Re: Still not enough
> I've yet to see anyone explain why a full-screen start screen is a bad idea, only to keep reiterating that is.
Well for one thins, it is a very major visual distraction.
Mobile phones *have* to do it because they have so little real-estate to work with.
To have the screen change so much to perform a fairly small action is not ideal. It makes the eyes feel uncomfortable, particularly if you are having to perform it frequently to switch between apps.
The reality is that the interface is not bad for touch. Some people like it, some people don't.
The main issue is that it is patently clunky for mouse and keyboard use. Why have to "put up" with an interface that is clumsy when we have established paradigms that work well for "traditional" use.
MS have really lost the plot with Metro. In their zeal to merge touch with desktop use, they have created a monster that caters well for neither. If they'd just spent a little more time trying to come up with a programming and design paradigm that could handle both the traditional and the touch then they might have had a winner. Unfortunately, they went down the obvious and failing strategy of trying to force feed touch onto a desktop without touch capability. Although they seem to be trying to superficially back off from that position now, they have so much invested in Metro that they seem institutionally incapable of backing up and taking another direction.
Don't get me wrong, I don't criticise MS for trying something new. But if you're brave enough to try something different, you must also be brave enough to admit when you make a mistake.