I'm thinking this fellows opinion is a minority one, and his psychology degree must have come in the mail so he probably isn't licensed to diagnosis people in my state.
Not a fan of Windows8. The 10 preview I played with was an absolute step in the right direction.
> You can design user interfaces that work for both, and mouse-driven systems profit from many of the UI changes that make for good touchscreen user interfaces — a clean, simple interaction design and large click targets, for example.
I don't think this is true. With a mouse, you can easily make very precise small movements, so a tiny button positioned right next to where you already have the mouse cursor (perhaps, for example, over another tiny button) is very easy to reach. A tiny button farther away is much harder to hit because you make larger and less precise movements to get there from where you were. The size of the target is not as important as its proximity to the cursor's current position.
On a touch screen, with no relative movement, the situation is pretty much the opposite: If you have tiny touch targets right next to each other, it's very hard to hit the right one, and you can't see if the cursor is positioned correctly before you click. If they're farther apart, it's easier to hit the right one, or at least harder to hit the wrong one. (And obviously larger targets are better.)
The biggest mistake that Microsoft made was calling it Windows, if they called it Surface instead of only their hardware that way, and kept on selling windows non crippled for the desktop, they probably would have gotten away with it. Nobody cares if they share the same engine under the hood.
He sounds unicorny towards Windows 8. Nobody ever uses Windows 8 in Metro mode (because no, your PC is not a tablet), and the way which you randomly fall in and out of Metro is atrocious. A lot of things they just did not bother to think about; for example, wi-fi connection dialog overlays keyboard layout indicator, ruining hope of correctly inputting password.
The whole Windows 8 thing is embarrasingly make-believe.
Exactly. I like Metro & Desktop but whenever the two mix (randomly) is just mad. It's one of the most horrible experiences I currently know in computing and I have no clue why people think this is ok. Smart people at that. It feels like they never tried it themselves after delivering their product. It drives my absolutely bonkers and keeps me from using the Surface more than my macbook air & ipad air. Yes I have to carry around 2 devices but at least I won't just go and break them in 2000 pieces out of frustration. I love the hardware of the Surface3 pro, but for me, exactly that point ruins Windows 8(.1) completely. Is 10 better?
Windows 8 was a failure in the enterprise desktop market. Loss aversion meant that corporations did not want to train their staff to use an unfamiliar UI, and the great majority of corporations either postponed upgrades or stayed with Windows 7.
With Ballmer gone, Windows 10 can return to the familiar Windows 7 look and feel for enterprise desktop purchasers - so hopes Microsoft.
When the iPad and iPhone first dominated their respective markets, Ubuntu was first to respond because Linux evolves faster than Microsoft. The Unity Desktop was the canary in the coal mine with respect to how desktop users would react at the software vendor's natural desire for UI convergence.
Notably, Steve Jobs and Apple, maintained two UIs, one: MAC OS for the desktop and laptops, and two: iOS for touch/mobile. Apple routinely mocked Microsoft, and ignored Ubuntu as non-competitive.
Desktop and Laptop, e.g. keyboard and mouse, multi-monitor, are better for content creation, such as writing software.
Mobile - touch and voice and camera - are better for content consumption, messaging and always-with-you intelligent services, e.g. navigation.
Tim Cook at Apple famously said Windows 8 was converging a ‘Toaster and a Refrigerator’.
I really don't care about Windows as I am a Docker application developer, and routinely use Ubuntu Unity which I grown accustomed to. Good luck Microsoft on Windows 10.
However, here's the thing: Windows are useful. An UI which pretends you shouldn't use them isn't good for anything complicated, when you use more than one application at a time.
Hierarchical start menus are also useful, for that matter.
I'm increasingly convinced that overlapping Windows are not particularly useful (they are better than one-thing-maximized-is-the-only-option), but tiled windows are very useful.
Tiles are useful. Using a tiling window manager or splitting Metro or vim with splits or emacs with splits you see what's useful. Windows is not imho; tiling very much is. Tiling with virtual desktops.
Edit: To me Metro tablet size without desktop or iOS with tiling would be the best.
This is why Microsoft introduced their Signature series. If you purchase any hardware with that identifier, there is no OEM bloatware. I picked up an HP Stream for my daughter and I was shocked to see it really was _just_ Windows and nothing else.
Everyone loves consistency, but it really is a fools errand to try and make a universal OS experience. Desktops with keyboards and mice require different design paradigms than touch screens with no physical buttons. Vendors like Microsoft that try and cater to both will simply face an eternal tug of war, and nobody will end up happy.
Very few people on a tablet want to touch-type code for eight hours a day. Very few people on a desktop want to hold their hands in the air tapping their expensive monitors for eight hours a day.
What Microsoft needs to do is produce a clean "OS base" (kernel, drivers) used by both, and then produce two separate products: Windows Office (for desktops) and Windows Metro (for touch devices.) They should have never tried to merge the UIs together.
This article presumes that Windows 8.x was a great tablet OS. Since Windows 8 failed on mission one: Getting people to switch from Android and iOS. Objectively some people may love it--I'm not one--but from a business viewpoint it failed on tablets and it was hated on the desktop. The only real surprise isn't that MSFT is returning to an Aero style desktop, it's that it took them so long to do so.
Readit News
Not a fan of Windows8. The 10 preview I played with was an absolute step in the right direction.
I don't think this is true. With a mouse, you can easily make very precise small movements, so a tiny button positioned right next to where you already have the mouse cursor (perhaps, for example, over another tiny button) is very easy to reach. A tiny button farther away is much harder to hit because you make larger and less precise movements to get there from where you were. The size of the target is not as important as its proximity to the cursor's current position.
On a touch screen, with no relative movement, the situation is pretty much the opposite: If you have tiny touch targets right next to each other, it's very hard to hit the right one, and you can't see if the cursor is positioned correctly before you click. If they're farther apart, it's easier to hit the right one, or at least harder to hit the wrong one. (And obviously larger targets are better.)
The whole Windows 8 thing is embarrasingly make-believe.
http://bgr.com/2014/02/04/windows-8-adoption-analysis/http://www.crn.com/news/applications-os/300073591/windows-8-...
With Ballmer gone, Windows 10 can return to the familiar Windows 7 look and feel for enterprise desktop purchasers - so hopes Microsoft.
When the iPad and iPhone first dominated their respective markets, Ubuntu was first to respond because Linux evolves faster than Microsoft. The Unity Desktop was the canary in the coal mine with respect to how desktop users would react at the software vendor's natural desire for UI convergence.
Notably, Steve Jobs and Apple, maintained two UIs, one: MAC OS for the desktop and laptops, and two: iOS for touch/mobile. Apple routinely mocked Microsoft, and ignored Ubuntu as non-competitive.
Desktop and Laptop, e.g. keyboard and mouse, multi-monitor, are better for content creation, such as writing software.
Mobile - touch and voice and camera - are better for content consumption, messaging and always-with-you intelligent services, e.g. navigation.
Tim Cook at Apple famously said Windows 8 was converging a ‘Toaster and a Refrigerator’.
I really don't care about Windows as I am a Docker application developer, and routinely use Ubuntu Unity which I grown accustomed to. Good luck Microsoft on Windows 10.
However what I dread most are the vendors and their crapware bundeling programs. Uch.
Hierarchical start menus are also useful, for that matter.
I'm increasingly convinced that overlapping Windows are not particularly useful (they are better than one-thing-maximized-is-the-only-option), but tiled windows are very useful.
Edit: To me Metro tablet size without desktop or iOS with tiling would be the best.
Very few people on a tablet want to touch-type code for eight hours a day. Very few people on a desktop want to hold their hands in the air tapping their expensive monitors for eight hours a day.
What Microsoft needs to do is produce a clean "OS base" (kernel, drivers) used by both, and then produce two separate products: Windows Office (for desktops) and Windows Metro (for touch devices.) They should have never tried to merge the UIs together.