
Windows 8 — Disappointing Usability for Both Novice and Power Users - thomaspark
http://www.useit.com/alertbox/windows-8.html
======
kyro
This is anecdotal, but I walked into a Windows store not too long ago to try
Windows 8 on a tablet, and I was blown away at how terribly unintuitive it
was. There were absolutely _zero_ visual cues to indicate where features were,
how to move around the interface. _None._ Now I don't know if that's changed
since then, but the experience left me with such a bad taste that I told
myself I would never give it another 5 minutes' chance. Throughout the entire
demo, I was asking the rep to show me again how he accessed certain menus,
switched views, etc.

My technologically-illiterate parents went from zero to road geeks with their
iOS devices in a matter of days. Had they been given the Surface, I imagine my
legs would be in constant spasm from all the frustrated and confused phone
calls I'd be receiving.

~~~
rogerbinns
> ... how terribly unintuitive it was.

I'm a little uncertain how future proof such a claim is. I used computers
before mice became common. Back in those days mice actually came with tutorial
programs showing you how to use a mouse! Nowadays we would consider it
somewhat absurd and no mice are shipped with such programs. Even typing tutors
used to be a very popular category of software.

When I got my first smartphone it was not intuitive that such a thing as a
long press existed. If you do not know about it, it can be extremely
frustrating doing some actions since you will never find them. Some other cues
are almost invisible - for example scroll bars tend to be very narrow. Multi-
touch, pinch zoom etc are also all unintuitive before you know about them just
as double clicks and drags were earlier.

There are no real cues for mouse interaction (eg double clicking), nor touch
interaction (eg long press). But we don't call apps unintuitive - those
interactions just became the new normal. You only need to see them a few times
to pick up on them.

Perhaps Microsoft needs to have TV ads etc (dare I say a tutorial program) so
their interactions become the new normal?

~~~
simonw
But mice are STILL horribly unintuitive. One of the reasons iPads have taken
off so well amongst people who haven't previously been able to use computers
(I have anecdotal experience with an older relative, but there are plenty of
other stories out there) is that the relationship between the mouse and the
pointer on the screen is pretty bizarre. Touch interfaces are better because
direct manipulation is much easier to understand.

Double clicking is even worse (I have a relative who has been using computers
for 20 years and still double-clicks on links on web pages). Thank goodness
that's slowly being flushed out of modern interfaces.

------
zainny
Personally, I think "Metro/Modern UI" is a complete train wreck. While it
initially received a great deal of praise from the tech press for being
"unique" and "fresh", my suspicion is that a lot of the praise was incredibly
shallow and based purely on aesthetic appearance and not usability.

This suspicion has been confirmed repeatedly from my own experience using
Windows 8 and watching others use it as well.

~~~
kenjackson
My experience has been quite pleasant and has been for others I've seen use
it.

Usability studies of this sort almost always find tons of problems in anything
that is new. For example, remember the iPad study by the same group?

 _For the last 15 years of Web usability research, the main problems have been
that users don't know where to go or which option to choose — not that they
don't even know which options exist. With iPad UIs, we're back to this square
one._

But it's even worse, because look at the study participants: _We tested 7
users — all with at least 3 months' iPhone experience — but only one was an
"experienced" iPad user._

These were people who were well versed with the iOS UI already! And they still
found the iPad hard to use! Did they really really find it hard to use? I
doubt it. But that's how usability studies work. You have a short amount of
time with new technology and are primed to find flaws in it. And your're
primed to be unforgiving (just the nature of being in a study).

I recall being in school when cut & paste first started to go mainstream. The
number of people who didn't find it or understand it would be considered
bewildering now. Now its a common pattern. But it is pattern. No one
complained they couldn't find it, but were happy when they did. And taught
others.

All these things are patterns. Bring any non-trivial product into a lab:
Chrome, iOS, AppleTV, Android, Windows 8, Boxee TV -- you'll find that people
will struggle more than you think. But one thing you learn when you do
usability work is that there's a distinction between discoverability and
usability.

In my experience Win8 has some discoverability holes, but once you learn a few
patterns its usability is quite good.

BTW, here's a review of the Surface for real people:
[http://betanews.com/2012/11/14/microsoft-surface-review-
for-...](http://betanews.com/2012/11/14/microsoft-surface-review-for-real-
people/)

His summary? _Surface is fantastic._ Why the difference? If you are willing to
spend an hour using it, rather than trying to note usability flaws, you'll
find it a rather nice experience.

Jeff Atwood says, "I'm a little embarrassed to admit how much I like the
Surface RT. I wasn't expecting a lot when I ordered it, but after a day of
use, I realized this was more than Yet Another Gadget. It might represent a
brave new world of laptop design." Jeff is someone not looking to score points
by pointing out obscure design issues ala Marcos. He wants a device he can
use. I think we'll see for this class of users (which is much larger than the
Marcoses of the world) that they'll resonate with Atwood's take
(<http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/2012/11/touch-laptops.html>).

~~~
kvb
Indeed. I find that these studies really assess _learnability_ more than
_usability_. Of course, learnability is one aspect of usability, but I'm more
interested in how users fare after spending some time with it. Personally,
I've found Windows 8 to be pretty enjoyable to use, after a bit of a learning
curve.

------
Cbasedlifeform
Wow. Scathing:

 _One of the worst aspects of Windows 8 for power users is that the product's
very name has become a misnomer. "Windows" no longer supports multiple windows
on the screen. Win8 does have an option to temporarily show a second area in a
small part of the screen, but none of our test users were able to make this
work. Also, the main UI restricts users to a single window, so the product
ought to be renamed "Microsoft Window."_

I wasn't aware of this "feature"...what a disaster.

~~~
ryanmolden
Metro apps, or whatever they are calling them nowadays, do take over the
entire screen, desktop apps are as they have always been and can be opened as
many as you like, and arranged as you like given your screen real-estate. I
routinely have 5-10 windows open at any given time on my desktop that is
running Windows 8.

~~~
daigoba66
To me it was pretty clear that this article was primarily reviewing the
"modern UI" part of Windows 8. I think your comment reiterates the point that
the "modern UI" has no place on the traditional desktop. I too use Windows 8
everyday and have successfully avoided this new UI (except for the now, in my
opinion, broken desktop search). Windows 8 is not a failure, but this new UI
might be.

~~~
ryanmolden
Yes, I just wanted to make it crystal clear for people that had never used it,
and thus would be even less aware of the "split" (or perhaps misunderstanding
it). If people dislike Windows 8 that is fine, I am kind of lukewarm on it
myself, I just prefer people to come to those conclusions off actual use
experience and not FUD or mis-quoting/mis-understanding an article. Not saying
anyone in this conversation did, but I have seen enough posts on the internet
from people that appear to have never used X, decrying X based on some
FUD/misinformation, I try to nip the opportunity in the bud when I can.

------
jsz0
Most of the problems with Windows 8 are typical Microsoft errors. This may be
the most radical example of them but basically it fits into the same patterns.
The UI revamp on the desktop side was almost entirely unnecessary from a
user's standpoint. It only exists to promote Microsoft's own self interests by
promoting Windows phones/tablets and attracting developers to the new
platform. It’s the type of move that would have worked quite well for
Microsoft in the 1990s when users had very little choice. With more
competition now any bit of friction you introduce can drive users away. Either
by switching to a competitor’s product or not upgrading.

The other big typical Microsoft error was rushing out buggy/slow software and
betting they would have plenty of time to fix it later. This worked fine for
decades but user expectation’s have increased as often happens. If someone re-
released a 1950s era automobile consumers would be horrified at how unreliable
it was. Totally acceptable in the 1950s. Totally unacceptable in 2012. For its
size and complexity I don’t think Winodws 8/RT is unexpectidly buggy/slow it’s
more that the competition had the luxury of a 5-6 year head start slowly
evolving their operating systems. Microsoft had to do it in 2 years. So you
get all the pain of bugs upfront instead of spread out over a more tolerable
time table.

Ironically the biggest mistake is very atypically the type of error Microsoft
makes. They rushed people into this new platform quickly without doing much to
soften the ground or ease users over. Retaining the classic desktop UI was a
big hedge on the Metro bet but only offers an escape not a bridge. Generally
Microsoft has to be dragged into the future kicking and screaming. This is a
rare case where they actually moved too fast for user comfort. If they had
made Windows 8 more of a bridge with the new UI features and other major
changes taking a less in your face presence they could have moved forward
quickly with Windows 9 as a bigger change.

All that being said I don’t think it’s a total diaster. They just need to
quickly walk back a few bad choices especailly for desktop users. They need to
make a few concessions to usability in the Modern UI style. Mostly they just
need to accept that business practices that worked when you were a giant
monopoly don’t work when you are the new comeptitor challenging the big
established players.

~~~
ConceptJunkie
This is how I see it. No one asked for Metro. Many people simply don't want
it. It exists solely for Microsoft's benefit, because they want to move in
that direction. I also would bet money that it's going to get harder and
harder to live in a non-Metro world over the next couple years (if, that is,
you are still using Windows).

I recall my Dad asking me if I was looking forward to getting Vista (back
before it was revealed to be the train-wreck it was) and I replied that I
wasn't. It simply had nothing I cared about. Windows 7 was the same way. Its
improvements over XP are, IMO, few and of little impact. I do not find its
performance to be consistently better than XP and its interface most
definitely is inferior (but "Classic Shell" fixes that).

The only thing I've seen from Microsoft that was even remotely interesting in
the last 10 years was Kinect, and I don't play the kind of games it's good
for. Call me a hater, but MS simply doesn't have anything to offer me.

And like many people, if it weren't for games and a small handful of apps that
I could live without if I really had to, I would run Linux on all my machines.
However... Steam is coming to Linux and a good number of GOG games run in
Wine, so soon there may literally be no reason for me to use Windows (at least
when not at work).

Maybe it's the economic reality that Microsoft simply doesn't care about
experts who have been using computers for 30 years because there are so few of
us. We power users, experts, software developers and others may smugly abandon
Microsoft because we think they aren't worth using any more, but Microsoft may
simply think, "Good riddance, we don't need you any more."

I don't read what most people read, or listen to what most people listen to or
watch what most people watch, so I'm used to it and that works for me.

But it's a little different with Microsoft, because they are still a very
effective monopoly in some ways (e.g., Office) and even if you have no
personal use for them, you can't completely escape Microsoft yet.

You've also got a good point, jsz0. Microsoft has completely forgotten how to
compete. They are so used to forcing whatever they want on people and having
them accept it because they have no choice. If they want to enter a new
market, they used to just overwhelm the competition with their massive
resources, and there wasn't much competitors could do. But it's not like that
any more. They are behind the curve and falling further behind with every
month. And as long as Mr. Too-Many-Y-Chromosomes is in charge, it seems
unlikely to me that will change any time soon.

------
notatoad
In my opinion, the biggest failure of windows 8 is that they called it
windows. If metro mode was an installable add-on for windows 7 that you could
jump into whenever you wanted a simplistic or touch-friendly experience,
people would love it. The usability isn't terrible on its own, it's only
terrible if you try to use it while expecting a windows operating system.

for example, the only being able to run one fullscreen app at a time thing.
the proliferation of iPads has shown us that users _love_ this, in the right
context. The desktop PC just isn't the right context.

~~~
malkia
Trains would've been a better name.

Windows Trains 8.0

~~~
aristidb
Microsoft Trains for Windows Live Home Premium 8.0

------
pixie_
Windows 8 must be the slowest train wreck in computing history, it's been
being reviewed as crap for over a year now and they keep chugging along.

It's funny to read all the comments from over a year ago and how nothing has
changed since then - [http://blogs.msdn.com/b/b8/archive/2011/10/18/designing-
sear...](http://blogs.msdn.com/b/b8/archive/2011/10/18/designing-search-for-
the-start-screen.aspx)

~~~
zanny
It trainwrecked the day buisinesses decided not to use it, which was the day
they got rid of booting to the traditional desktop with a start button.

It isn't a compelling purchase at all, nobody will go out and actively seek a
Windows 8 device, and desktop / notebook computers have had decreased sales
since everyone has one now and they are "good enough" for media consumption
and text / spreadsheet editing. The only reason anyone needs more horsepower
now is for graphical horsepower for animation or gaming or computational
horsepower for compiling or running a server.

So nobody wants Windows 8. It is a product without a target market, and the
Surface has fallen flat on its face as a one trick pony to try to corner a
"market" on a tablet with a desktop.

And hopefully in a year we have a mature Ubuntu running on Android tablets
just fine, and that IMO will be a much nicer desktop experience on mobile than
Microsoft Window and the Windows 7 desktop at 7". Except for a tiny, tiny
market of businesses that will buy surfaces for their employees to use the
mobile versions of word and excel I don't see this train leaving the station.

~~~
davidlumley
Am I the only person who thinks the lack of a start button and a 'traditional
desktop' are non issues? The lack of a start button/desktop is not a usability
issue in and of itself - it's everything else that makes it such a nightmare.

~~~
JohnsonB
>The lack of a start button/desktop is not a usability issue in and of itself

Tell that to non-technical users who have trouble remembering to use the start
button when it's staring them in the face, they _need_ that visual cue at the
very least.

~~~
davidlumley
You're right that there should be some sort of affordance to access programs.

What I meant was that the problem isn't that there's no `start` menu - it's
that there's no consistent, intuitive, and quick way to access any program
(along with having to switch UI's between desktop and metro, and a lot of
other things) which are problems that the start menu originally solved.

------
NZ_Matt
For what it's worth I've been using Windows 8 since the RP and have been very
happy with it. The key point that a lot of reviews fail to emphasize is that
evrything that worked in Windows 7 is still there and works exactly how it
always has. The removal of Aero and subtle improvements to explorer are nice
updates for the desktop experience.

The start menu was always kind off useless so I didn't take long to get used
to not having it there, I launch everything via search now (hit the Windows
key and start typing).

~~~
CamperBob2
_The start menu was always kind off useless_

No, it was not. It was nerfed in Windows 7, presumably as a way to deprecate
it before Windows 8 got rid of it entirely, but it was very useful for a great
many people before that.

Installing ClassicShell to put the XP Start Menu back is the very first thing
any power user should be doing on a new Windows 7/8 machine.

If I want to type the names of programs to run them, I'll launch a DOS box. I
_thought_ we had collectively agreed as an industry that this was not the best
paradigm for the majority of users.

~~~
hackinthebochs
Come now, the start menu is a joke and always has been. Navigating multi-
layered menus, where a slight misalignment makes you lose your place? Or an
unsorted jumble of applications links from years of installing? You call that
usable? Any power user worth his salt ditched the start menu eons ago with
launchy or something similar. Even windows 7 came with a meaningful app
search.

Anyone clinging to the start menu as some sort of epitome of usability is
having a "get off my lawn" moment.

~~~
Shamanmuni
It's quite usable for casual users who don't know the names of the
applications and want to explore what's in the computer. KDE offers a gret
solution for this; in the start menu applications are organized by category
and there's a short description next to the icon explaining what it does.

If you enter a category it doesn't add a layer, it shows the applications in
the same view as if you were opening a folder; and at the bottom you always
have a Search bar which works great and power users can comfortably use.

So, say, you want an application to play video. You go to Applications, select
the Multimedia category, and click on the icon that says "Video player".

Both Unity and Gnome3 also have solutions in which you don't have to
compromise or use quirky macros to get the behaviour you want. You can have
the best of both worlds. But then, as usual, many will continue bashing Linux
GUIs as if they were a usability nightmare and totally inferior. C'est la vie.

~~~
hackinthebochs
There is a lot of truth to that. But I would wager that 99% of the time you
know what app you want to open and its just a matter of finding it. Typing a
few letters of some part of its name is definitely a win here. Another nice
solution would be for apps to have categories that they can install themselves
into, and the user could filter by typing generic categories like "internet",
"play video", etc.

------
robomartin
I have yet to take the leap in terms of using it day-to-day. I just don't have
the time to play.

I had my kid install it in a small netbook we were not using just to see what
it felt like. Neither one of us is interested in using it very far past boot.
It's one of those "Right. Brilliant!" moments and then the notebook is closed
shut and turned off.

Professionally my concern has to do with wasting time and not being able what
we absolutely-positively need to do on a daily basis. As I type this I have
about twenty programs up and running on this machine. It has three large
monitors attached. It was specifically built to make programming, electronics
design or mechanical design far more productive. If doing a web project it is
not uncommon to have multiple browsers, virtual machines and IDE's going as
well as PDF's and reference material. Similar scenarios exist when doing
electro-mechanical design.

My current first-touch experience with W8 is just that: a first impression.
And this impression has not been positive at all. I, frankly, don't have time
to deal with bullshit. Metro (or whatever they care to call it) might be great
for a tablet or for grandma on a single screen laptop. It absolutely suck ass
for us. I wouldn't even want it present on any of my machines. What I need is
an evolutionary improvement over where we are as opposed to a pole-shifting
paradigm shift. I would suspect that if I decided to switch my development
machines to W8 (not likely) the process might easily bring productivity down
to zero or less for at least a month. This on the assumption that all
applications play ball.

What's disappointing here is that, to me at least, it sure feels like MS has
more than lost its way. They seem to simply not understand who uses their
machines and what they need to do with them.

I get it. I get it. Grandma, uncle Fester or cousin Itt might need a dumbed-
down single-finger point-and-something-happens interface so they can waste
five hours a day on Facebook. However, the massive population of users who
needs these machines for business, engineering, design, industrial and other
applications don't need this at all. They need the ball to keep rolling in the
same direction. Less bugs. More speed. Cheaper. That's it.

I was hoping that the day might come when MS might fully embrace Unix/Linux as
the core underneath Windows and move us all into what could be a really neat
platform in a manageable way. Of course, it is lunacy to even think that this
could be possible. Then again, I present you with Windows 8.

~~~
kabdib
The core OS underneath the glitzy pixels is a fine OS. Really, more than fine
-- it's a /great/ OS, fantastic at asynchronicity and driver support. It has
warts, but on the whole it was well thought out. (I've been working with OSes
for 30+ years, starting with TOPS-10 and Unix in the late 70s. I have a little
pedigree here).

The stuff they put on top, not so much. I will probably wait years until I
install anything past Win7, and if MS hasn't cleaned up its act for power
users by then, the only thing holding me back from switching to Linux are the
apps I use, and games.

(I do wish MS had some up with a better text shell. PowerShell doesn't cut
it).

Steam on Linux may take care of the games part of my needs. The apps? Visual
Studio is hard to beat, and there are some others that I can't live without
that don't have competent Linux equivalents. Time may erode my dependency on
these.

[I left MS about a month ago. It's interesting to experience the perspective
shift]

~~~
tehayj
I know a lot of creative professionals who would abandon OSX and WIN in a
heartbeat if Adobe would release their software for Linux.

~~~
kabdib
Well, there are a host of tools used by "creatives" that would need to move.
The driver scene would have to get a lot better. And sound on Linux is a
disaster on rollerskates (it used to be very bad on Windows as well, until
Microsoft started throwing its weight around).

------
sliverstorm
Eh. I've been using Win8 on my desktop for a couple weeks now; I'm pretty
happy with it. As far as I'm concerned, it works out to $40 for some nice new
features and continued security/feature updates.

I don't use "Metro" mode. But I do appreciate many of the tweaks, and I'm
still grinning over my cold boot times with Win8, UEFI, and SSD. I swear it
boots faster than it resumes from sleep. (Resume from sleep is fast, but it
seems the NIC takes a few extra seconds to re-establish a link)

------
tvdw
I've been using Windows 8 since roughly two weeks before its launch, and I
agree with most of the article.

In fact, I just realized that I never use a single "Modern UI" app for the
simple reason that they force my entire screen (2560x1440, 27") to be filled
by one app. Such a waste of space. In desktop mode I often have four 1280x720
windows on my screen.

Windows 8 might just be the push I needed to switch to Linux.

~~~
jpatte
What I don't understand is why you feel like you are supposed to use "Modern
UI" apps on your big screen. You are not. Everything you enjoyed to do with
Windows 7 is still possible with Windows 8. Just because there is an alternate
way to do them does not mean you have to adopt it...

------
f4stjack
Wow... I feel like I am in a minority who enjoyed windows 8. As for the
article I disagree with it on many points. I am using this beast for several
months (adding the beta releases to the queue) and although I was very sceptic
and using the same words with Mr. Nielsen as in the UI is schizophrenic and
tries to be two things in one shell BUT you know what? If you are not
interested, you don't even see Metro (or whatever its post copyright lawsuit
codename is). It doesn't get between your legs, it wasn't always so; my memory
did record some awful experiences with CP and RC releases of Windows 8. But
the release version is... good, surprisingly. I expect windows 9 will
streamline it even more.

I agree that opening two browsers in desktop mode and in tablet mode can be a
hassle towards users' memories but hey my workflow makes me using two
different browsers in two virtual desktops so I was happy to have this feature
without loading a virtual desktop app for windows.

"Lack of multiple windows" um... what? I am running a netbeans, firefox and
several consoles running tweaker script programs in ruby at the moment. Of
course if he meant the Metro interface, I can't see why do you expect multiple
windows on a tablet interface.

And from there I felt like the article goes irrelevant and subjective. I had
no problems with flat icons, and to be frank I found the news app the best of
the bunch. It does not oversaturate you with the content and is blazing fast.
As for live tiles, how can third party developers' choice can be accounted as
a failure on Windows 8's usability? I mean if his criticisms were about the
Microsoft Apps I would have accepted it but it's saying like "oh iPhone apps
icons are too colorful. Shame on you Apple!"

All in all there is a weird tendency of bashing windows 8 in the press. And it
doesn't deserve it. It's good, and is trying to change the desktop paradigm
whether you like it or not - It is admirable, they are trying to create an
original thing but this very originality is hindering them on reviews.

This is my cuppa anyway.

~~~
chris_wot
_I expect windows 9 will streamline it even more._

I do _not_ want to have to wait for Windows 9 for Microsoft to get their act
together.

~~~
moheeb
Then buy Windows 8....or Windows 7.

------
at-fates-hands
Wow, looks like I'm the only person who actually likes this and disagree with
several of the points from the article.

First of all, you have problems finding your apps since they tool away your
start menu? Get a simple, free app launcher like launchy or executor. Problem
solved.

I'm running an older Intel 1.8 processor with 4GB RAM on a 32 bit system. I've
had several Adobe apps open at the same time without any issues I experienced
with XP, Vista or 7 such as hanging or crashing under the system usage. We all
know most Adobe apps are Vamperic on system resources so I was surprised at
how well 8 handled the load.

This is probably the first time I've seen an article cry about the lack of
information on a news app. When I look at most news sites, it's information
overload on the homepage. Try finding a specific article on that LA Times
homepage? Good luck.

~~~
simonw
"First of all, you have problems finding your apps since they tool away your
start menu? Get a simple, free app launcher like launchy or executor. Problem
solved."

Again, that's not how usability works. You shouldn't expect regular human
beings to hunt out and install third party software to help them launch
applications!

~~~
hackinthebochs
I don't even have windows 8 and I know that you can search for apps right from
metro! Why is it that no one gets this?

------
suresk
Random usability rant: I find it slightly odd that, even now on Windows 8,
keyboard customization requires so much effort in Windows. For example, I
always make my capslock key an extra control key (if you haven't tried this
before - try it!) and on OS X and most flavors of Linux, this is an easy 5
second process.

On Windows 8, there are a ton of Keyboard settings - including promising-
sounding ones like "Change how the keyboard works" and "Keyboard properties" -
yet you still have to use a stupid registry hack to actually change the
behavior of keys (ie, to make your capslock key an additional control key).

~~~
novamantis
I make my capslock a backspace. Seriously, when do you really need to type so
many capitals that can't just be rationalised by using Shift instead? Using it
as Control as well is a great idea! You should first try out Autohotkey,
instead of resorting to registry hacks. Cheers

~~~
suresk
Ah, remapping it to backspace is kind of interesting. The reason remapping it
to control works well for me is that most of the keyboard shortcuts I use for
things (and I use a lot) use it, so remapping the capslock key to it helps you
keep your hand on the home row more.

I'll check out Autohotkey, thanks for the tip.

------
madoublet
I have been using Windows 8 for awhile now. I never really stopped to think
about the overall usability of the OS, simply because I thought it was easy to
use. Nielson makes some good points, but I think at the same time, his point-
of-view is overly academic. It is an OS. If you choose Windows 8, you will use
it all the time. Nuances, such as how the charms work, how gestures work, and
what tile does what, fades into the background. You learn it and you move on.

------
alyx
This is all yawn inducing.

I don't remember the last time we had this many articles on HN discussing an
OS.

All this "discussion" and criticism of Microsoft and Windows is 90% conjecture
or very personal (read biased) opinions.

I too have been using a Surface since launch and have been running Win8 Pro on
my laptop since RTM, and guess what? I disagree with the OP.

I highly recommend you go to a store and give it a try yourself, if you can
will yourself to cut through the hater-noise.

~~~
chris_wot
I try not to be too confrontational here, but in this case I'm probably going
to have to. I would dearly love for Microsoft to release a killer OS, but so
far as of yet I can't see any real compelling feature that I would be
particularly interested in.

Let's be honest here... if I have to do development work, then I'm not going
to use Windows 8. I'll be using Windows 7.

~~~
JanJansen
Why not use windows 8? It has lots of small improvements to windows 7 (better
task manager, better multi monitor support, new keyboard shortcuts, integrated
cloud storage...etc) that's enough for me.

Plus the new Windows runtime APIs looks very nice, and most are usable in
desktop or metro apps.

~~~
chris_wot
From an end user POV: task manager is fine in windows 7, for any deep system
performance troubleshooting I use perfmon; multi monitor support is work
brilliantly for me in Windows 7; I use Dropbox, works very well for me and is
quite integrated enough!

As for Windows runtime APIs, it depends on whether I want to make he bet that
Windows 8 is going to be successful enough to learn them. Jury is still our on
that. Besides, I'm more of a Spring man...

------
ronyeh
I spent some time using Windows 8 at the local Costco, and agree with most of
Nielsen's points.

In case you need alternative ways to exit an app, try:

Alt + F4. This old-school method still works!

Hit the Windows Key on your keyboard. Treat it like the Home key on an iDevice
or Android tablet. This backgrounds the app, but does not terminate it. Then,
you can type the name of another app and your menu will filter down rapidly.
Hit enter to launch the new app.

All the new gestures make sense on a tablet (except the swipe in from the
left, but back out again to show your active apps). But the gestures are
terrible when you're on mouse + keyboard. I wish Windows 8 laptops had nice
big multitouch trackpads, so that you can do things like 3 & 4-finger swipes,
and pinches, like with OS X.

~~~
seanx
Windows 8 supports multitouch trackpads on new computers. Many older laptops
can also get gesture support with the correct drivers. My 18 month old laptop
has pinch support + all the edge swipe gestures.

------
potatolicious
Have been using a Surface as well as a Win8 desktop for a couple of weeks now,
and I have to say this is pretty accurate.

When WinPhone first came out with the Metro UI I was a fan - there's a visual
simplicity to it that's very appealing. After you use it for a while though
the weaknesses become pretty glaring and hard to accept. It _is_ often very
hard to tell what UI elements are interactive and what are purely
informational because they are so plain. There's no way to visually discern a
non-interactive icon vs. an icon that is also a button.

The lack of shading and UI chrome also means that UIs frequently become
jumbled. Sections of UI blur together where on any other platform they
would've been separated by a visual line, shading, or something else.

The simplicity in this case has gone too far.

It's also very true that many of the first-party apps have _ludicrously_ low
information density, almost as if they expect these devices to be toys. This
is in stark contrast to MS's stated goal of shipping something that is more
serious, more productive than iPads and Android tablets, which up until now
have been seen as leisure devices.

People often accuse Apple of taking style over substance, but Win8 IMO is a
far, far more egregious violator.

There's another big issue: the first party apps suffer from some pretty
serious performance problems. It doesn't bode well for your platform when your
own internal teams can't ship best of breed apps. The People app, for example,
takes _literally_ 6 seconds to load your recent notifications on a Surface RT
- all the while without displaying any loading indicator. You literally tap
the button, wait, figure it's broken, and just as you're about to move on it
pops into existence - and of course the performance is so poor that it just
magically appears on screen without transition.

The entire OS is littered with sloppiness of this variety - as well as apps
where touchability has clearly never been comprehensively addressed. You will
move from places with gloriously comfortable touch targets (like the home
screen) to apps that have 9pt text links you're expected to hit.

The "search" charm is also poorly thought out. Just take a look at Amazon,
eBay, iTunes, and what have yous that have substantial search functionality -
Windows expects everyone to cram their search needs into a _single_ freeform
text input. In fact, the eBay app on Win8 builds its own search page.
Surprise, search is complex, context dependent, and not all apps can pigeon-
hole it into your paradigm. Oops.

[edit] Extra rant: I was able to get the Windows Store app _completely stuck_
today on the Surface. I visited an app's detail page, and tapped the Back
button to get back to the search results. _Nope_. Back button would visually
indicate interaction but do nothing. Waited, nope. Sloppy bug.

So here's where it gets good. On any other platform (and in old Windows land)
I could just go kill it. Except I have _no idea_ how to go about _quitting an
app_ on Windows 8. Apple at least has the courtesy of allowing you to kill an
app very quickly - if someone knows how to do it in Win8 I'd love to know,
because clearly their own first-party apps are not good enough to be trusted
to take care of themselves.

~~~
rlu
What bothers me about the OP though is that if you really dislike Metro so
much on a desktop, you don't have to use it!

I'll repeat that even though I think we all know this already: if you don't
want to use Metro apps, you don't have to use Metro apps. It is really that
simple.

So, if you're a power user and want to stay away from all of that nonsense,
then click on the "Desktop" tile and you're done. Sure, you have to return to
metro when you search or for a few other minor scenarios but overall it should
not be a big deal.

And then for a lot of the other complaints (e.g. hidden interface, icons that
you don't think you can click) it is just a matter of time before people learn
it. Then it will become a non-issue.

If OP claims he is a fan of Win7, then he should also like Win8 as the desktop
and core OS is very much improved.

~~~
icelancer
>What bothers me about the OP though is that if you really dislike Metro so
much on a desktop, you don't have to use it!

This is said over and over again, and everyone has to keep reminding them that
it's not about what is currently happening, but the fact that Microsoft is
GOING IN THIS DIRECTION. The "Desktop" is slated for execution - just because
they have it now doesn't mean it's going to exist forever. It's obvious that
MS (and other companies) believe that this "power user" feature is unnecessary
going forward.

~~~
rlu
I really don't agree with this and there is no arguing that it is simply
conjecture at this point.

I don't think Microsoft thinks that Metro apps or the metro environment do or
ever will offer the same level of extremely high productivity that desktop
apps and the desktop environment provide.

I think we will have a much better idea of Microsoft's POV on Metro if/when
they release Office apps on it. Quite simply put, if Metro Office does not
have 1:1 feature parity with the desktop apps then that backs my point. If I
were to bet, I would say that Metro Office will be more aligned with the web
apps. I would be quite surprised if they aligned more to the full desktop
clients.

Why? Because the desktop is an environment suited for mouse and keyboard where
you can have super high levels of productivity. Metro will not replace that as
it excels in other use cases. Can you be productive with Metro? I'd argue you
can. Just as productive as in the desktop? With some apps, perhaps. With
others, absolutely not.

~~~
suresk
Then how do you explain the fact that the Windows App Store is metro-only?
That seems to imply that either Microsoft wants to push metro-style apps in
the long run, or they don't care about the app store on the desktop - I'd put
my money on the former.

~~~
rlu
Well actually you can get desktop apps off of the app store. Sort of. It just
redirects you to the website where you can download the software. But it is a
listing nevertheless.

~~~
suresk
Yeah, but I'd argue that the major benefit of app stores are:

\- Discoverability

\- Easy payment processing/distribution

\- Automatic updates

\- Being able to easily re-download it later

\- Consistent purchase, install, update experience

\- Some confidence on the part of the end user that what they are downloading
works on their system and isn't going to harm their computer

The simple listings for non-metro apps really only benefit from the first
item, and they don't really change my argument.

~~~
rlu
Yeah I agree. Though I don't think that them pushing the app store as being
metro first is equal to them shunning the desktop. Perhaps that is simply
something we'll agree to disagree on?

It's very important for them to have the metro environment flourish and for
that they're going to need lots of metro apps and blah blah blah. Metro _IS_
important. It just isn't replacing the desktop any time soon.

~~~
suresk
To be clear - I don't think Microsoft is shunning or trying to destroy (at
least in the short term) the non-metro desktop. I just think they are going to
be pushing metro (or whatever it is called now) pretty hard, and if you don't
like metro-style apps, they are going to be harder and harder to avoid as time
goes by.

I just think that app stores are going to be more and more important to the
ecosystems they exist in. For the reasons I mentioned above, I think more and
more software is going to be procured via app stores (although, in big
businesses it will probably be fairly small), and that is going to influence
what developers build.

I probably wouldn't have built and sold a Mac app if there weren't an app
store, and as I look at porting it to Windows, trying to replicate the
infrastructure that I get for free with an app store isn't very appealing for
the amount of money I'd likely make, so my choices are: make a metro-style app
so I can use the Windows app store or not make the app at all.

> Perhaps that is simply something we'll agree to disagree on?

Fair enough :)

------
arrrg
Oh, wow, that “Change PC settings” button (if you can call it that) is
abhorrent. How can something like that happen? How are you even supposed to
know that’s a button? Is it more often the case with Windows 8 that buttons
have zero indication that they are buttons?

~~~
actsasbuffoon
I've been using Windows 8 at work for compatibility testing for over a month,
and I didn't know that was a button until this article pointed it out. I don't
know if I should be embarrassed or agitated.

~~~
levymetal
If the user misses it, it's the developers fault.

------
ct
As someone that really wanted Win8 to succeed being primarily a Win dev, I
can't help but agree with the article. MS needs leadership that truly
understands usability. Win8 missed most of the boat for what consumers want
and drove their core supporters of enterprise devs away with all the HTML
hoopla. With Sinofsky out, Ballmer needs to go next and be replaced with
someone that's a better speaker and better understands users/developers if MS
wants to retain any market share.

------
genwin
Maybe Microsoft will get it right for Windows 9, like they did for Windows 7.

It might be too late, though. I never thought I'd use a Mac, if only because
Windows was good enough, and I like Windows 7. But knowing the Upgrade Train
is approaching, eventually to make it difficult not to upgrade to Windows 8+,
and using Linux more often, and having got _real tired_ of facing a
significantly different OS UX every few years for mostly no benefit to me, I
find myself reluctantly researching a switch to the Apple world. If _I'm_
considering such a move, there must be tons of other people in the same boat
since I don't make big moves easily, especially not at higher cost.

~~~
w009adg
I'm a Mac user and i am worried that apple is gonna make osx to iOS like.

------
mtgx
Thanks. I was wondering when Jakob Nielsen would review Windows 8's UX. I
agree the mono-color icons are a mistake. Icons exist for a reason - to
differentiate between each app, and have its own unique identify. It's much
less the case with Windows 8 icons because they are all white and mostly
undifferentiated. It just makes it harder for the brain to process which is
which, and where is what you're looking for, or what an icon means.

------
chrisherring
From a purely desktop perspective I've found Windows 8 to be a positive step
overall. As a 'power user' the main benefits I have found are better
performance and stability. Those alone should be enough to mark it as a
success for heavy users. The new task manager is just a bonus.

As far as the start menu is concerned I'd be surprised that any 'power user'
would miss it all that much. I always used a launcher (executor) as keyboard
trumps mouse for speed and the new UI makes the 3rd party launcher app
obsolete. Pressing the windows key and typing the name of the app is something
most users could learn and come to appreciate the boost in productivity.

------
yuhong
"Windows no longer supports multiple windows on the screen." _In Metro mode_.

~~~
frozenport
Window 8

------
cheeaun
I've been using Windows 8 on a laptop (no touch input) for few weeks and it
took me 2-3 days to make it "work" like Windows 7. Since I upgrade from
Windows 7, several things messed up and none of the Metro apps can be
launched. Even the Store app crashes every time. Googled around, tried fixing
it and giving up in the end. The only last solution is to 'Refresh' the PC
which I'm hesitant to do.

So, none of the Metro apps work at all, and I don't think I'll be using them
anyway on a non-touch device. The next thing I do is install some 'Start menu'
alternatives like ClassicShell, IObit StartMenu8 or Start8 (Start8 works best
for me, not free though). These apps will skip the Start screen (when booting
up) and hook the 'Windows' shortcut to open its own menu.

There are few little annoyances like when you open images, it launches in the
Metro Photos (or Images?) app which takes up the whole screen. That'll need to
be changed by setting the default app for images to 'Windows Photo Viewer' (or
any apps you like).

~~~
lessnonymous
Thanks for the hint on Start8 .. looks really good!

------
corporalagumbo
This seems a little harsh, to say the least. Among other things, he seems to
be criticising Microsoft for both the early efforts of third-party devs (live
tiles) and because users take time to grasp some of the new UI fundamentals
(charms bar). Both of those issues will disappear quickly as the OS picks up
steam.

As an iPad owner myself, I am nothing but intrigued and excited by 8's tablet
interface. It seems like it would be a massive, massive jump in usability from
iOS (dependent, of course, on how the App Store fills out). Furthermore, while
he may not be wrong re: 8's desktop usability, I think this review is
unnecessarily harsh towards what must be seen as a significant and complicated
transition product. Just as web design is changing to a responsive model where
content dynamically adapts to different devices and display areas, so are OSes
changing to be dynamic and adaptive. In the future the idea of a user
experience where your files and program's were locked onto the hard drive of a
single computer, accessed through a static, unchanging desktop will be absurd.
Computer interfaces are going to become incredibly smart, fluid and
responsive, and W8 is the first step in that direction. I think it is silly to
just focus on what Microsoft didn't get perfect first time around - I think
they should be congratulated on their audacity. What they've done is certainly
leagues more impressive than Apple's plodding, torturous attempts to wedge iOS
concepts into its 20-year old WIMP model (seriously, go use Mountain Lion -
its a complete mess - but no one attacks Apple as harshly as they do
Microsoft... funny that.) Anyway in the end I share his sentiment, can't wait
to see how Microsoft builds on its great work with W9! One thing is for sure:
the old one desktop to rule them all model is finished.

NB: just to clarify, I haven't used W8 myself. I am sure a lot of the
complaints about it being too minimalist and apps being too limited are
perfectly fair. But I think Microsoft was right to strip away the clutter of
the WIMP legacy and start again from scratch. Adding progressively more
complexity in carefully measured increments is the best way to build a mature,
balanced product befitting a new generation of computing. Again, go take a
look at the average Mountain Lion set-up if you want to see a ridiculously
cluttered, complicated mash of UI concepts, windows, spaces, slide-away trays,
menu-bars, etc etc (and try find a normal user instead of a HN-style power
user for added effect.) The only argument is for me is not whether Microsoft
is doing the right thing (I completely believe they are) but whether they are
managing this transition well. As someone with no experience in developing
major new OS versions I can only imagine the complexity, so I am inclined to
go easy and try and praise what was done well and what is a good idea rather
than what didn't quite pan out in the first attempt : )

~~~
actsasbuffoon
What parts of Mountain Lion do you consider "a complete mess"?

LaunchPad is a joke, but other than that I find Mountain Lion to be very
intuitive and easy on the eyes.

~~~
corporalagumbo
1) If you use Mission Control, there's a linen background hidden behind the
desktop. If you open the Notification Center, there's a linen background
hidden behind the desktop. But if you change desktop spaces, there's only
black - where's the linen (i.e. what happened to that permament physical
textured backdrop Apple apparently decided was the bedrock of the UI?)

2) Not to mention that gross effect when you change desktop spaces, and the
whole desktop slides over - including the menu bar (that apparently static,
foundational part of the UI) - to be replace by a new menu bar! The dock
doesn't change, so why does the menu bar?

3) And of course that other gross effect when you click full screen on an app
(that little full-screen button nestled oddly in the top right corner of the
window chrome above all the other little static buttons) - and the whole thing
morphs and bulges and slides into a new space. Yeesh.

4) And yeah, Launchpad. So now apps are scattered between the dock, the
application folder, and the Launchpad. Great.

5) Also, the Finder seems to get worse with every generation.

Really though, it's the sum of all the parts that offends me. When I see
people with their sleek Macbook Airs on their laps, then I look at their
screens, and I see stacks and stacks of scattered windows of all shapes and
sizing clustered over the desktop, and everywhere, fiddly little tiny click
targets (in the menu bar, in the windows themselves, in the window chrome -
don't get me started on those ghastly mini traffic light buttons for mini
windows...) And they're moving their fingers around in that little touchpad
controlling that little mouse pointer on the screen, tapping on the little
targets or slowly dragging things around...

All of this stuff was fine when computers were big slow things that sat on
desks, running a handful of low-res apps at a time, driven by a mouse and
keyboard. Back then, it wasn't possible to implement the fast, fluid,
colourful graphical design and interface features of Metro. Windows had to be
static heavy things that you carefully dragged around, resizing individual
edges one mouse drag at a time. Nothing had any momentum, the whole window
stack just sort of sat there like a pile of lead sheets. But now that
computers are in our laps, or in our hands, and our computer use is spread
between multiple device, and more often than not the average person is using a
touchpad or a touchscreen to browse the internet (which has expanded into
something so huge it no longer makes any sense to bottle it up in a single
browser window) - and especially now that touchscreens are about to become
ubiquitous on every single laptop sold in the world - the old static clunky
WIMP model needs to be shuffled off to the side in place of something that
makes more sense.

I will note that Mountain Lion isn't qualitatively worse for this new stage of
computing than, say, Windows 7. But I have no respect for the small attempts
to modernise the OS with ported iOS features. It's putting lipstick on a pig
(admittedly a pig that was very good and useful for a long time and still has
a lot of value in many different contexts.) Microsoft's hard reset will
ultimately produce the right OS for the times, Apple's slow tweaks won't. In
my opinion at least.

~~~
gurkendoktor
I agree with much of your posting, but...

> When I see people with their sleek Macbook Airs on their laps, then I look
> at their screens, and I see stacks and stacks of scattered windows of all
> shapes and sizing clustered over the desktop

> All of this stuff was fine when computers were big slow things that sat on
> desks, running a handful of low-res apps at a time, driven by a mouse and
> keyboard

I think this is exactly the wrong way around. This behaviour was _never_ fine
on a desktop with a mouse — but it is the best we have to cut through multi-
app tasks on an 11"/13" laptop. With Exposé and an Apple trackpad, I have
never felt overwhelmed even on my 1024x768 iBook, no matter how many windows I
had open (and boy was Exposé fluid in 2005!).

Every attempt at using a "cleaner" screen layout on a laptop screen has failed
spectacularly for me. How is Windows 8 any different from any other tiled
window manager here? I see all my windows at once, but in exchange they are
smaller (too small).

------
itry
"Windows no longer supports multiple windows"

Only in Metro-Mode, right?

Its hard to imagine to have a Desktop OS that does not support multiple
windows.

Did Microsoft say anything about the future of the Metro/Desktop duality?

And Metro Apps do not work on the Desktop and visa versa? So you would have to
decide if you buy a "windowed" version of Photoshop or a fullscreen version?

~~~
contextfree
There's not really a Metro Mode and a desktop mode, there's only one mode. You
get one main app taking up most/all of the screen + optionally one companion
app on the side. The desktop acts like an app and can be in either of these
positions (hence why it's not really a separate mode) and within the desktop,
you can run as many (desktop) apps and windows as you like and have the
taskbar etc etc just as before, with the exception that the start menu has
been replaced with the start screen, where you can pin, launch and switch to
both the new kind of apps, the desktop as a whole, and individual desktop apps
(which switch to the desktop and launch/switch to the app).

You're correct that desktop apps and the new kind of apps are separate (with
the exception of web browsers which have a bizarre way they can run in both
environments).

------
josteink
I think the worst thing about the Windows 8-feedback so far is that everyone
is very dismissive about Metro as a whole.

Lots of people (me included) will tell you that Windows 8 is great and a solid
upgrade from Windows 7. That there are improvements across the line, and that
_if you don't care about or don't like Metro, just don't use it_.

People are assumed not to like Metro. People are told how to avoid it. If
Windows 8 in any form succeeds based on that feedback, it would still be a
failure for Microsoft, because the whole point of Windows 8 and the one thing
they are actually trying to sell _is_ Metro.

I'm not driven crazy by it, but I don't use it much. I don't use Metro-apps.
When I was given a chance to sample a Microsoft Surface tablet, Metro made a
whole lot more sense. But I'm not going to be using it on my laptop.

------
chintan
Honest question: For a multi-billion product like Windows, doesn't Microsoft
conduct usability testing?

Neilsen had 12 participants in his study and discovered quite major usability
issues. I wonder if their internal testing came up with similar issues and now
they are having an Emperor's clothes moment.

~~~
omnisci
I've actually wondered this as well. I actually like the DESKTOP portion of
Windows 8 and think it is a really nice improvement over windows 7. In fact,
if Win8 shipped without metro, I'd buy it right now...happily.

But it doesn't. It comes with Metro, and although I "figured it out", I
shouldn't have to. Specifically as I'm comfortable with every OS available,
using iOS, android, windows (since 2.0) and OSX. Each one of them requires a
bit of learning and tweaking, but I remember opening win8 RC and wondering
"how do I shut this off?" Initially I got pissed off because I felt like a
child, I had no idea how to find the control panel etc (without using
"advanced methods, winkey-r, "control" enter). While every OS has it's
weakness, if you can't do basic shit then there is a serious problem.

So, did they conduct usability testing? I also wonder. I'm gonna vote "no" on
this one.

With that said, I'm still gonna get it, purely out of curiosity.

------
rmrfrmrf
1) Whoever was responsible for this Hindenburg of an OS needs to be removed
from Microsoft immediately.

2) Whoever claims that Metro, the star feature of Windows 8, should simply be
disabled as a response to near unanimous criticism is in no way qualified to
discuss UI/UX.

~~~
WiseWeasel
With regards to your first point, you'll be happy to know that Steve Sinofsky
was recently fired from his position as head of the Windows division.

------
lyudmil
I was disappointed that the article didn't do a better job of separating
opinion from evidence. The introduction seemed to imply that a usability test
had taken place, but the results were never used to back up any of the
article's criticisms.

That being the case, I have to assume that this is opinion. So, the author and
the people he spoke to didn't like Windows 8 for what seem to be logical
reasons. Okay, but not as illuminating as actual evidence that there are
usability problems.

------
pzaich
Question: Why couldn't Microsoft user some sort of device input flag to
default the Windows 8 UI to the best UI for the current input?

Tablet-mode: default to Windows 8 metro style (I'm using my fingers)

Any kind of trackpad or plugged-in mouse: Shift UI to traditional Windows GUI
(Obviously I want more fine-point control)

If Windows is truly trying to cover both types of usage, they should recognize
that both of these paradigms are useful in specific settings.

~~~
shawnz
> If Windows is truly trying to cover both types of usage, [...]

Who says they're trying to cover both types of usage? It seems pretty clear to
me that they want devs to forget about the desktop and start building metro-
only apps.

~~~
jpatte
IMHO they only push developers to start building Windows Store apps because,
well, they _need_ apps in their store. It doesn't mean you should stop
building apps for the desktop.

~~~
ConceptJunkie
We'll see whether or not (and how much) desktop apps and their developers
become second-class citizens in the coming months and years. I'm betting it
will happen. The lure of taking such a significant cut from every app sold has
to be weighing heavily on a company that is rapidly running out of ways to
make more money besides planned obsolescence.

~~~
kvb
What do you mean by "running out of ways to make more money"? Didn't MSFT post
their highest revenue ever this year?

Also, even for Apple the app store doesn't seem to be a big profit center. I
really think that consumer preference is driving the move to app stores, not
greedy platform owners.

~~~
ConceptJunkie
I didn't say they were running out of making money, but the days of just
churning out a new version of Windows and Office every 2-3 years and counting
on millions of reflexive upgrades are limited. And since more and more money
spent on computing devices is _not_ being spent on devices where Microsoft has
a dominant position (i.e., laptops and desktops and servers to a lesser
extent), MS is rapidly losing market share even if their share of PCs is not
substantially decreasing.

Microsoft's greatest competitor to Windows version X has been version x - 1
ever since XP came out (except for Windows 7 whose greatest competitor was
version x - 2). With Windows 8, there is very, very little incentive to
upgrade unless you want to use a touch-screen device. I would bet very few
people even upgrade Window any more. 99% of the time they only get a new
version of Windows when they get a new computer. I know that's been true for
me for 10+ years, and I'm cool with that.

Consumer preference may be driving the move to app stores, but only because no
other delivery mechanism provides that kind of end-user experience of being
able to pick out an app, install it by pushing a button and knowing you're
almost certainly not getting malware.

Oh, except for most Linux distros for the better part of 10 years.

------
kristianp
"When running web browsers in both device areas, users will only see (and be
reminded of) a subset of their open web pages at any given time."

Setting firefox as my default browser helped here. (Not going to work on RT of
course). Clicking a link in the Metro mail app takes you to the desktop
instance of the browser, unlike chrome and ie, which also seem to ignore any
sessions you have open in the desktop version.

~~~
actsasbuffoon
That reminds me of another gripe. You can only launch IE in "Metro" mode when
it is your default browser. It took me about 40 minutes to figure that out on
Friday.

------
moe6
Some parts really need to be worded better.

I can't go back from Windows 8, as a power user with 3 monitors too, and am
also eagerly awaiting the Surface Pro.

I just don't see nor feel many of the "hacker news" sort of geek hate with how
certain things have been done in 8. I just went at it openly and while some
parts need some work for Desktop, I actually quite like it.

I think everyone also should be aware that this is basically their first
iteration, of which they've said they're going for a shorter cycle akin to Mac
OS, and that the Metro apps are going to be low density at least for now
because of the pitiful resolution the regular Surface is at. Many of these
apps are also first generation or quick ports of apps on other ecosystems. Of
course they're going to target the Surface tablet first then think about how
they'd do it, if they wanted to, for the desktop or laptop.

~~~
ConceptJunkie
So, it's KDE 4.0, except you pay for it.

------
dromidas
You know what... get over it. You're just showing your age by not being able
to figure out how the new Windows works. It may have been hip and cool to yell
about how hard to use the new Win8 was a month ago but now you just sound like
my grandmother.

No multiple windows on your screen? You're kidding, right? There is a new
"style" of program. It's called the app. It does not belong on your desktop.
If you're using an "app", you're doing it wrong. Use desktop programs, ignore
the start menu except for program look-ups and carry on as normal. There is no
UI difference in Win8 for a desktop user other than the start menu which can
be primarily ignored.

Underlying performance improvements make up for the tiny bit of hassle anyway.

------
antonpug
I agree 100%. Windows 8 is a major step backwards. I tried to get used to it
for about 2 weeks, and as a developer, I can say that it is slowing me down
big time. Not intuitive, buggy, ugly, distracting UI.

~~~
dagw
As a different developer who's been using Windows 8 for about 2 weeks as well
and I really like it. I will agree that some thing not being particularly
intuitive and you really have to memorize a few keyboard shortcuts to get
going. Once that's done it's great. The UI is almost exactly like Windows 7,
with a bunch of small improvements, and while I have no benchmarks, my initial
reaction is that it feels more responsive than Win 7. I have yet to really
find a use the Metro part of the UI, but I simply pretend it's not there.

What in particular did you find was slowing you down?

------
rplnt
They keyboard utilization is much better in Windows 8 than it was in Windows
7. The metro is just great with keyboard. Can't say the same about mouse.

------
lawnchair_larry
For anyone who has to suffer with Windows 8, Classic Shell from sourceforge
will save your life.

------
pteredactyl
linux

~~~
squidsoup
Sadly none of the linux desktop environments are particularly great either -
unity, gnomeshell, and kde all have different problems and none of them are
nearly as refined as the OS X UI. That being said, if you are comfortable with
a minimal tiling wm like awesome or xmonad, you can have a very productive
environment.

~~~
novamantis
Well, guh. The point of those DEs is too be highly customisable. Although, I
agree that they should be more appealing out of the box.

~~~
rplnt
Gnome-anything is far from customizable. If you don't count hacking it by
editing XMLs and javascripts (for gnome-shell).

~~~
novamantis
Did I say Gnome? Most Linux users know this. KDE, XFCE, LXCE are what you want
if you need customisable UI.

------
gtirloni
UX experts gave us GNOME 3 or so I'm told.

Great work guys!

------
iamtherockstar
The thing about Windows 8 is that it makes me uncomfortable because I'm
technologically competent and feel lost all the time. It makes me feel like I
don't know anything about computers when it's been my career for 15 years.
It's similar to using vim for the first time, where you hit something
accidentally and don't know what mode you're in, or how to get back out.

