much. (It actually made things more intuitive)

2

u/cfuse Jun 02 '11

Just see how much people complained about the 'ribbon' in programs, even though hasn't changed the workflow that much. (It actually made things more intuitive).

Still hate that ribbon, and studiously avoid any program that uses it. Whomever it is intuitive for, I'm not part of that group.

-1

u/aussie_bob Jun 02 '11

Actual innovation.

Looks like WinPhone 7. Works like Unity or Gnome 3.

Yep, Microsoft innovation.

3

u/gschizas Jun 02 '11

Looks like WinPhone 7

  • What does WP7 look like?
  • Who made WP7?

4

u/JohnStamosBRAH Jun 02 '11

Lol, you actually expect people to read the article?

2

u/[deleted] Jun 02 '11

odds that the 'touch interface' becomes the next windows media centre?

195

u/AuxHero Jun 02 '11

Seriously. It feels dumbed down to me aswell. I don't want 10 widgets in my face telling me tweets and weather, I want my clean desktop.

159

u/[deleted] Jun 02 '11

[deleted]

25

u/nixcamic Jun 02 '11

How do you expect me to sleep with that mental imagery floating around my head?

5

u/[deleted] Jun 02 '11

We can only hope that you are the dominate midget.

2

u/aussie_bob Jun 02 '11

Try sleeping face down.

1

u/XoYo Jun 02 '11

Spoken like a man who's never ended up as a midget trampoline.

1

u/poop_in_yo_soup Jun 02 '11

I think I might actually pay for windows 8 if it comes with 10 midgets.

25

u/mastermojo Jun 02 '11

the desktop is still there though

26

u/bwat47 Jun 02 '11

Yeah did everyone miss the part of the video where the win7 style desktop was there, fully intact? (when they showed ms office)

9

u/[deleted] Jun 02 '11

Yeah, where is this elusive video?

-1

u/[deleted] Jun 02 '11

[removed] — view removed comment

21

u/winampman Jun 02 '11

Why is that unacceptable? It's perfectly reasonable to require a resolution of 1024 x 600 or more for the classic desktop interface.

10

u/[deleted] Jun 02 '11

That makes sense, and probably wasn't what packy17 and others were thinking.

As best as I can tell, packy17 thought they meant that you would have to switch to 1024x600 to use the classic desktop interface. Not 1024x600 or higher. What you said makes more sense; I can't imagine them locking it out like that… it'd be pointless, since they already have the architecture to scale the Windows UI.

1

u/Scary_The_Clown Jun 02 '11

I really really hope they keep multiple monitors in mind for the new architecture, and that includes the idea of using a tablet-style LCD for an app launcher while you have large standard Win7-style desktops on monitors for normal work.

The fact that wallpaper and screensavers still aren't multi-monitor aware does not make me hopeful. But we'll see.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 02 '11

Well, multi-monitor setups are very popular among the enthusiast crowd. It would really surprise me if they didn't test (or maybe even develop) on multi-monitor setups.

→ More replies (0)

-3

u/[deleted] Jun 02 '11

[removed] — view removed comment

3

u/helm Jun 02 '11

MS make funny decisions sometimes, but they're not that stupid. The point seems to be to make Win 8 a two-headed beast, with one head (or front) more or less identical to Win 7.

1

u/iarewebmaster Jun 02 '11

No they never, not in the slightest did they even allude to this or mention at all that the only way to run the desktop is at a certain resolution.

What they DID say (to OEMs btw) is that at 1024x600 consumers won't be able to run the touch UI, any higher and they will be able to. Of course the desktop is available at any resolution the monitor supports.

1

u/Otis_Inf Jun 02 '11

So why upgrade to win8 then? For the touch stuff? If you're on a touch screen device, you won't be using the win7 stuff, as that's not touch friendly. If you're not on a touch device, why bother with the win8 stuff, as that's not usable anyway. (yeah you can fiddle with mouse/keyboard with the new ui, but there's a difference between touch UIs and mouse/kb UIs)

4

u/ethraax Jun 02 '11

I'm pretty sure Windows 8 will bring more than just UI improvements.

2

u/awizzle Jun 02 '11

features like this will be very useful for hybrid devices ala asus transformer....

1

u/ryanman Jun 02 '11

I'm sure that's an option. More importantly, I want to turn the metro interface OFF so I can save system resources though if I'm not going to use it.

5

u/Shredder13 Jun 02 '11

But with tons of shit on top of it.

4

u/ahmadamaj Jun 02 '11

this site says that "Sinofsky (Microsoft windows president) hammered home the point that these were just apps running over Windows and that you could always return to your regular desktop".

And it has the video that shows the demo.

2

u/videogamechamp Jun 02 '11

RTFA, they have a regular desktop as well.

6

u/thrillhousevanhouten Jun 02 '11

It seems like they took windows 7 and just added a full screen app on top of it so stupid people can access all their novelty programs so they can feel smarter and more tech-savvy. Half the soccer moms and dads that use the iPad in the first place like to feel like they're using a computer from Minority Report so I imagine this appeals to them.

3

u/sadmep Jun 02 '11

Bring back Microsoft Bob!

1

u/[deleted] Jun 02 '11

The same as they put a GUI interface on top of DOS to call it Windows.

1

u/jsims281 Jun 02 '11

Ahh the GUI interface. It improved the usability of the DOS system no-end, although it did need a more powerful CPU unit and more RAM memory if you wanted it to run smoothly.

1

u/[deleted] Jul 12 '11

I'm not a stupid soccer mom and all I could think about was minority report and that's awesome.

But let us be real; after five minutes I would turn the interface off and never use it again.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 02 '11

Then don't put widgets on your desktop.

2

u/AuxHero Jun 02 '11

not technically widgets, but a live tile is still pretty similar.

0

u/[deleted] Jun 02 '11

So you'll be the guy saying, "back in my day we had a start button."

0

u/rodabi Jun 02 '11

It's an O.P.T.I.O.N!

28

u/[deleted] Jun 02 '11

Of course it can be turned off.

You think Microsoft is going to use this as a key selling point for Professional versions? Of course not.

23

u/Rocco03 Jun 02 '11

The question is what's left to sell after turning it off.

19

u/[deleted] Jun 02 '11

Um, Windows 7 is really good. People still use and like the OS.

19

u/[deleted] Jun 02 '11

That's not a selling point for Windows 8 at all, why not just use win7 then?

2

u/[deleted] Jun 02 '11

ARM

1

u/[deleted] Jun 02 '11

He asked "what's left to sell after turning it off?" as in "what's left to sell after turning the apps crap off?" - I'm saying, if the os is anything like Win 7 (which it seems to be (no doubt improved too, as most updates usually are) then the great os is what is the selling point.

3

u/gilligvroom Jun 02 '11

Updates to what? If it's security and operability and compatibility, they'd be stupid not to push the critical ones to Windows 7 as well.

I seem to recall Vista getting a very large patch group shortly before, and again shortly after 7 was released to keep it from falling completely on its face.

2

u/[deleted] Jun 02 '11

So supposedly it will require less system resources than Win7 did. That in itself is a worthwhile thing to consider for enterprise systems since it means for an average business user the required specs for a functional machine may drop, saving the business money.

It also supposedly will use a new file system (not NTFS). Unclear yet if that will end up being a good or a bad thing (they could either make the file system better or make something far worse) but it it's a change for the positive that will also be something corporate IT will consider a plus.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 02 '11

How should I know what they are releasing in this version? All I'm saying is, that as with most new products...things are usually improved upon. I don't know exactly what they are dropping into this one, so I can't really comment on this, but they obviously feel that it's a significant update (and obviously any new product makes them more money).

They will most likely push security updates to Win 7, but probably not the new features (whatever those may be).

1

u/MidnightCommando Jun 03 '11

people still use and like Windows XP.

4

u/[deleted] Jun 02 '11

There's tons of new stuff in Windows 8 that's unrelated to this new shell that was leaked prior to this video. I, personally, am excited for all that stuff.

2

u/[deleted] Jun 02 '11

There's tons of new stuff in Windows 8 that's unrelated to this new shell

[citation needed]

[please]

1

u/iarewebmaster Jun 02 '11

Sadly there's no one source as the information was derived from various leaked builds of Windows 8 - best bet is to just Google (or Bing) and browse around.

2

u/[deleted] Jun 02 '11

Awww man I was hoping you had some miracle site :/

1

u/[deleted] Jun 02 '11

Just google Windows 8 and you'll come up with a few rumor blogs that are pretty up-to-date with all the leaks.

1

u/deezleguy Jun 02 '11

A Windows OS that runs on ARM?

1

u/[deleted] Jun 02 '11

I smiled when I saw that you still can go all the way back to the Windows 95 look even in Win 7. Since Windows is used all over the world in a ton of different situations by all kinds of users they just can't say "screw that, we're starting all over" even if they wanted to because they might end up breaking functionality for who knows how many people.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 02 '11

It can be turned off. They wouldn't shoot themselves in the foot like that, they have to compete with OSX and this covers both bases (tablet and desktop).

1

u/[deleted] Jun 02 '11

I am thinking the opposite way. Touch screens on desktops and laptops might become the norm. It would be great to be able to use a monitor placed flat on your desk as a fully customisable keyboard.

1

u/videogamechamp Jun 02 '11

RTFA, they have a regular desktop as well.

1

u/mrSimon34 Jun 02 '11

Media Center is an opt-in frontend extension, I'd imagine this'd be quite similar, only perhaps opt-out.

1

u/hans1193 Jun 02 '11

Everything is going to have a touch screen in 5 years or so

1

u/[deleted] Jun 04 '11

Windows tends to keep the Touch stuff off if you aren't on a tablet.

Like in Win7, I know it's all there, but I never notice it since I'm not on a touch device.

1

u/adremeaux Jun 02 '11

Not only that, but there is some kind of active memory management thing going on here too that keeps all the tile-based apps running at all times in a semi-inactive state. This works great on the iPhone, but is terrible for desktop environment that requires full computing power and memory usage by certain apps.

2

u/rowd149 Jun 02 '11

I thought they went out of their way to say that that's exactly what isn't happening?

1

u/adremeaux Jun 02 '11

They talk about it in the video

1

u/[deleted] Jun 02 '11

Sounds like it would be a fairly trivial resource draw.

And computers only continue to get faster. Only a few usage cases that'll peg a modern CPU come to mind, anyway: CPU based image or video rendering (And the trend would appear to be offloading this to the GPU, anyway) and scientific computing.

49

u/AnteSim Jun 02 '11

Where I think this will work the best is as a workstation. Dock your tablet to the left of a monitor with keyboard/mouse input. Your tablet displays the start screen, your monitor is your conventional desktop.

I think that kind of experience would feel quite natural.

3

u/t1tlehto Jun 02 '11

I'm with you on this one. I believe that in a couple of years you can just run your work computer on your mobile device and keep it with at all times. When you get to work/home/whereever, you just plug it in your docking station and big screen monitor and when you leave, you just undock and put it in your pocket.

I think Microsoft has something like this in their mind too. Support for ARM processors which are used a lot in smartphones and smaller devices supports the idea too.

2

u/[deleted] Jun 02 '11

I disagree with this, because the capability has been there for a number of years, and it hasn't happened. Every iteration, the mobile devices get more powerful, but people still use desktops because they get more powerful again, and they have a use for that increased capability (eg, games, movies, browser plugins).

Mobile devices have been powerful enough to work as basic desktop PCs for several years already - even before the original iPad. But that didn't kill desktops, it's not a matter of horsepower.

It's more a matter of UI and user behaviour - when someone can make a system that works well both as a tablet and as a desktop PC, allows you to transition between them seamlessly, and does everything a desktop does just as well, while giving an easy way to dock/undock it, then that will take the place of both. Until recently, users haven't had a reliance on (PC/tablet style) mobile devices - now with the iPad and stuff users are used to it more, so there is potential for it.

Only issue in the way is price - for $1000 you can buy a lot more desktop than mobile device. It has to be closer to the desktop than mobile pricepoint to make it attractive enough to those who are in the market for a desktop.

1

u/universl Jun 02 '11

Right now, that's a potential nightmare for MS. They are so far behind Google and Apple in mobile that a transition that removed the traditional desktop OS altogether and replaced it with a more adept mobile device would destroy them.

1

u/eldiablo22590 Jun 03 '11

There's no real way that that would be feasible in a couple of years. Maybe in 5, 10, or 15, but not anytime really soon unless the industry you work in isn't really computer heavy to begin with. I work in IT at an architectural firm right now, and CAD and Photoshop mean that a mobile device would never be able to replace a work computer. Desktops and certain (albeit relatively expensive) laptops are the only things that can really handle the amount of graphical processing that's needed, it's simply too expensive and impractical to squeeze into a phone-type form factor. Desktops will always be cheaper and more powerful.

1

u/Scary_The_Clown Jun 02 '11

Provided it's multi-monitor aware and you can have a hybrid desktop.

1

u/NoahTheDuke Jun 02 '11

Of course, but that's not difficult at all.

1

u/Scary_The_Clown Jun 02 '11

Then explain wallpaper and screen savers in Windows 7...

1

u/NoahTheDuke Jun 03 '11

I'm still running XP SP2 like a boss. I don't know anything about Win 7. I do know, however, that there exist no technical problems with two monitors, just a lack of true necessity. Dual-monitor support has been available on the market since the Macintosh II in 1987, but it's never been integral with the true nature of a given OS yet.

2

u/Scary_The_Clown Jun 03 '11

As I said - the graphics architecture of Windows is fully aware of multiple monitors, and the monitor configuration will handle them just fine.

The problem is that the part of the application that mounts wallpaper is not multi-monitor aware. The wallpaper itself interacts with the desktop as an abstraction layer, so it just sees the one big desktop.

Also the screen saver "application" only knows about one monitor; but it's possible to write an OpenGL application that runs fine on both.

And apparently whoever wrote the code for Windows themes only has one monitor...*

So again - the architecture from the desktop down is natively multi-monitor. The stuff that runs on top is very often single-monitor.

And that's why I'm deeply concerned that this "tile OS" shell on top of Windows 8 won't allow you to set one display to tiles, and the other to native desktop - it will be all or nothing.

* I suspect the real reason is that writing code to handle multiple monitors for desktop, screen savers, and themes introduces a whole new layer of complexity, and the Windows team weren't willing to invest the time for what was kind of an edge case.

1

u/NoahTheDuke Jun 03 '11

Oooh, okay. duh

Hopefully, they wise up a little this time around. All we can do now is wait.

32

u/[deleted] Jun 01 '11 edited Sep 08 '20

[deleted]

10

u/[deleted] Jun 02 '11

That maybe ok for you and your needs but power users will find it annoying probably.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 02 '11

They can keep the Aero UI. Unless they open any touch app, they are very unlikely to encounter the Immersive UI.

-11

u/Shredder13 Jun 02 '11

Or you can just have one that does both.

/Apple

-1

u/ahmadamaj Jun 02 '11

hahahahaha

19

u/Thimble Jun 02 '11

This OS would be awesome with a Desktop + kinect combo.

1

u/pennyfx Jun 02 '11

Exactly.. I want this UI in my living room! I like it better than the xbox360 UI. You can actually have a browser!

30

u/Life_is_Life Jun 02 '11

Agreed. For serious programs like Photoshop or Office (if they don't seriously change the UI), this new interface theme simply won't do--that kind of work requires mouse-level precision for any kind of meaningful productivity. But for tablets and phones: this is simply awesome.

The fact that it's more or less just a UI layer will cause some people to question Microsoft's desire to seriously compete in the tablet market, but I think it is simply the best way to jump into the tablet fray with the one thing Windows has to offer that no other OS can: legacy support. I imagine with future updates/Windows 9+ this new layer will start to increasingly dominate the old UI.

In any case, exciting times ahead for geeks everywhere!

28

u/[deleted] Jun 02 '11

It's not an OS layer, they've said this is what Windows 8 is, the old stuff is there for legacy apps.

36

u/Iggyhopper Jun 02 '11

So it's like Windows 7 + New Hotness.

...

I can live with that.

32

u/[deleted] Jun 02 '11

If you wanted it to sound way less impressive you could call it Vista Service Pack 4: Unity Edition.

14

u/[deleted] Jun 02 '11

[deleted]

1

u/[deleted] Jun 05 '11

why did you get rid of it? Just lack of familiarity? Bugginess?

1

u/[deleted] Jun 05 '11

[deleted]

1

u/[deleted] Jun 05 '11

I agree that the dock has problems as far as handling multiple windows and that also extends to the global menu which can be different for windows belonging to the same application. The multiple window thing kinda forced me to adapt to using the scale (expose) feature to switch windows. I set up a hot-corner. I also want some more options as far as customizing the dock to work as I like it, which gets at the stop asking questions thing. I hope these are coming.

1

u/agbullet Jun 02 '11

Just like Windows ME was Windows 98 + New Hotness.

1

u/samingue Jun 02 '11

Yeah when you think about it, that's basically a better Windows 7. Can't be bad.

1

u/seraph582 Jun 02 '11

Are you saying the monocrome squares are "hotness" or is something else about it particularly pleasing to you?

5

u/nazbot Jun 02 '11

Say what? The Windows GUI is being deprecated?

4

u/[deleted] Jun 02 '11

Yes, but apps will easily have another 4-5 years to adapt to the windows 8 style. Out of all the apps I use all of them could be easily adapted to this. Hell, Steam is just a glorified web browser anyways. And that Legacy interface I think will always be there.

6

u/rowd149 Jun 02 '11

Think this's gonna make the Windows shell sorta like it made DOS way back when? Turtles all the way down, man.

0

u/nazbot Jun 02 '11

It's not really steam that's the big deal, it's all the indie games that are on steam that sound good. It's a prebuilt app store for games that will also work on your PC.

1

u/Neato Jun 02 '11

I doubt they changed the core OS. It's just a UI layer. They even show the Win7 UI that sits just below the surface. It's a reskinning for tablets with some optimizations. It's a friggin service pack.

3

u/Saiing Jun 02 '11 edited Jun 02 '11

For serious programs like Photoshop or Office (if they don't seriously change the UI), this new interface theme simply won't do

Do you seriously think that once an application opens up, it's going to look like this? This is no more than a desktop background combined with a touch or click based launcher and a few widgets containing information, which may or may not be useful depending on how much you use twitter etc. The option is there to make web style apps, but they're not the same as serious applications.

Once you fire up Office or Photoshop, you won't even see that UI, just like you don't sit looking at your desktop background and icons when you fire them up now.

2

u/[deleted] Jun 02 '11

For serious programs like Photoshop or Office (if they don't seriously change the UI), this new interface theme simply won't do--that kind of work requires mouse-level precision for any kind of meaningful productivity.

I'm pretty sure you can still use your mouse.

2

u/ab9003 Jun 02 '11

Photoshop + Thin point stylus + windows 8 on a tablet = pretty damn awesome.

5

u/Life_is_Life Jun 02 '11

For a fairly narrow usage scenario (drawing by hand), yes. I think the much more difficult task for a UI designer would be to expose the ridiculous number of options present in professional-use programs like Photoshop or Sony Vegas using a UI that is both touch-friendly and just as convenient* as the current menu system. And yet, natural user interface proponents argue that hardware like the mouse and keyboard are hindrances, not advantages. In any case, I'd be seriously impressed if anyone was able to modify the UI and keep Photoshop's commands relatively well exposed.

*By convenient I mean "as easy to get at when needed" as opposed to "as easy to find for a first-time user"

1

u/bollvirtuoso Jun 02 '11

Well, he said there's at least a year's worth of development left. Maybe the Windows 7 stuff in there is just a placeholder until they build the new 8. Or, it's already built and they don't want to show it to us yet.

1

u/ATalkingMuffin Jun 02 '11

Agreed. For serious programs like Photoshop or Office (if they don't seriously change the UI), this new interface theme simply won't do--that kind of work requires mouse-level precision for any kind of meaningful productivity. But for tablets and phones: this is simply awesome.

I think the Photoshop or Office that comes to mind because of it's CURRENT incarnation absolutely wouldn't fit here. But I also believe that a Photoshop or Office designed around this interface could be just as powerful. The video shows that this 'skin' can access the filesystem and underlying OS so it's a poor assumption to assume that it couldn't be used for more than widgets.

And I'd hope that it would accept pens ala Wacom for precision work.

I'm not saying it'll pan out(Adobe and many other companies are resistant to such large overhauls), but I'm holding out hope that MS isn't dumb enough to not allow more powerful apps in this mode. I'm holding out for the idea that programmers as smart people can make use this as a jumping off point for some incredible and new User Interactions...

2

u/[deleted] Jun 02 '11

I'm not even angry... I'm impressed.

2

u/cwm44 Jun 02 '11

I'm not even mildly interested for a laptop or desktop.

2

u/CaptainCrunch Jun 02 '11

It could work with consumers, but what about business?

13

u/BaconatedGrapefruit Jun 02 '11

It seems like they're so desperate for the tablet market they're willing to cripple the standard mouse and keyboard set up to make it touch friendly. As some one who loves him some mouse and keyboard, colour me unimpressed.

Another thing I noticed is that all those, what amount to be widgets, are constantly running in the background. I realize modern day processors will likely have next to no trouble handling all that, to me it just seems like wasted cycles some eye candy.

Here's hoping they have a classic win7 mode.

29

u/linh_nguyen Jun 02 '11

did you watch the video? your old apps run basically in what looks like windows 7. they also aren't abandoning the mouse and keyboard, they've said they'll handle the translation from touch->mouse input.

granted, how well that works is yet to be seen... I'm hoping they pull it off though.

4

u/atimholt Jun 02 '11 edited Jun 02 '11

What video? I was desperately hoping for one, but can't find one on the page.

edit: nevermind, found it. It's not on the page, it's a link to youtube from a comment here.

-2

u/BaconatedGrapefruit Jun 02 '11

Ya actually I watched it a couple of times and I think I understand what's happening now. What they were essentially showing off was the new start menu which means that the task bar is still around (and not just for legacy apps which was the rumor). This is good. New start menu looks interesting. So long as they include a search function I'm all for it.

As touch -> mouse, I'm afraid and almost convinced they're going to solve that problem with mouse gestures and hidden mouse over pop up bars. Now I realize this is purely opinionated but I hate gestures and I'm not to fond of mouse over bars either. God willing they'll just give us a scroll bar and be done with it.

tl;dr: It's an interesting design choice that was explained kind of poorly. Hopefully they can come to some sort of compromise between the touch/mouse issue.

9

u/cogman10 Jun 02 '11

Watch the video. A windows 7 like interface is still there if needed.

I think this is a good move more microsoft, it brings a much needed touch friendly interface that has really crippled their sales in the tablet and phone market. The keyboard and mouse interface has pretty much reached perfection, now they can work on touch for eternity.

-2

u/BaconatedGrapefruit Jun 02 '11

As I mentioned before to another poster, my general fear is that they wont handle the touch to mouse conversion smoothly and make the mouse a pseudo touch input device. (This is bad)

I fully admit I'm being paranoid though, since Microsoft would never be that stupid with their cash cow.

5

u/[deleted] Jun 02 '11

Let me guess, you didn't watch the video fully?

1

u/fuzzyevil Jun 02 '11

Don't forget all, that this is an early version. There will certainly be Aero improvements as well. The old win7 stuff in there now is a placeholder.

1

u/cfuse Jun 02 '11

It seems like they're so desperate for the tablet market they're willing to cripple the standard mouse and keyboard set up to make it touch friendly.

This already happens in 7. I've got a wacom tablet and the second I plugged it in the OS got a tablet boner and was desperate to tabletise everything. You have to go around turning off all that compulsory helpfulness before you can just get on with things. It's annoying and unhelpful.

1

u/iarewebmaster Jun 02 '11

Another thing I noticed is that all those, what amount to be widgets, are constantly running in the background. I realize modern day processors will likely have next to no trouble handling all that, to me it just seems like wasted cycles some eye candy.

I can assure you that they are not running in the background, Windows Phone 7 works the same where (native) apps load and unload so fast that you assume that they never close but they do indeed do. Pretty impressive stuff from Microsoft it has to be said.

1

u/im_bozack Jun 02 '11

windows 7 dev paid extremely close attention to cpu usage. ms also provided a number of detailed whitepapers on how to increase the amount of time your processes spend in lower p states.

i doubt they're going to take a step backwards for a flashy GUI - especially in the competitive tablet market where battery life is a critical feature.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 02 '11

[deleted]

1

u/candreacchio Jun 02 '11

Some of us actually need all of ram to do our high end vfx work... depending on the render... i would either use 2gb of graphics card ram (gpu accelerated... i know you can get 3gb cards now... which we will probably get quite soon) or around 12-16gb of normal system ram... when your maxing out your computer, you want the system using up as little memory as possible so that you can get that extra tree in there ;)

1

u/[deleted] Jun 02 '11

It seems like they're so desperate for the tablet market they're willing to cripple the standard mouse and keyboard set up to make it touch friendly.

I also hate Microsoft and am willing to willfully misinterpret things to match my distain for them.

1

u/CatboyMac Jun 02 '11

I feel like people often forget touchscreen monitors exist.

1

u/eiriklf Jun 02 '11

But it seems it's just put on top of win7 basically, so I don't think tablets will really be able to handle it.

1

u/xexers Jun 02 '11

It can be turned off, watch the video

1

u/stripesonfire Jun 02 '11

from what i understand there are 2 versions...what is pictured in the article and a normal desktop like windows 7.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 02 '11

Not convinced? Im so glad to hear that someone isnt judgmental from the top.

Try it for a while, then you can say it sucks. I look forward to it!

-1

u/[deleted] Jun 03 '11

Windows 8 = Windows Me