Windows 8 shocker

Started May 7, 2013 | Discussions thread
(unknown member) Contributing Member • Posts: 946
Re: If true it's a good step, but Microsoft has other UI problems

Simon Garrett wrote:

There's a great deal of evidence, notwithstanding your preferences, that a large proportion of desktop and laptop users don't like Metro.  They may be "emotional", they may be reluctant, they may be resistant to change, but customers don't have to justify their likes and dislikes.

Ha, ha, I think you actually missed my main point but whatever.

I am not sure exactly what percentage of Win 8 users don't like the new interface. I know millions of users are already using it and we don't quite hear them. There are some who are extremely unhappy with the new UI and
constantly complain about it on online forums. The rest even if not quite content with the new UI have started using it, getting used to it and be content with it. We are all entitled to our opinions but I see anger and aggressivity in the tone of some of those who dislike the new UI. Those who are ok with the new UI on the other hand, generally don't come online to express themselves.

On another note, I am all for companies listening to consumers and getting feedback from them on their products. However, this doesn't always lead to progress and improvment as sometimes consumers are reluctant to changes and improvements if it is against their old habits (like when the users here on dpreview who complained about having video recording option on digital still cameras). So a balance is indeed needed.

Tim Cook has an axe to grind, of course.  So do you.  So do I.  But his comments on Metro, biassed or not, chime with those of many critics of W8, which is why malch quoted the article, and why I quoted the specific comment.

None of us personally knows Tim Cook. You don't know me and I don't know you. I know for sure people vary in their level of greed and I know these wealthy big companies are more greedy than I can ever be. Whether his comment suits your or Malch sentiments against Windows 8, I would still not consider it worthy of discussion or even quotation.

You may like Metro, but I don't believe a UI designed for bit fat fingers on a small screen works well on a larger screen with keyboard and pointing device.  It throws away the advantage of a high-res screen and high-res pointing device.  Nor is there any compelling logic to suggest the same UI benefits users.  Users cope pretty well with different, appropriate UIs in different contexts.  Even "emotional" users.

I don't really see why you think Windows 8 is solely designed for touch screens. You, nor anyone else has ever brought a convincing argument that Win 8 is less efficient than the previous Windows for desktop usage. Tell me what previous windows with their start button can do that Win 8 cannot do?

IIMO, Win 8 is a hybrid OS designed to work for both desktop computers and touchscreen systems.  I have never used it on a touchscreen so I cannot attest to how good it is for that. I have solely used it on my desktop and I find it better than the previous windows. There is only one thing: there is some vidsual incoherence when switching back and forth between the full screen
metro and desktop. MS could have improved on the visual aspect by using tiles resembling desktop icons (more 3d buttons rather than flat tiles) and could have used better options instead of the solid color backgounds
(having an option of using a background image behind the tiles would have been great). But this isn't about practical functionality but the look.
Just for one fact: in metro, the user can customize the tiles according to his favor and preference. I can remove any preinstalled tile from the default screen and add tiles for the applications I want. I can resize
and rearrange the tiles. The new possibilities were not possible in the old start menu or were much limited. Metro start menu has given me more freedom of chocie than the old start menu which, I value. Moreover,
not having to navigate through tiny icons in the small start menu window in order to find and activate the application I want,( like in the past) is convenient and saves me time.

However, this isn't about users and user benefit.  I quite agree that Metro is MS's response to Apple's app store and ipad/iphone UI.  But they'll quite possibly fail even on tablets and phones as Android is likely to make a walled-garden for software difficult to sustain.  It offers nothing to users or 3rd-party developers.  And MS are even more likely to fail with Metro on laptops and desktops, as Metro is not a good UI for this context (IMHO, and in the opinion of most users, it would seem).

MS underestimated resistance from users who didn't like a rapid change in what they were used to see. But I doubt that will be a reason for MS to fail. Whether these users are in the majority, I am not sure either. MS is late comparing to iOS and Android for about five years or so. In the age of Internet, five years is enough for masses to settle on the new idol (iphone or else) feeling they would be at serious loss if they didn't own one.

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow