You Can't Bypass the UI Formerly Known As Metro On Windows 8 444
colinneagle writes with this excerpt from Network World: "The final build of Windows 8 has already leaked to torrent sites, which is giving the propellerheads a chance to dig through the code. One revelation will probably not sit well with enterprise customers: you can't bypass the don't-call-it-Metro UI. Normally, you have to boot Windows 8 and when the tiled desktop UI (formerly known as Metro) came up, you had to click on one of the boxes to launch Explorer. Prior builds of Windows 8 allowed the user to create a shortcut so you bypass Metro and go straight to the Explorer desktop. Rafael Rivera, co-author of the forthcoming Windows 8 Secrets, confirmed to Mary Jo Foley at ZDNet that Microsoft does indeed block the boot bypass routine from prior builds. He also believes that Microsoft has blocked the ability for administrators to use Group Policy to allow users to bypass the tiled startup screen. There had been hope that Microsoft would at least relent and let corporate users have a bypass, if only for compatibility's sake."
CowboyNeal déjà vu (Score:5, Insightful)
The way to become wealthy is to.... (Score:5, Insightful)
....Make people need you. - bill gates
And the way you make people need you is to not teach them to fish, but limit what they can do for themselves and make the rest so difficult that they have to need you.
Re:and now we watch the titan burn... (Score:4, Insightful)
It's not horrid on a touch-enabled device. The problem comes when you try to use an interface obviously designed for touch with no touch input. Sure, you can use it with a mouse, but that just feels awkward and weird.
Windows 8 is probably going to be amazing on tablets, but i don't see why Microsoft tries to force it on desktop users. In their stead, I would just keep the Windows 7 UI, and put that on top of the upgraded codebase. Or if they want to tie the platforms together so badly, make the OS detect the type of device it is installed on, and use the appropriate interface (Not-Metro for touch-based devices, regular for non-touch-based ones).
Re:the thing that confuses me (Score:5, Insightful)
They want people to make what was formerly known as Metro apps to play in the new UI, because they'll also work on the tablet & phone version. The goal is to have a unified platform to boost the amount of applications on the tablet and help it sell.
Of course, making Metroized apps means they don't work in Windows 7, which now that XP is gradually going away will be the dominant enterprise OS. And of course Metro is so unpopular with desktop users that the tablets are going to get a bad name just due to bad name recognition. So it's a risky strategy at best.
I understand the choice, but I disagree (Score:5, Insightful)
I can understand why Microsoft decided to remove that option, though I disagree.
They want to the users to give Metro a fair try by living with it for a while. It is different enough where most people only see it once until they set an option to get rid of it. I've been using Windows since 3.0 and the first thing I do at a new job is get rid of the XP theme and set things up to look classic.
I think this is a mistake for Microsoft. Forced changes without easy options to go back angers users. Ubuntu and Unity are in a similar situation. Between Microsoft and Canonical trying to promote a tablet desktop on non-tablet PCs I think Apple and the KDE will be the winners.
On my formerly Ubuntu box at home the change motivated me to give the KDE and Kubuntu a look for the first time in years. Luckily I really like it and am now unlikely to go back to Ubuntu and Unity(or GNOME )
Corporate bypass is easy (Score:5, Insightful)
It's called Windows 7. You can expect it to be a lot more popular in the enterprise then 8.
If it ain't broke (Score:5, Insightful)
While I admire the desire to be really creative and shit and try to come up with a cool "new" interface, functionality still remains one of the key desirable attributes for a user interface. We can thank Apple and all the Apple wannabe copycats for useless, ridiculous new ways of doing things that are less accurate and more time consuming by design. Who said that dragging page after page of stacked thumbnails as if they were pages from a book is an improvement over a plain old list? Especially when the constraints are so narrow that you often end up "dragging" two at a time. Want an example? Here, go look for a specific [nasa.gov] picture on this site. Have fun. Oh it looks cute. It's not functional. You will waste time waving your mouse back and forth trying to get the picture you wanted. A UI is supposed to be something that helps you, not something you have to fight with.
Now I'm not saying this is how (formerly known as) Metro is going to work, I haven't used the beta, and I've only seen a couple screen-shots. But I understand that Microsoft is going for the "smart phone" look and feel, and that means lots of big colorful buttons you have to drag everywhere, and crap like this. And considering what they've done with "Ribbons" when they obfuscated their "Office" suite - and I'm talking about the 2007 version, I refuse to "upgrade" and see what else they managed to fuck up, I can't imagine this UI will be better. I remember an argument in the late 80's about how computers hadn't really lived up to their promise of greater productivity in the office. Well Microsoft, I guess we'll have to congratulate you for lowering the bar even more...
Maybe it finally will be... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:microsoft fanbois will still buy it (Score:2, Insightful)
That only works for a limited period of time. Eventually, they stop selling Windows 7, and eventually they drop support for it.
Re:If it ain't broke (Score:4, Insightful)
That aside, I disagree with your assessment of the ribbons in office. I have used MS office products since Word 2.0, and I trained people basic and advanced techniques in all office apps for 7 years, starting with 2000, then 2003, then 2007.
When 2007 came out, I despised it. I remember hunting for 7 minutes just for 'Change Case' or 'Insert Date'. I have to say however, that was because of my familiarity with the older versions. Since I was teaching the software, mostly to adults who had little if any computer experience, it amazed me how much faster and easier they learned with ribbons than with the old UI.
Once I trained my brain on both UI's I could do pretty much what I wanted in either with a minimum of fuss, and the ribbons did start to make a sort of logical sense to me as well.
Regardless, I do not see the benefit of the 'metro' style interface at all. It feels like I am losing flexibility and I hate that. So for my customers and friends, I will recommend that if they require MS, Windows 7 is where you should stay. Otherwise I have a nice kubuntu or Linux mint DVD for you.
Really Pisses Me Off (Score:5, Insightful)
I recently tried installing it on my netbook with a resolution of 1024x600 (the typical netbok resolution) and I cannot run a SINGLE metro apps because my resolution is not at least 1024x768. What is that bullshit? The apps can scale at all? They expected this to be on some older devices that supported it, so why the limitation? I know future Surface devices will have to meet a certain standard, but why throw compatibility out the window? Why not an 800x600 resolution minimum? That way you'll know everyone within a reasonable time period (not the short time period of 2 years ago where my netbook sits) can use the full features.
There reasoning I think is so app developers don't have to cater to tons of resolutions, which is fine. FOR A MOBILE DEVICE.
They expect Windows 8 to be used on Desktops but completely cripple usability.
It's true I only really use the start menu for searching programs and rarely go straight to the icon itself. But the search is even worse in Windows 8! I hit the WinKey and start typing. I type in "device" looking for the Device Manager. Nothing. There are some metro quicklinks for installing hardware and whatnot, but not the Device Manager. Not until I search "device m" does it show up. Meanwhile in Wndows 7, I type just "d" and there it is, as well as everything else that starts with "d".
Now the sad part is, I would use it if it still had the start menu. It runs wonderfully on my netbook. It scrolls smooth and everything is snappy.
But it's useless. The XP I ran before worked better.
And all this crap they're giving to corporate users is hopefully gonna hurt them. It'll run terrible, it'll *feel* terrible. Maybe they've just decided to give this area to linux like Apple has and just focus on consumers. Well that's fine and dandy but the Apple user experience on a laptop or desktop is not in any way horrendous, while Metro leaves me feeling frustrated.
Can't wait for Windows 9 now. Its sure to be good.
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Corporate bypass is easy (Score:5, Insightful)
You think Microsoft gives a damn which version of their desktop OS corporates use? Get real! All they care about it that they do use a version of their OS, hopefully in order to run MS Office and other MS applications as well, and not someone else's OS. Since pretty much any corporate with an MS desktop deployment that matters is now on MS's Software Assurance scheme they essentially have the revenue guaranteed already, no matter what version of Windows they decide to deploy.
Factor in what happened with XP/Vista on the corporate desktop and there might even be a little bit of sense here. Forcing the new UI down home user's throats, whether they want it on the desktop or not, increases market penetration and user awareness, plus it helps drive sales of Windows 8 tablets and phones, although to what extent remains to be seen. By the time Windows 9 comes along, touch screens on the desktop should be fairly commonplace, users will be familiar with the new UI, and there will hopefully be plenty of business apps available to run on it. Anyone care to bet whether Windows 7 will get EOL'd not too long after Windows 9 SP1 ships?
Re:microsoft fanbois will still buy it (Score:3, Insightful)
Oh, wait. That's not what happened at all.
It kind of did. Windows 7 is really Vista Service Pack 3. Which Enterprises are moving to. Windows XP has two years of support left.
If you hate the UI changes in Windows Vista, which Windows 7 kept, and you don't like Metro, then you are kind of screwed.
Re:Tweak-tool (Score:4, Insightful)
No we just need a good 3rd-party Metro remover, which probably won't be too far off...
Re:That's fine because I plan to bypass... (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm fairly sure the reason they're pushing it is because they get a cut of all software sold for the 'Metro' UI. The better the uptake is, the sooner their profits and level of control goes up. I posted this same thought on another article relating to this and got modded 'Troll', so I may be more accurate than some would like.
Re:The way to become wealthy is to.... (Score:3, Insightful)
This. It is basically working for the government and having to pay them almost all you earn to eat and live. Then you are left with an absolutely minor amount of money with which you might be able to use, if you don't die first.
But now people are waking up. Even the odd casual system user is realizing that Windows is actually really awful and limiting.
God forbid the mess they will cause with the release of Win8. It is going to be hated more than Facebook changes.
Besides, I think Microsoft are actually living up to the "every other windows is crap" rule on purpose.
The "bait, switch, fix and be praised" method, the bastard of all children.
In this case, make a really promising speech on the new Windows. "oh we have been listening to you, blah blah bullshit"
Release a few shiny fancy pictures.
Beta comes out, remove features as it ages.
Release. It is absolutely terrible. Even the most avid fans hate it.
Spread some FUD about articles. (yes, against their own company)
But then come service pack, fix a few issues, but still leave a horrible amount unfixed.
Same with SP2.
Then start talking about the next OS, "oh we listened to you, we fixed all that mess, hurray for us!"
Show them a really good OS.
Release it on the same base as the previous OS but with all the bugs fixed and just slap a new name on it. BAM, Windows 7 in a nutshell.
Same is going to happen with Win8 and Win9, I guarantee it! If not, I will eat my hat. Oh wait, I have no hat. Then I will get a hat. Then eat it. On air.
no way UEFI lock down will come soon (Score:5, Insightful)
as Windows XP still holds half of the market. Enterprises are still getting around to rolling out Windows 7. Those companies are not going to touch a brand new operating system to begin with, especially one that makes such a radical departure.
any OEM that does the lock down will not only lock them self's out of the web sever market but the desktop and laptop Enterprise market as well.
Re:That's fine because I plan to bypass... (Score:4, Insightful)
You already have Windows 7, so Windows 8 doesn't look too appealing to you. But if you're starting from Windows XP/Office 2003, which is being retired on April 8, 2014, then Windows 8/Office 2012/Windows Server 2012 might be the platform you are targeting as replacement instead of Win7/Office 2010. Why? Because if you're the guy who stuck on XP for a decade, then you're probably going to want to go as far forward as you can. The 4/8/14 deadline for retirement is not an accident. Microsoft left enough time for slow adopters to get the first service pack for Win8/Office 2003 when they push out their new systems.
For corporate/business/enterprise users, Windows 8 offers:
(1) upgraded version of Windows Defender baked in.
(2) faster boot compared to Win7, so it must be so much faster than WinXP, right? Hybrid boot makes this go faster.
(3) UEFI will, unfortunately, be sold as "protection against malware".
Re:and now we watch the titan burn... (Score:4, Insightful)
Windows 8 is probably going to be amazing on tablets, but i don't see why Microsoft tries to force it on desktop users. In their stead, I would just keep the Windows 7 UI, and put that on top of the upgraded codebase. Or if they want to tie the platforms together so badly, make the OS detect the type of device it is installed on, and use the appropriate interface (Not-Metro for touch-based devices, regular for non-touch-based ones).
The problem with that is that the apps are designed for tablets too. There's so much wasted screen real estate to accommodate fat fingers instead of precise mice, and assumptions that the apps will run full screen. Running them in any sane way in a desktop UI might be difficult at best.
And what about functionality that's gone away, like support for multiple mouse buttons? It won't magically reappear.
Re:That's fine because I plan to bypass... (Score:4, Insightful)
The insanity that infests Microsofts UI design people that brought forth that abortion previously called Metro, seems to have attacked the suits at Canonical/Ubuntu, such that they feel the need to shove their turd, Unity, down loyal Ubuntu users throats.. I'm a long LONG time Linux user (Slackware-1994), and a Ubuintu user since 7.04, and this idiotic abortion called Unity, makes me reconsider my loyalty to Ubuntu. For now, I'm upgrading my systems to 12.04, and putting Cinnamon DE on it.. After installing 12.04 on a test machine, I made a valiant effort to actually try to use Unity in my day-to-day workflow... NO WAY.. It had me screaming and tearing my hair out by the roots.. I gotta say, WHOever designed Unity, needs some serious mental health care.. Since I weaned myself off Microsoft's teat a while back, I wasnt too worried about what kind of idiocy MS had come up with this time, but since I'm the defacto neigbhood tech guy, I figured I'd better check it out, so took a spare machine and installed the preview.. I'm sure it would be perfect for a tablet pc but on a DESKTOP?? WHAT the hell is MS smoking???? There's just too much insanity in the world today....
Re:and now we watch the titan burn... (Score:5, Insightful)
but i don't see why Microsoft tries to force it on desktop users.
Here's my theory: MS knows desktops users will hate it. Enterprises will skip it. Win 8 is not about advancing desktops or enterprises. Win 8 is about MS trying to force their way into the mobile/touch space. If MS had developed a separate OS for tablet/mobile, it would languish just like WP7 when it comes to developers. Instead MS will force all future Windows developers to be Metro developers. Developers will have no choice; problem solved in the minds of MS.
Re:The way to become wealthy is to.... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:That's fine because I plan to bypass... (Score:4, Insightful)
All Ubuntu are doing is adopt Apples marketing methods.
The difference being this: OSX has a damn good interface, while Unity is just horrible.
Re:That's fine because I plan to bypass... (Score:5, Insightful)
You just got nailed by some MS shills because you are totally right.
MS is doing it by the MS book. 1. See someone else make a lot of money/capturing a market doing something. 2. Scramble to make a plan/software/hardware to enter the market. (Note I did not say make money.) 3. Enter market dumping a ton of resources in exchange for a some of the market share but no promise of profits. 4. Stay in market while continuing to put in their own resources. 5. Maybe...big maybe profit at some point if the income can ever dig them out of the amount spent on the overall project.
Typical Microsoft anti-business arrogance (Score:4, Insightful)
1) You have 100 employees who use MS Office. .docx docs and xlsx spreadsheets they are starting to receive? Yes.
Did they want a new interface? No.
Did they need one? No.
Do they have learn one to use the flood of
Do you have to spend money retraining them again? Yes.
Did a whole generation of macros become useless? Mostly
2) You have 50,000 employees (say, Seimens) using XP who must now upgrade to Windows 8.
Did they want a new interface? No.
Did they need one? No.
Do you have to spend money retraining them again? Yes.
Did a whole generation of software build around Windows XP become useless? Pretty much.
3) You have 1000 customers using your VB6 application. You employ 3 programmers
Did they want to learn new code? No.
Despite the promises, does their VB6 app work on 64-bit Windows 7? Yes, it just crashes every few minutes now.
Do they have to learn new code and then recode and then retest to keep their customers? Yes.
Microsoft's Motto? Who cares about how much you have to spend upgrading or training or re-developing, asshole? You'll eat our shit with a smile.
Or not, actually. Linux gets more usable each year, and android pad OSs aren't standing still either.
Re:and now we watch the titan burn... (Score:5, Insightful)
Instead MS will force all future Windows developers to be Metro developers. Developers will have no choice; problem solved in the minds of MS.
But it doesn't work that way.
Suppose you're a Windows developer, even a new one - as in just writing your first app. You can:
1. Write it for Metro, such that it'll run only on Win8 PCs and tablets.
2. Write it for the desktop, and it'll run on any Windows PC, except for ARM Win8 tablets.
Even if Surface is a roaring success (hmmm), the numbers are still like an order of magnitude different. Some people would certainly write for Metro just to get a slice of the new market before competition is in, in hopes that it'll be big enough later on. But I don't see how the majority would do that.
Heck, have you seen the uproar that happened when it was announced that VS 2012 Express will only run on Win8 and only let you develop Metro apps? That was taken back pretty damn fast.
Re:no way UEFI lock down will come soon (Score:5, Insightful)
Spoken like a true tech support guy who thinks because he knows how to install windows systems he is the be all know all of business systems. Y2K wasn't about the desktop. It was about business systems. And the desktop was small potatoes in that regard. If you have a company with 25,000 employees you can put a new desktop on every desk for less than 25 million dollars. It can be almost guaranteed that to replace the main business systems for a company that size it will cost at least 100 million dollars. In some cases like telecoms you can bet half a billion dollars or more. Desktops weren't ever the main problem of Y2K. It was the main business systems. The only reason there wasn't a melt down is because of the many, many hours of overtime in the few years leasing up to 2000 to prevent meltdown. I was working 50 to 70 hours weeks for most of 1999 (and at least 50 hours per week in 1998) so that companies with real Y2K issues (some that did $1 billion + in sales yearly) wouldn't fail. A lot of companies had to have the systems in place well before midnight on Dec 31, 1999. And many had to start implementing them years in advance. That is why there wasn't some sort of staggering convulsion on the night. One company where I implemented a big system... a very big system, needed the new system online by November 15, 1999 or they would not be producing the next day. Their entire customer base would be affected at the same time (a daily product for between 250,000 to 500,000 customers depending on day of the week, but never any less than the lower value). And that one system took nearly a year to implement. I ran two projects like that, that year (along with a host of developers, analysts, trainers, dbas, etc). If you didn't see any of that, it means you weren't paying attention or aren't as worldly as you think you are.