Quote Originally Posted by dilettante View Post
The Vista/Me negativity seems to come from a herd mentality more than anything. People don't realize that they are standing alone and naked when they make these comments, rather than safe throwing stones from within a crowd.

Personally I prefer Vista to Windows 7 in many ways, and two of my machines are still running Vista. I have a retail Win7 Ultimate just sitting in a box here, and only run Win7 on a tablet that has no Vista drivers available.
You need to think about it from the 99.9% of the market that are not developers or 'computer geeks'. Vista was an atrocity. The underlying reality that XP/windows 7 is based on the same technology as Vista is irrelevant. This is like concluding that a Trabant is based on the same technology as a Mercedes, so people who knock the Trabant really are 'throwing stones'. The technology may be similar but the 'experience' is different: which comes to...

I think people have many misconceptions about metro and the start screen. The "app store" is really mostly for metro apps. Metro apps must be installed through the app store, and that is a good thing. Desktop apps can be installed through the app store or any of the traditional ways we have always installed apps. people think of "metro" and "desktop" as these 2 different modes on windows 8, and in some ways they are, but the more you use windows 8, the more that the desktop just becomes a "metro" app. I find it pretty easy to navigate around and get to what I need to get to. It did take a little time to get used to it, but everything they have done makes pretty good sense once you start using it.
That is my understanding: the desktop is 'within' the Metro environment (if I can draw a childish and old parallel: early versions of Windows was an application 'in' the DOS environment). I don't really know, and honestly - as a a user - don't care about inconsequential elements. I don't disagree that the App store will be a good thing - if it can bring some discipline to application developers. But critically, how will the experience hold for the majority of users?

Maybe I'm being too cynical, but it seems the tablet Metro interface - the desktop PC doesn't appear to be the real market for Metro - does appear to be presented for the user 'lowest common denominator'. Ironically, perhaps that truly is the average user.

Microsoft have tried tablets, previously - perhaps before it was ready, true - by trying to 'miniaturize' the laptop and add a touch screen. They were rubbish. Really, really, rubbish.

Likewise with the windows CE variants, windows mobile, Windows 6 point whatever, and so on. A developers nightmare - each incarnation was a big middle finger to developers for these devices - and an appalling 'user experience'. It wasn't surprising that blackberry took the baton with a smaller screen, but a more productive interface. Microsofts foray into such a market is not a recent one. Of course, technology has changed, hardware has changed: the capability to truly put a 'f888ing computer in your hand' is here and now, and have been for a couple of years (actually more than that).

Developers need to step out of 'developer' mode and think about what people want from a device: for example, the difference between the Zune and iPod. Both with similar technology, and while Zune didn't have an extensive market share, and in dollar terms, wasn't necessarily a 'failure' or loss leader (although I'm not so sure about that since it was kiboshed), it really, overall, didn't succeed. The question is, why? I was seriously in the market a few years ago for a music player - Zune, iPod or other. The Zune did, actually, work reasonably well with few flaws. But it didn't have....something (I'm a UI designer, and am constantly evaluating good and bad interfaces, and what makes people do the things they do with device/machine interfaces - I couldn't pin-point what was wrong, if anything).

Honestly, the bottom line, I think, is that the Windows moniker comes with too much baggage and has been typecast to a specific role.

Can Microsoft pull of the Metro Experience? Personally, I'm doubtful from a user experience standpoint, but from a Juggernaut perspective it is possible by ramming it through the desktop. It will be an uphill struggle, with an extensive marketing campaign to convince people why they want Windows on their phone. Will the Metro interface bring the [Microsoft] mobile market up, or will is drag the desktop market down?

As an engineer, I'd like to see it stick around for a bit - the Microsoft mobile development 'platform' is haphazard BS which constantly gives developers the shaft (well, I gave up during windows mobile). I don't have time to spend 110% of my time learning new development tools and platforms - I like to get things done in my primary field: developing is a tool to get a job done.

[Sorry if this rant went off-topic].