This feels a lot more responsive. No more start button is interesting. Relies a lot more on actually using the windows key (yay)

I hope I can get the accelerometer on my tablet to work on this build.

Well thats nice. Mail & calendar work perfectly with my google account

It has the mail and calendar apps now? Awesome. Mail supports ActiveSync I'm assuming, doesn't it?

It's got hotmail, google, and exchange listed. The new switcher is cool too. Win+Tab

Posting from it, It's pretty nice. I love the new explorer and taskman.
For now metro seems okay, but I can't even imagine how cluttered it would be on my work laptop which has 80 billion icons in the start menu.

I don't think I've bothered digging through the start menu to find anything since 2007 when good searching was introduced...

Same, but those shortcuts have to go somewhere.

I like everything that happened in the "Desktop" mode. Everything else? Burn.

Despite the crashing and hard lockups (it's a beta), I just can't help but shake the feeling of how massive of a step back this is for desktop computing, in Metro. Menus are completely hidden, settings tucked away where users will have trouble finding, options randomly dispersed between right click menus on empty spaces, the keyboard randomly can't be used to navigate (a focus issue), none of the apps do anything impressive...

Another thing, the apps themselves. I don't care if it's a beta or not, if this is an indication of the level of control and features we can expect out of the final apps, they might as well not even exist. Added my google account to calendar, can't pick which calendar (so I get useless holidays! Thanks!). Mail picked up that google account (without asking) and synced it. I don't even know how it's syncing, because I delete an email and it doesn't go away on GMail. I can't find out, because there are ZERO options for configuration. This makes Apple's iOS Mail app look like Outlook! Best of all, you can't pick and choose what that account is for! I use that personal account for calendar, but I don't use the email. Sucks to be me I guess!

I can only hope and pray that they have a LOT more features they haven't added yet, but considering the amount of time they have left (keeping in mind that they have to feature-freeze for bug fixing), it's not making me feel too comfortable.

Frankly, the thing that drives me nuts the most about this, is the complete lack of UI cues. There is NO indication that you can even right click to bring up, say, the menu in Solitaire to make a new deal. They're going to drop this on people who have used traditional PCs all their lives. I gather that most users will not even be able to turn off their computer.

This isn't making desktop computing better, it's forcing it into a tablet world. There's hints of something more (the lockscreen for instance is brilliant and simple), but that's it.

For once I think I agree with CM. I'll add my thoughts later after work...

I agree about the UI cues, but I imagine its something that once you get comfortable won't be necessary. The most important thing to remember is that its a 'touch first' interface and not just a tablet interface. From what I've seen and omg spoken to people at MS about ( NAME DROOOOOP) it looks like theyve done a rather good job of making the mouse work just as well.

But this isn't okay. This is the opposite of okay. Touch-first is great on touch supporting devices. This even goes against their continuous sales pitch of "no compromise". They are compromising, and the sacrifice is coming from traditional desktop computing. Here's a venerable litany of issues one faces with Metro. Some will be solvable by eventual experimentation, but keep in mind a lot of folks are simply not going to want it. Especially older folks who already hate the tiny changes Win7 introduced. It's not the fact that anything's changed, remember, it's the way they're handling this change.

1. Keyboard support is shoddy. The focus issue needs to be fixed, period. Basic keys like Windows key perform non-obvious functions (it acts as a task switcher!). Win+Tab acts like alt+tab, except it doesn't work for desktop apps. The alt+tab does. Why is this even a thing?
2. The hot corners are stealing even more from the usability of desktop apps. Already desktop apps couldn't use the bottom corners, because that belonged to the task bar. Now they can't use the upper left either. The upper right, from the tiny bit of testing I did, thankfully did not block closing applications.
3. Context menus are almost completely gone, but not quite (go delete an account from mail, for instance).
4. The right click menu that pops up completely confuses me when combined with the charms settings. I'm never quite sure where the option I'll need will appear.
5. I feel like I have to reinforce the problem with the charms menu. I can't imagine the number of support calls that will come in from people who simply can't find the option to turn the PC off.
6. Now we have two control panels. Wonderful.

I made this analogy before and I think it works still. Metro feels like Windows Media Center. Windows Media Center was designed for one purpose: to be used at 10 feet, with a controller. It has gigantic buttons, easy to read text, and more. It ran in a separate window that felt almost like a whole different OS. Windows Media Center was adequately successful at what it was designed for: HTPCs. It was NOT successful on people's own desktops/laptops. This is exactly what we're seeing with Metro, except now it's being force-fed to us slowly. They keep the old desktop around so as not to make anyone too angry, but frankly it's already annoying.

But why isn't it okay? the general 'gestures' or whatever fit in alright with the mouse. Plus, it's not like they pulled an Apple an inverted the scroll wheel by default.

Your point about the hot corners is ridiculous. Even on OSX having all 4 corners set to do something, I never had any world-ending experiences.

Anyway. Im downloading it on my laptop to attempt to run outside of a VM. we'll see how that goes

edit- and Im honestly curious why 'touchy' interfaces can't / shouldnt be for a laptop/desktop environment.

literally cannot understand how a trained graphic designer can regard windows 8 with anything other than derision.

Microsoft is committed to shipping Windows 8 this year. That basically means the OS is in feature freeze and will ship more-or-less exactly the way it is right now, less some bugs. If you like it that's good news, I guess. Not sure what apps you're gonna run on it though, because virtually every software developer alive today thinks it's a huge joke.

You're right. I hate it because it's not OSX!


or Im interested because theres potential. Its not the ****ty startmenu thats only good for search. Did I say I agreed with all of it? No. Also if you're going to call me out for my career, I don't do UX. I'm learning, but its definitely not my job

Calling you out for your career? No, dude. Relax. I just think it's funny that you're okay with it while the rest of us non-designers are clawing our eyes out at what Microsoft is doing to all of their products.

It's like everybody at Microsoft is off doing their own thing. No top-down oversight of anything, not UX, not graphical design.

ffs, Metro looks like someone did a spit-take of a half-chewed mouthful of skittles all over the screen... screens of noisy, colorful rectangles that are indistinguishable without foveal vision. Desktop icons replaced with ugly-as-sin white and transparent for no reason. Black and dark grey icons in Visual Studio so they are now basically meaningless. Ribbons finally given a real role on the desktop after they launch a whole new UI paradigm, like fixing the barn door after the horses come home.

It's just stupid. The whole thing. Stupid. Bad leadership, bad design. Bad bad bad. Lots and lots of people at Microsoft should get fired for pushing this starting with Steve Ballmer.

Windows 8 On Arm is kinda hilarious, for one thing it can't run all the old (x86/64) apps that are the reason you would want to use windows over any other OS in the first place, but the office team refused to make a metro version so they had to add the desktop in, entirely for office and IE.

These are gestures that have never, ever been used in Windows before, and they expect typical idiot users to know them without so much as a word of their existence? This isn't like swiping, swiping is a common gesture that is recognized on a multitude of devices (to the point that, if it's touch enabled, people expect to swipe).

Keep in mind that the mouse is not going anywhere. To use your wording, they are going "touch-first" in a world that is majority NOT TOUCH. It isn't touch, and it's not going to be touch anytime soon. I would be shocked if even 25% of PCs were touch enabled by Windows 9.

Microsoft has begun sacrificing their primary market, and is designing for one which is currently, at best, a niche market for them. The iPad sold great. The iPad doesn't run Windows.

I wish I could have been there at the pitch meeting. I would love to hear how hotly debated this was, or wasn't in the meeting. The whole decision to abandon desktop usability in exchange for touch, that is. Sure, they did some cute things to make it work, but you know it, I know it, everyone knows it: it's still Metro.



Does everything have to be world ending in order for it to be a terrible decision? Besides, on OS X, you already lose all four corners because of the way the damn OS is designed (windows almost never touch the boundaries of the screen). That doesn't make OS X smart, that makes it stupid. And you're using it as an example of how it's okay? It is certified, 100% obvious usability that the corners are the most usable parts of the screen. This is why Windows used them in the first place! The problem now is they are monopolizing every corner away. Programs like Firefox and Office which pray for that left hand corner, the only real safe spot left, are now screwed. Can you still use these applications? Of course! Are they as usable as before? Absolutely not! That's the point of usability.

The worst part is, Microsoft has huge usability labs. They know these issues, I guarantee it. It gets sad when you then have to reach the conclusion that they didn't care about the implications.



First let's address one issue. It's an issue that I, shockingly enough, think Jobs was right about. Touching anything on a vertical or near vertical screen for any length of time sucks. You're usually reaching across a desk, or a laptop keyboard. This isn't exactly comfortable after a few hours of work.

Then let's address the other, using a touch-designed UI in a desktop environment.

1. Gigantic buttons. Let's just completely ignore a mouse's greatest power: accuracy.
2. Gestures are non-obvious. I don't care if you can learn them. People still have to learn in the first place.
3. Wasted space in general. Sure it looks pretty, but imagine having Windows Explorer in a Metro style. In fact, according to Microsoft, this is exactly why it isn't in Metro! Dense information is common on a desktop, and Metro was never designed for it.
4. You have different use cases on a desktop. With a tablet you're usually trying to get a small number of tasks done quickly. These are also usually simple tasks. This was the strength of the iPad, remember? It wasn't a PC, it didn't try to be a PC. It has a limited feature set and it focuses on making those features as fast and easy to use as possible. Microsoft is working towards that with Metro. Desktops aren't used that way! This is the whole reason the traditional desktop even exists on Win8.

In short, I am beginning to believe that Metro on a desktop was put there not for the consumers, but for Microsoft. They want it there because they want to unify their products. A noble cause, except it doesn't work. Apple's trying too, although not as hard, and frankly every thing they've implemented has also sucked (See also: launchpad). As long as traditional desktop applications are used and supported, a Metro UI will not belong. It will be a tumor that you will be constantly reminded of. A bright, large, flashy tumor.

It should tell you something when the company that invented the word "dogfooding" isn't doing it.

I already agreed they need better gesture hinting. Touch first doesnt mean "made better for touch." Mouse actions (maybe also with win key) should feel like a variation on touch. I havent used it enough to form an opinion on it yet. Also, windows 8 has nothing to do with the ipad.

I also said nothing about touch on a vertical surface. Using 'normal' gestures on a screen thats vertical isnt a tough thing to do. I already use a graphics tablet for nearly everything.

They're treating it like it does (and frankly, that's because I struggle with the idea that a mouse and a touch interface can truly co-exist without compromise, and why should they?).


I have no idea what you mean by normal, but I'm not talking gestures with vertical screens, I'm talking the simple act of pointing.

I'm starting to warm up to metro. It works on a gaming desktop. Would probably work on a casual desktop too, I don't believe it will ever work in a professional/enterprise setting though.

^Interesting and relevant

It needs folders badly however.

Not going to try the beta, but it sounds horrible.

..based on what? I was cautious about metro but I think it'll work for me.

Based on anyone who's trying to get anything done.

I'm curious why you find Metro useful at all on a gaming machine, considering there's literally nothing in Metro for a serious gamer.

But it doesn't take anything away either, while giving me a better explorer and task manager. As well as booting faster, plus (In my experience on this specific machine) legacy games (JK, Fallout, Total Annhilation, Age of Empires 2) work on here that don't on 7. As it is now the metro screen is just a collection of shortcuts, and for me that's perfectly okay. I would never even attempt to use this on my laptop though, because the clutter from all the programs I need to use would be horrific.

On another note, I really don't get why we still have Program Files and Program Files(x86). To me it just seems to add unnessicary clutter, and confusion when a poorly designed installer installs to the wrong folder. Would it not be better organization to append (x86) or (x64) to programs that have seperate installs for x86 and x64?

This whole page of discussion has been about what it does take away (usability mostly). Of course there's benefits of Windows 8. The problem is, they're all marred by that Metro growth hanging off the side. It's really, really stupid if Metro is used for nothing more than a start menu and login screen. Because then you have to ask yourself: why have it at all?

That's fair, but in my opinion I believe that the benefits of all the under the hood changes in Windows 8 outweigh the disabilities introduced with Metro, for now anyway. At the very least I suggest people fire up a VM and give it a shot for a few minutes. It's possible with more tweaking it could work better then the start menu.
It does however need folders, badly.

Well therein lies the problem. It shouldn't be a "well all this **** stinks, but at least the task manager is nicer". It should be well thought out and implemented. Sadly, it's probably not going to happen.

The countdown to Windows 9 begins now.

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

+

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


=
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_8#Metro_UI

my gods... the HD space under the recommended hardware... and i thought 21GB for Rage was omghuge... 30 is omghuger

X-Plane 9 is 60 gigs, X-Plane 10 is 100, that ain't nothing. That's kinda weird though since the game itself (as of now) doesn't take up anywhere near that much, I guess it's for future expansions/dlc.
E: Installed it's only 3 gigs.

hahaha what it recommends 6gb ram holy **** this is the ****ing future

I don't see why not, this is 2012.

Programs don't decide which Program Files they get installed to, windows does. Further, when a 32 bit program looks for 'C:/.../program files', windows gives it program files(x86), whereas a 64 bit program looking for the exact same path will get the non-x86 version. The different folders also have different security restrictions (IIRC, 32 bit programs can write to program files(x86) but 64 bit ones can't write to program files.) It's not about separating 32 bit and 64 bit programs, it's actually for backwards compatibility.


Back on topic. There would be a lot less fuss over win8 if MS had branded it a 'tablet OS' instead of a replacement for win7.