There’s a lot of information coming out about the future versions of Windows – and it’s looking like Microsoft is listening to its users. First and foremost, it seems like the Metro interface will be disabled completely when Windows runs on traditional laptops and desktops; however, Metro applications will still run in windows on the desktop.
The Desktop/laptop SKU of Threshold will include, as previously rumored, the Mini-Start menu – a new version of the traditional Microsoft Start menu, an early concept of which Microsoft showed off at the company’s Build developers conference in April. It also will include the ability to run Metro-Style/Windows Store apps in windows on the Desktop. Will it turn off completely the Metro-Style Start screen with its live-tile interface, as Neowin is reporting, and make the tiled Start Menu a toggleable option from the Mini Start menu? I’m not sure, but I wouldn’t be surprised.
Meanwhile, convertible devices will work pretty much like Windows 8.x does today, switching between the two modes. Microsoft will also do the inevitable: merge its phone and tablet operating system into one product.
The combined Phone/Tablet SKU of Threshold won’t have a Desktop environment at all, but still will support apps running side by side, my sources are reconfirming. This “Threshold Mobile” SKU will work on ARM-based Windows Phones (not just Lumias), ARM-based Windows tablets and, I believe, Intel-Atom-based tablets.
These are all looking like some very decent changes, and something they should have done from the get-go. In fact – they should have never tried to shove Metro down desktop user’s throats to begin with. They should have moved Windows Phone over to NT (which they did anyway), and scale that up to tablets.
I am, though, quite interested in what the Metro-on-desktop apologists are going to say now. For entertainment value, of course!
Windows World… The biggest beta-test ecosystem I have ever seen.
Which company in the entire world can fumble its product line, in such a way, without getting into troubles ?
… Fascinating.
Answer: A virtual monopolist
The reason MS have a virtual Monopoly is more related to the fractured nature of the Linux desktop, and the exorbitant prices Apple charge nowadays.
One of those could really have capitalised on the dissatisfaction with Win8, my guess is it may now be too late.
Personally, I’m hoping they’ll allow developers to use Metro/NewUI to write native apps without “buying in” to the AppStore, sorry Marketplace model – if not I’ll still avoid targetting that platform.
Thats a big part of it. I think probably a bigger reason is you look at the *typical* Windows user (and by typical, I DO NOT MEAN those Windows users who are reading this). They don’t like computers, they don’t like to learn anything new, and by definition, learning Metro is learning something new, this requires some effort that they would rather spend on something non-computer related.
In a sense, Microsoft doomed Metro back in 1995. They managed to convince the world that the Windows95 desktop is the only way to do computing, anything else is *different*, anything else is *scary*, and OMG, anything different is OMG, *incompatible* .
People bought into this gestalt, and the rest is history. As long as this mindset exists, the typical Windows user will NEVER accept anything that does not look like Windows95.
Of course there are Windows users who will question something, but unfortunately, they’re number is probably not much more that Linux desktop users.
People bought into this gestalt, and the rest is history. As long as this mindset exists, the typical Windows user will NEVER accept anything that does not look like Windows95.
Last time I looked KDE, XFCE and LXDE all resembled Win95.
Not enough.
I can install windows on anyone’s desktop and off they go. Even with the various linux desktops, be prepared to spend a day (plus topups) to train them on it.
I could show you quite a few KDE users who use KDE specifically because it looks like Windows.
They’re probably used to Windows ME in particular – it’s widely known that if you start ME up, you never stop.
What fractured nature? It’s mostly Ubuntu and Linux Mint out there. Which are cousins anyway. The babbling about fragmentation is a cry from users of “hardcore” distros (like Arch or Slackware), who feel left out when some Linux software doesn’t officially support their distro. But they are literally the 1% of the 1%. How are their problems representative of the problems the mainstream faces?
Ubuntu’s problem is that’s it’s not compatible with itself. Same for Mint. Your proprietary app or driver may work in the current stable/LTS version, the next stable/LTS comes and it may or may not work. Investment jeopardized. And you can’t stay in the old stable/LTS because new Linux apps assume you have the latest stable/LTS.
But this is an actual problem that can’t be fixed (X.org and PulseAudio maintainers don’t care, it’s your fault for polluting your Linux installation with closed source), so Linux fans will never admit it’s a problem.
Those users had no problem learning Mac OS X during the Vista age, and don’t have a problem moving from iPad to Android and vice versa.
If OS X managed to nab the percentage it nabbed during the Vista era -despite the overpriced hardware- and Desktop Linux didn’t, then Desktop Linux has a problem.
And it’s called backwards compatibility.
And the culture of Desktop Linux ensures it will stay a problem. The general idea is that “ruining backwards compatibility in favor of getting rid of broken approaches is good” and “if you need back compat because you pollute your linux with proprietary software, it’s your fault anyway”
Edited 2014-07-01 18:39 UTC
Proprietary drivers are intentionally hobbled because Linus prefers not having a fixed driver ABI. It’s better for security, it’s less development baggage, and it encourages OEMs to put their drivers in-tree or watch the community do it and leave them out of the loop. As for applications, bundle your dependencies or suffer the whims of the platform… just like on OS X or Windows. I’d say “or static link” but with the amount of (L)GPL stuff in the Linux desktop stack that won’t work for proprietary applications anyways. Can’t say that bothers me overmuch.
Oh right, because Linux and Apple failed to keep pace with Windows in the 90s, right?
Talk about over- and mis- simplifying a situation.
Windows/Microsoft are dominant because of extensive (and extensively documented*) illegal business practises that resulted in billions of dollars of fines, which were a drop in the ocean of the profits said business practises reaped. Once monopoly was achieved and the bank balance was bursting, how was any company going to be able to realistically compete?
* http://www.groklaw.net/staticpages/index.php?page=2005010107100653
Apple had to carve out their own niche market with a brand based on quality and style by focusing on a few strong products that appealed to its fan base.
As for the fractured nature of Linux, that’s what happens when you drop tens of thousands of academic volunteers in a bucket each with their own brainchild and agenda. It has become better through the businesses that have emerged from the soup but you can’t expect hundreds of businesses to evolve a single cohesive product between them.
Despite this diverse community behind it, Linux has been stable in a way Windows admins could only dream of and hence Linux has always been strong on the server market despite intense lobbying and the investment of billions by Microsoft.
You should read a little more before dismissing open source. It is a train that even the almighty Microsoft can not stop.
Windows was still simply a better option than others in the 90s. Linux was not yet ready for casual users (many would argue it’s not ready still)
Given the growth of macs relative to the PC industry and it’s pretty clear they have capitalized. Of course the nature of a premium product is that it will never take over the mass market.
And Linux, well let’s just say that at least windows 8 still works, even if the UI is a mess.
Let’s add to that the softaware. Some people use more than a browser and a media player.
No, Open Office is not like MS Office, Gimp is not like Photoshop, Code::Blocks is not like Visual Studio, Blender is not like 3d Max and so on.
…which however preserves backwards compatibility, which is the reason it has 90+% market-share in desktops and laptops.
7 years of driver back-compat, 14 years of app back-compat.
And you can run all new apps in 7 year old versions (like Vista), as a bonus.
Beta test or not, if you want to preserve your investments in proprietary software and hardware with proprietary drivers, Desktop Linux won’t do. It’s either Windows or OS X (the latter will cost you a lot).
Back on topic: Goodbye and good ridance to Metro. Nobody would care if Metro was an option, the problem was it was actually devouring the Desktop like a frickin’ cancer. I hope Windows fanbois understand that if all Windows powerusers where like them and blindly cheered for MS, MS wouldn’t have any reason to back-pedal on their metro-fication plan.
Edited 2014-07-01 15:16 UTC
I don’t know, Apple and Google?
Both also have their share of user blow ups and have their fanboys stay behind them, whatever they do.
A list of similar product issues can be easily assembled for them.
You should have stuck with the honest part and ended with “I don’t know.”
Apple, unlike Microsoft, recognized from the beginning that touchscreen phones and tablets were inherently different than computers controlled by remote pointing controllers (mice, trackballs, touchpads). That’s why iOS, rather than OS X appeared on iPhones and iPads while OS X remained a desktop OS. Each had a UI tailored to the platform on which it was running.
Now, years later, Microsoft is finally coming to a realization that Apple had from the beginning.
P.S. Don’t ever use the term “fanboys” again. Your attempt to belittle people who prefer other platforms is childish and ignorant.
You asked for it:
– Apple Maps
– iPhone Antenna
– Final Cut Pro X
– Claris Works
– Macintosh Programmer’s Workshop
– Java/Objective-C Bridge
– QuickTime3D
And you provided nothing of substance, just as I would have expected. Apple Maps work fine. I’m flabbergasted that you would compare a maps program with the entire UI of an OS, as if to say these things were somehow analogous.
There was no problem with the iPhone 4 antenna. I used an iPhone 4 from when it was released until the iPhone 5s came out. It worked fine.
As to the rest of your “examples,” they show a level of desperation that is pathetic. “Java/Objective-C Bridge” isn’t even an Apple product:
https://github.com/shannah/Java-Objective-C-Bridge
ClarisWorks? It was huge success. ClarisWorks quickly surpassed Microsoft Works in sales and popularity. Early in 1992, Microsoft shipped a new version of Microsoft Works, with the claim “Best-Selling Integrated Application for the Macintosh” on the cover of the box. Claris Legal forced them to remove that inaccurate text.
Just shows you never developed software for Mac OS.
The Java/Objective-C Bridge was part of the first releases of Mac OS X, when Apple wasn’t sure developers at large would buy into Objective-C and thus sold Java as first class programming language for Cocoa applications.
So where it is now, after Apple failed to keep it for its users?
As for the other comments, we are talking about products not only UI changes.
Edited 2014-07-02 12:41 UTC
No, it just shows that you used the wrong term. The Apple product was called the “Java Bridge.”
But, no, I don’t do Java on Mac. I’m an embedded systems developer. I was writing real-time, multitasking kernels in assembly language, so forgive me if I don’t have tremendous sympathy for developers who refused to use Objective-C, which Apple designated as the preferred language for development of Cocoa applications. The term “bridge” in the name should have been the tip-off that Apple intended it to be a way to get from where you started to where you should be, not as a “first class programming language for Cocoa applications.”
Comparing the Java Bridge’s limitations to the Metro UI is really a stretch. I would not expect the former to receive anywhere near the development attention and company resources as the latter. Pardon the pun, but let’s compare apples to apples.
Apple decided to kill it; that it had reached end of life. The users needed to move on and adopt new tools, just as Microsoft Works users had to move on when that product reached end of life. How can you compare a successful product naturally reaching its end-of-life to the utter failure from the get-go of Metro?
We are only talking about major UI changes — comparing Apple’s approach and success with Microsoft’s. So we can talk about Microsoft Bob if you’d like, since that was another example of Microsoft re-imagining what a personal computer GUI should be.
Edited 2014-07-02 13:58 UTC
As for Final Cut Pro X, Videomaker magazine wrote:
“When Apple unveiled Final Cut Pro X back in April 2011 at a National Association of Broadcasters event, many in the audience were stunned and impressed by the overhauled user interface, the robust additions that made better use of newer hardware and operating system technologies, and for showing how the current paradigms in video editing software could be changed for the better.”
That stands in stark contrast to the horrible reception that the Metro UI received.
http://www.premiumbeat.com/blog/final-cut-pro-x-the-missing-feature…
It is absolutely fine to delete features that are important to a small percentage of users. Disappointing those users is completely acceptable and a good part of product development. That’s how Apple keeps from creating a bloated mess like Microsoft Office has become.
I’ve hated Metro on the desktop from the start, and I’m glad to see it (potentially) die on traditional PCs. I do think it works well on tablets, and fantastic on phones, and I’m glad they aren’t changing too much in that space.
My main gripe with Metro on the desktop is not with Metro itself but by the extreme discord between Metro apps and regular programs and the rather mish-mash way that some parts of the system are metro and other’s not (like the network menu thing, for one) and some are kinda both yet not really. Metro apps does not show up in alt+tab but you have to move the mouse cursor to the top-right corner to see them and conversely regular programs does not show up in top-right corner. Who the heck thought this was a good idea? Some things are configured in the control panel while others can only be configured with the PC setting in the pop-out tab thingy. It’s incredibly frustrating and I kinda wish they’d gone full Metro instead of this half-assed effort.
Also, why does it take longer to launch a simple Metro app like the pdf viewer than a full-fledged AAA game?
Edited 2014-07-02 07:15 UTC
Glad to see that they are done with the ‘Experiment’ and are getting back to common sense. Way to go, Satya…:-)
Also, I agree with Morgan’s comments…
Edited 2014-07-01 13:03 UTC
Kind of makes me wonder if Valve will feel compelled to move ahead with SteamOS, since Metro and its app store was a major flop on Windows 8, and apparently doesn’t have much of a future on the desktop.
Probably not “compelled”, but I don’t see a reason not to launch given the number of vendors that have signed on and the investment already made. It’s not like Microsoft suddenly isn’t a threat to their business model anymore.
I have configured my machine so I normally don’t see Metro at work where I do all hardcore computerstuff with a dozen open programs most of the time and multi-tasking all the time.
But at home I like having an appstore with a very simple install/update/uninstall mechanism and sandboxed full screen apps (or sometimes a side by side). Microsoft seems to have gotten this just right with Metro and I don’t have any big complaints about it.
What I DO understand though is that the switching between these two environments is a horrible experience and that people that live on the Desktop hate the switching. I also dislike the two-of-everything idea (which IE,pdf-reader,photo-app is the default?)
I see no reason at all why Metro would be removed from “traditional hardware”. It isn’t all about touch, it is about simplicity (Metro) versus power (Desktop)
What I would like for a future Windows is for a simple switch to enable/disable Metro and Desktop
(do I qualify as a Metro-on-desktop apologists now? And are you entertained Thom?)
Edited 2014-07-01 13:29 UTC
Ya, I hope they do something with the desktop side in this regard and many other things, like multiple clipboards, virtual desktops, etc. 3rd party utils help fill in a lot of these holes, but when you have to use Windows in a locked down/corporate environment, it is a miserable, miserable experience.
I know you meant that tongue-in-cheek, but no, you’re just giving a valid account of your experience. And honestly, installing a Start menu replacement and avoiding the Start screen makes for a highly usable Windows 8/8.1 environment.
There are still some serious usability issues when trying to use a traditional mouse or trackball though. The whole “grab the top of a fullscreen Metro app and drag to the bottom to close” function is maddening without a touchscreen. Simply put, they didn’t give two shits about traditional desktop users when they came up with Metro on the desktop, as if somehow all home computers were magically transformed into mouseless, touch-based machines.
Again, I’m glad to see them coming to their senses.
The funnier part of Metro on desktop is that you cannot use it on a full touch environment neither.
Since 8.1 Update there is a close button and I actually never had trouble to drag-down with my mouse (but prefer the close button now, although Alt+F4 is still my main method).
And I think you can do everyting in 8.1 just by touch. They even changed the bootloader to support touch. That doesn’t mean it all works well or convenient though. I would hate to use touch on the commandline and even VLC is hard to use with touch (WAY to small targets)
I don’t understand why people think that it is keyboard+mouse OR touch. I use touch as a 3rd control option that works better than keyboard+mouse for some things.
Edited 2014-07-03 08:08 UTC
This just confirms the Windows Pattern(r) is still in effect.
I have to say though, win8 was much better than Vista.
Several home and small business users came to me when Windows 8 started appearing on new laptops. Everyone wanted it removed or modified to get their Start menu back. Most of those people finally gave up on Windows 8 and switched to Linux. They seem happy and unlikely to switch back. Microsoft really shots themselves in the foot with Windows 8 and I don’t think reverting their changes will bring back the users they lost.
What if Metro and Desktop were installed independently by choice during setup? Let users pick which they would like, or even both. Linux distributions do the same thing and allow users to choose any or all desktop environments from a long list of choices.
As casual users have become accustomed to the child-like “app and tiles” type environment on their portable devices, they may actually prefer that on their basic desktops and laptops too.
Serious computer users are still going to reject Metro as a primary environment (Metro on a 24″ wide screen with a keyboard and mouse is a complete unusable fugly mess), but might still have occasional use for it.
Edited 2014-07-01 14:51 UTC
hallelujah! They’ve seen the light and reason has prevailed!! Metro on the desktop made no sense!
“Will it turn off completely the Metro-Style Start screen with its live-tile interface, as Neowin is reporting, and make the tiled Start Menu a toggleable option from the Mini Start menu? I’m not sure, but I wouldn’t be surprised.”
“The combined Phone/Tablet SKU of Threshold won’t have a Desktop environment at all.”
The obvious question here is what is to become of convertibles such as the Asus transformer line? Toggleable? It’s rather unclear still, as the two above quotes seem to cancel each other out.
Is no-desktop an ARM only feature?
What am I missing?
I would like to know too. I have a Surface RT and I for one like the desktop environment for using it as a bit more than a tablet when I need to and attach the touch cover. Plus the Full version of Office 2013 is only in the Desktop environment not in Metro. I don’t want to lose that.
I at least want the option of using the Desktop on my Surface so I guess I won’t be upgrading if this is true.
Now on my desktop PC, that is another matter. As has been stated already there is a disconnect between the Metro environment and the desktop that is just plain bad design, IMHO. I hope this is finally fixed.
Edited 2014-07-03 19:07 UTC
I agree, there are not many metro apps out there and the desktop mode on my RT device i thought was a strong selling point as i was able to manage storage and just generally look after my device, i found it really good.
Im a bit worried about this news as i don’t know if the quality of the metro apps will be a compelling draw!
The best I can say about Metro is that it never got in my way and it was easy to ignore, I liked the fact that I could just hit the win key and I would have all my shorcuts at hand, for someone with years of computing experience like me, Metro is not really a problem, but I can see how people who doesn’t have the same experience I have could hate it.
But, let’s not confuse Metro with the whole Windows 8.1 experience, Windows 8.1 is faster and less resource hungry than Windows 7, the problem relies in the fact that they used the Metro applications as default to open documents and it was a really bad idea, because Metro applications are designed for tables.
Edited 2014-07-01 18:26 UTC
For any new OS there’s a “catch-22”: users don’t want it because there’s no apps, and developers don’t write apps because there’s no users.
To help break the “catch-22” for Windows Phone (where they needed apps but didn’t have market share yet); Microsoft told normal desktop application developers (where they had plenty of market share already) that everything is going metro, hoping they’d get apps that will run on desktop and phone (to use on phone).
I don’t think metro on the desktop was a mistake at all – I think it was a cunning strategy.
Of course now Windows Phone has apps Microsoft don’t need this any more, so they’re pretending they’ve changed their mind (even though I suspect this was their intentional from the beginning).
This calls for a small modification to Hanlon’s razor…
Never attribute to cunning that which is adequately explained by stupidity.
Well I think this was Microsoft’s stategy, just not a particularly good one.
Windows Phone still has a slender market share but they have pushed people away from desktops/laptops.
How many times can they get away with regular users buying a new computer with Win8/Vista/ME only to find the upgraded software is a lemon?
Apparently I am one of those, and I would say that I hope they Metro will be off by default, not permanently. It is a good thing that Microsoft ultimately started listening to users, but biting supporters in the process is not the best idea they could come up with…
now all that is left is for Gnome to admit that Shell has failed and tablets are not the future of desktop and we can go back to the world as it was.
But I love GNOME Shell the way it is =).
Do you love that it has become a very reduced niche desktop for selfish users and developers though?
Is not that to me, in the contrary, I’m very productive with it, actually I’m more productive using GNOME Shell than with any another desktop.
Edited 2014-07-02 22:49 UTC
I’ve found that Windows 8.x can be “fixed” with four little tools, three of which are completely free.
ClassicShell – (free) restores the Windows 7 start menu and bypasses metro to log directly into the desktop upon sign in; fixes some annoying Explorer issues
Desktop Gadgets – (free) restores the desktop gadgets such as clock, calendar, etc. and includes most popular gadgets
Aero Glass for Win8 – (free) restores translucent Aero effects as they were in Windows 7 & Vista
Stardock Modern Mix – $5.00, causes Metro apps to be windowed on the desktop
Whenever someone asks me to help them get to grips with Windows 8.x, I install these tools and Windows 8.x magically reverts to the way things were in Windows 7. Not one single person has asked me to switch back to native Win8.
Edited 2014-07-01 23:10 UTC
Isn’t it interesting though that the reason why Classic Shell was invented was because people hated the Start menu in Windows 7?
by far my favourite part of windows 8/8.1.
for metro itself i just disable access to the store in policy and delete the apps using powershell. it’s like it was never even there.
Thanks for the power hell tip..
I might just update now, half of the metro apps dont work with uac disabled for security.
Why not make the windows start menu toolbar stays on permanent when going in metro mode…it almost work with 8.1 ? and Why not make metro apps menu like apple and gnome did it would made windows lot better than windows 7…Why on earth removing shadows on borders on windows it look amazing on Vista and 7 on aero glass desktop..???
What happen to the Art department ???
Should beauty would be the key of success on business ???
Edited 2014-07-02 04:57 UTC
I can see why they would move the Metro tech to the desktop.
Resolution independence is on its way. People like it on their phones and tablets. They want it elsewhere too.
Metro was supposed to solve this.
I can see them using the nuts and bolts of Metro, but with a desktop specific design language.
This might still force Valve’s hand as MS might not want to let go of Marketplace yet.
Metro was a bad idea for Desktop PCs since day one. As a touch interface its great, I find it perfect on my Dell Venue 8 Pro. Sometimes the gestures can be a little wonky but on the whole its one of the better touch interfaces out there. On one of the PCs I have on my desk at work, not so much. If that PC had a touch screen monitor, maybe it would be good, but as it stands its not the best application to use with keyboard and mouse.
Windows 8 should have prompted a choice during installation and/or first run for system behavior. Option 1 would have been for touch, option 2 for keyboard and mouse. Option 1 would take users to Metro by default, option 2 would take users to the explorer desktop with a functioning start menu and on that start menu there should have been a button to get to the Metro UI. Finally, users should have been given an option to configure this on the fly.
I’m sure that the original intention of the push for the Metro UI was to promote people to get touch screens for their PCs. However the problem is that touch screens are still relatively expensive. Granted, my touchscreen at home was pretty cheap for around $300.00 USD after a Groupon for a refurbished Acer DA220HQL Android ‘Smart Monitor’. But thats the cheapest decent sized touch screen I’ve seen.
The reality for most people is that Windows is pretty good.
I often watch my own behavior. I still use Firefox.
Many people have moved onto chrome. But I stick with firefox. It’s not out of some odd form of loyalty. It’s really a few things
1. My data is on there with sync
2. I like LiveBookmarks (RSS feeds as bookmarks)
3. Bookmark toolbar
4. My current stack of addons/plugins/settings
5. My firefox knowledge base of tricks and settings…
Now, even if another browser implemented all these. Or even if they met one of my needs ‘better’, I’ll still stick with firefox because it is good enough. A browser would have to vastly exceed what firefox is doing for me to switch to it.
The same is true of Windows. Every version of windows has issues and things I have problems with. Yet, none have made me change. Heck, for all the issues with Windows 8, it was nothing start8 and some reg fixes wouldn’t solve. Heck, I had to do a fair bit to get my wireless working. For some reason the wrong driver gets installed, so only wirelessG works. And I had to work around some legacy VPN softrware.
I know that if I switched full time to Ubunutu or OSX, I’d probably spend just as much time learning, fixing things I don’t like, finding alternatives…
And in the end, Windows works for me. I can run eclipse, dev env, office, games, web browser, all my random apps… and fireup an ubuntu vm if I feel like it.
And hey, now it looks like they’re going to fix the windows8 desktop experience, so I don’t need to install start8. All the better.
Sure, it costs me money, probably $25/year amortized. But that’s pretty cheap considering I waste money on coffee or random snacks or watching movies…
Edited 2014-07-02 16:18 UTC
I could see this coming a mile away. The metro interface just makes no sense for very large screens.