So many words...
"... demonstrating their belief that we are on the cusp of a paradigm shift in computing..."
Doesn't "playing wankword bingo" mean exactly the same thing?
Does Windows 8 improve upon Windows 7 for the use cases that my real world customers and users demonstrate? After a week of tinkering with the consumer preview, the answer is far from simple. Now that's what I call multitasking (click to enlarge)... First up is the ribbon. For new users to a product, my experience …
Just because you don't understand the words, doesn't mean it's "wankword bingo".
[Microsoft is] demonstrating their belief that we are on the cusp of a paradigm shift in computing.
[Microsoft is] showing everyone that they think that the our whole way of doing things with computers is about to change.
The first sentence is a shorter, intelligible and perfectly cromulent way of expressing the same idea as the second.
While we spend our lives surrounded by marketing buzzwords & creaking acronyms, but not everyone believes that a paucity of vocabulary is doubleplusgood.
Moving from MSDOS to Windows 3.1 GUI was a paradigm shift.
Moving from Windows 3.1 to Windoze NT was a paradigm shift for business users.
Moving from Windows 3.1 to Windoze 95/98 XP was a paradigm shift for home users.
Calling the change from NT/XP to Vista/Windoze 7 an upgrade IS wankword bingo. For most users it is just pricking around with the interface (most users are not aware of the changes under the hood), change for the sake of change and a total and utter cluster-fuck of a change.
Right now I have a severe pain in the butt with users complaining, asking how to do some of the simple stuff that was so intuitive under NT/XP, a simple operation like pasting plain text into a document has gone from ALT-e for edit, s for paste special mouse-click to ALT-h, v, s, mouse-click. What is it Mickysoft says about windoze? "A consistent Interface"... Bollocks!
Trevor Pott is also correct about the ribbon. For new users the ribbon increases discoverability of the most common features, great if you are typing up a school project. For a business organisation that has spent many
man person-years developing macros for power users the ribbon is a wholesale disaster, macros were embedded in document templates that had customised toolbars, it was relatively easy for users or developers to create a macro, and assign it to a custom toolbar, not so with the ribbon. What is it Mickysoft says about windoze? "A consistent Interface"... Bollocks!
So you are right garetht, Mickysoft is on the cusp of a paradigm shift in computing, but only if you consider going backwards and making the user interface more cumbersome and awkward to use. One 'app' at time is just the dumbing down of an interface. FFS, a lot of the power business users here need a dual monitor setup just to give then enough desktop real-estate to work effectively.
Double plus ungood garetht.
Windows 8 is a paradigm shift alright, for users to switch to Linux. They should change the name to "Windows GC (Grandparent and Child Edition)".
I completely agree with this author, and have been saying similar stuff since they went from XP to Vista. There was no gain in changing the interface the way they did, none. The core stability changes are fine, I could even live with the security changes. Changing the interface the way they did is stupid for no reason. I'm not adverse to change, DOS->3.1 amazing, 3.1->95, amazing, 95->98 better, 98->ME WTF?, ME->XP amazing, XP->Vista why?, Vista->W7 so, W7->W8 see ya.
They are betting the farm on this stupid crap, I mean really, is the lead designer Bill Gate's son? Why would they go against what their users (previous) want, time and time again?
Let me explain your sales figures:
Vista (yay, new windows, wait what happened here? is XP still available),
Windows 7 (maybe it will fix what they broke in Vista, no? but it is more stable, right? is XP still available)
Windows 8 (what is this, is this a Zune virus/commercial, no, it's made like this? XP is gone? can I get this with Linux installed instead)
Just make each release more stable, make a pretty theme, make some new icons, and throw in the snazzy new app or two. Don't make all of your users attempt to use a dumbed down interface.
The only thing that kept me from switching to a flavor of Linux years ago, was the functionality and solidness of "File Explorer" in Windows 9x, 200x, and XP, and most of the changes they have made since Vista have been chipping away at that reason. The new interface is going too far.
Bye Microsoft, hello Linux.
The article doesn't say that it's a paradigm shift, and I didn't say it's a paradigm shift. We both asserted that Microsoft believes it to be so.
I just wanted to make a stand against the idea that using a flourish of vocabulary was distasteful, superfluous or redundant.
If it is not the case, perhaps "Mickysoft" and "windoze" could be added to the Commentards Bingo?
"Just because you don't understand the words, doesn't mean it's "wankword bingo"."
But is isn't a paradigm shift either based on the original Kuhnian meaning of the term.
OTOH it may just be "innovation". But as an innovation is supposed to be a significant improvement, the "improvement" part is so far subjective.
so, that would be anyone who uses a computer at work then. with the possible exception of management and their PA's, who probably quite like the idea of one window on their screen at a time. and because management are the ones that appropriate the budget, it's means the rest of us plebs in the workforce, the ones who actually use our PCs for more than just Outlook, are going to get Metro shoved down our throats whether we like it or not, and then get reprimanded and demoted when our productivity deteriorates.
When I was a copyeditor I routinely had just Outlook and Word on screen at once, side by side and without overlap, with time spent elsewhere very minimal. That's probably not too common a use case though; even in the job before that I was juggling at least InDesign, CorelDraw and Outlook.
Potentially I can see this being the 'rebirth' of the WORKS style of applications.
The ones that were masters of none, jack of all trades.
Imagine the one application as your do-a-bunch-of-things-at-once-that-are-unrelated-but-you-want-side-by-side.
So in part of the full screen application theres a pane thats got an RDP client embedded, another pane thats got a browser, another pane thats got a chat client. Its ONE application but made of up different bits.
I dont like it...But that sounds like the only solution to me. Maybe an API that lets you tile them together?
> I've often wondered what a world in which MS was reduced to an also ran
Well they've been getting into bed with Nokia rather a lot of late and who'd have thought a few years ago Nokia would have taken the road to oblivion. Will the two of them set off into the sunset together hand in hand?
I do really love my Asus Transformer. The form factor works, the operating system works for that style of thing. If I want to do anything serious at all, I have to load up a laptop though... I can't see how I can really build a website properly without multiple monitors, and a couple of things open at the same time.
The annoying thing is I think Windows 8 could be great on a tablet... but an absolute disaster on a real PC. I spent four hours the other day trying to find settings, and generally just use it.
I really like some of the changes in Windows 8... but I'm not installing that on a main PC, it's not an operating system for a PC. It's a tablet OS and Microsoft didn't tell Microsoft.
And it probably means many of us will have to move to using either an unsupported OS (which many do with XP now) or start using a Server OS instead (I know several that use Win2K8 for that purpose).
Clearly, this is just Microsoft thinking that the PC will be dead longer term. Personally, that may be the dumbest idea ever out of Microsoft. And this from the makers of Microsoft Bob. :o
"And it probably means many of us will have to move to using either an unsupported OS (which many do with XP now) or start using a Server OS instead (I know several that use Win2K8 for that purpose)."
When I used Win2K8 for the first time I immediately thought "This is fine, I don't need anything fancier". I don't want Aero, I don't want Transparent windows or cute sound effects, and I want a backup solution that isn't the crippled thing that comes with Win7. I'm not a gamer, not a graphics designer and the Win2K8 interface gives me what I need.
Typed using Remote Desktop from an aging XP system into WHS2011, which is fine but comes with licensing restrictions I could do without..
"Microsoft seems to be moving to GUIless servers."
They have tried to with Server Core,. but everyone is so scared of the command line interface* that the latest recommendations seem to be to use Remote Desktop into it.
* the Windows CLI is just about the most hostile I've come across, and I've used a few. Powershell is one answer, but it wasn't available on Server 2008 Core.
"Unfortunately, the take home message is that the people who will find themselves affected by this are simply afraid of change, their numbers small enough to constitute a rounding error. Microsoft is not losing sleep over us."
This is what people said when Windows Vista came out and we all know what happened next; all of a sudden it seemed Microsoft couldn't even /get/ any sleep while Windows 7 wasn't put on the road.
What the author is also overlooking (IMO) is that Metro goes way /beyond/ the powerusers. A lot of people have only "recently" became familiar with the concept of clicking start, or clicking start and getting a whole new environment to cope with (start menu). So what about those guys ?
I don't really care about all this. My work is in the very slow process of compatibility checking all our bajillion in house apps against Win7 with a view to upgrade our bajillion PCs from XP. By the time they're brave enough to do it again it'll be another 10 years and there will be a completely different paradigm, with completely different issues.
Sometimes it's nice to live in the slow lane......good luck all!
It's going to be interesting to see how this pans out. At home I can see the attraction of Metro - but then all I do at home is answer a few emails and browse the web. At the office I just can't see Metro being any use. Like the author I'm a multitasker and often have to compare different windows or monitor multiple windows.
But MS has never really understood us it seems. Why else would it still allow newly started applications to steal the focus? It wouldn't be so bad only these days most apps take several seconds to launch so inevitably once I've issued the launch command I go off and do something else. Ten seconds later I'm rudely interrupted by some application proudly announcing its arrival.
...is the biggest BUG left in MS-Windows. Quite WHY MS have never fixed this nonsense I don't know.
Flashing on the bar - fine, poping to front and then taking the next "o" I type as OK, well that's just plain wrong, and gets me in trouble at least half a dozen times a day.
Of course learing to type without looking down would help... but where's the time for/fun in that?
Multiwindowmultitasker all the way...
Yes I agree it's a real pain. Not helped by the inconsistent use of MDI in Office 2010 - with Excel you can easily close the last document without closing Excel - in Word you can't without losing the ability to easily switch between docs. So while I launch Excel once on a Monday and it stays running until I shut down on Friday, I must launch Word a dozen times a day.
> I don't know if this is really a windoze problem as such; is it just stupid developers (mickysoft or
> otherwise) overusing system modal forms.
It's a Windows problem, because even system modal dialogs shouldn't get focus until acknowledged by the user. There's far too much risk of input accidentally going to the dialog instead of to the application that the user thought had focus. Changing focus without explicit user action violates the principle of least surprise. It's a huge flaw in the user interaction model.
And system modal dialogs are a UI design failure in the first place. Applications shouldn't be able to commandeer the input stream. If the OS needs to do it (typically because of critical failure), that's another matter; but even then it should be used very sparingly.
Even application modal dialogs are mostly a tragic failure to implement a proper control model.
-- "At home I can see the attraction of Metro - but then all I do at home is answer a few emails and browse the web. At the office I just can't see Metro being any use."
I'm not a rocket scientist at work who turns into a lolcat-spamming retard at home - in fact, it's probably the other way round.
I've had a few minutes of play with 8 & Metro, and it's horrible.
The thought that I have been left with is that M$ seem to be committed to some crazy idea of a "unified user experience" across all devices, something which even Apple realise is a stupid thing to do.
Maybe M$ will use this as some anti iStuff advertising ammo, "You use our desktop like you use our tablet, or our mobile"...
The problem is a scratch and sniff touch interface is designed for big fat fingers prodding on a small screen. A desktop machine with a huge monitor and several hundred DPI optical mouse doesn't need 200x200 pixel squares to click, you can easily hit a 16x16, and use the rest of the screen real-estate for more information and other stuff.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019