
Windows 8 designer: Why Microsoft forced Metro on us all - alt_
http://news.cnet.com/8301-10805_3-57619024-75/windows-8-designer-why-microsoft-forced-metro-on-us-all/
======
Aqwis
It took some getting used to, but I now much prefer Windows 8 to Windows 7 on
my laptop (that said, I still use W7 on my desktop PC).

Why? It simply allows me to do much more without touching the touchpad. I
power on the laptop, press Ctrl+Alt+Del, start typing my password without
having to awkwardly alt+tab around as I would in W7. I log in to the desktop,
press Win and start typing c,h,r...enter, Chrome starts. I press Ctrl+L, type
a URL or a search, scroll on the page using pgdown or pgup... only having to
use the touchpad if I want to click on a link or select some text.

Sure, I could do much of this in W7 if I wanted to, but W7's start menu search
is far inferior to W8's Metro search, and I would have to ALT+TAB a lot more
around if I wanted to avoid using the touchpad.

~~~
daigoba66
> but W7's start menu search is far inferior to W8's Metro search

That's interesting because I personally consider Win8's start screen search
far inferior to Win7's start menu. Neither come close to being as powerful and
as useful as OSX's spotlight, but I honestly felt Win7 did a finer job.

~~~
pmelendez
That's arguably but the thing most people don't realize is that Win 8 is the
more keyboard centric version of Windows and that in a laptop is priceless :)

~~~
higherpurpose
Only because they _force_ you to use the keyboard more for shortcuts, because
they've hidden so much from the screen for the sake of "simplicity", which
ironically makes the UI harder to use.

It's also the exact opposite of what the author is saying, because it's the
power users that would (probably) use keyboard shortcuts, not normal users.

------
bunderbunder
> Try to add a powerful new feature to Windows, and casual users balk. One
> example Miller cited is multiple desktops, a feature in OS X and Linux, but
> still not built into Windows. Each time Microsoft conducted user tests on
> multiple desktops, casual users got confused, prompting the company to cut
> it.

The same feature's confusing to causal OS X and Linux users, too. Which is
most definitively _not a problem_ , because casual users won't be coming into
contact with that feature, anyway. OS X is a single-desktop interface until
you actively choose to create a second desktop. Most Linux setups behave
roughly the same. On territory this well-trodden, it should have required
precisely zero lateral thinking for Microsoft to figure out how to respond to
that focus group result.

Similarly, when Apple added a tablet-inspired application launcher to OS X,
they figured out a great way to make it both easy-to-access and non-
disruptive, without displacing any existing workflows. The launcher's there
and works well for users who want it, and is effectively non-existent for
users who don't.

That anecdote from the article, if true, is yet another delightfully pithy
illustration of Microsoft's fundamental difficulty with UX: They don't grasp
the difference between "one size fits all" and "all fit one size".

------
bitJericho
"Does Microsoft need to force-feed us a not-so-good version of Windows before
we can get something better?"

Am I the only one that remembers the hate from the Windows XP start menu?

~~~
blakesterz
There was hate for the XP Start Menu? I remember everyone loving that. Don't
recall any hate, maybe I missed it.

~~~
rayiner
See: [http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r3054233-Those-who-call-
XP-s...](http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r3054233-Those-who-call-XP-s-
interface-Fisher-Price)

~~~
TillE
Sure, people made fun of XP's default theme for its superficial look. The
complaints about Metro, however, are almost entirely about functionality.

------
pavlov
IMHO, one huge thing they got wrong with Windows 8 Metro/"Modern UI" on non-
touch computers was to repurpose the right mouse button in a completely
unexpected way.

On a Windows 8 tablet, you swipe up from the bottom of the screen to open the
"control bar" of a Metro application (I don't know what is the official name
of that UI element). This is crucial to know because the bar is hidden by
default, yet it contains fundamental actions like deleting a message in Mail
or navigating to a URL in Internet Explorer.

When using a mouse instead, you're supposed to right-click to bring up the
"control bar". This is completely non-discoverable and also goes against every
established UI convention: for the past 20+ years, the right button has been
used for context menus, but suddenly in Metro it brings up a hidden
application-global menu instead.

Windows 8.1 tried to fix this by adding a button in the corner that brings up
the bar, so at least you can find it by clicking around. But that's still not
good enough. The bar makes sense on a tablet where screen real estate is
limited and the swipe feels very natural, but on a desktop it's just a bad
toolbar implementation that adds extra mouse navigation to simple tasks
because people never figure out the right-click shortcut.

------
MaysonL
The casual users I know who have been exposed to Windows 8 have uniformly had
the reaction _" WTF?"_, often violently and expletiveladenly expressed.

~~~
Consultant32452
People don't like any kind of change. My daughter has no reference about what
is "normal" or how computer interfaces _should_ look. She is quite happy with
the win8 interface and took to it like a duck to water.

~~~
TillE
> People don't like any kind of change.

I hear this view constantly, but it's just absurd. I started using OS X for
the first time just a year ago and generally loved it, even though it's very
different in many ways to Windows or KDE/GNOME. The multi-touch trackpad
gestures are particularly useful. You don't get complaints when you offer
users significant new functionality.

Good change is good. Bad change is bad. Sideways change is also probably bad.

------
kohanz
Did we really need insider information to confirm that Windows 8 was designed
strictly for casual users?

~~~
tomphoolery
It's news to me. I had no idea Windows 8 was designed for _any_ users.

~~~
pavlov
It's pretty great on tablets. Maybe that wasn't the right design target, but
clearly it was designed for some users.

~~~
dragontamer
Case in point:

[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MCKWn1zjejE#t=0](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MCKWn1zjejE#t=0)

[http://davidhewson.com/2014/02/10/revising-without-paper-
fin...](http://davidhewson.com/2014/02/10/revising-without-paper-finally-it-
works/)

Doing a complete book edit without paper (stylus only), or drawing and
publishing web comics is now possible on a tablet.

Windows8 is the only content-creation tablet device right now. The Samsung
Galaxy Tab (Android) tries to do the same with their Wacom stylus and
everything... but the experience just isn't the same.

When you can actually use _real_ Photoshop, Word, One Note, and have the best
handwriting recognition software... the Stylus on Win8 is far above everyone
else.

Stylus machines are rare... but you still have some choice. Surface Pro,
Surface Pro 2, Dell Venue Pro (8 and 11), Asus Vivotab Note, Lenovo Helix, and
Lenovo Thinkpad.

So the price range is between $300 (Intel Atom based Vivotab Note) and $2000
(Lenovo Helix Intel i7 with 8 GB of RAM) for Windows8 based stylus tablets.

------
stusmall
They say they contacted MS to verify his identity but didn't include their
reply. From reading this article without the context of the reddit thread I
would venture to guess if he really was then it is past tense now.

~~~
nacs
Seems he still works there according TFA:

"CNET contacted Microsoft to verify the identify of the self-dubbed Windows UX
designer. A Microsoft spokeswoman confirmed that Miller does work for the
company but declined to reveal any details about his specific role."

------
Kapura
>In one respect, Miller is saying that Windows 8 was the price we had to pay
to get to a smoother and friendlier Windows 9. If so, is that really the best
way to treat your customers? Does Microsoft need to force-feed us a not-so-
good version of Windows before we can get something better? Or was Windows 8
an unnecessary slip-up on the road to the future?

What a load of trash. People need to stop judging Microsoft products in terms
of unreleased products. I understand that the hackers et al. who use the power
features in Windows are upset that MS changed the game on them, but putting
Metro as the forefront of the UI was, as the article describes, a necessary
step in getting users to actually use it.

Metro UI is quite good for browsing content and navigating to the things that
you're certain to want. It's good looking and it works pretty well. Just
because it's your launch screen doesn't mean it's supposed to be the only tool
you ever need. If you log on to windows 8 to check facebook, it's awesome. If
you log on to manage hard drive partitions, you're going to need to be looking
elsewhere.

Microsoft is trying to make products for the consumer market. If you want to
blame anybody for Metro, blame Apple. iOS and other simple, clean user
experiences showed consumers that there is a better way than the old desktop
standards. The applications you want can be at your fingertips, instead of in
a button in the corner. Microsoft HAD to make the initial experience of the UI
simpler to stay competitive in the modern market for personal computing.

------
mschuster91
Casual users are like sheep. Sometimes, you gotta force 'em for their own
good.

The author is correct, Metro is the heaven for all those grandmas and family
relatives who before would call/mail us on "how do I power on the
computer"-type problems. Now, you put 'em in front of a Metro PC and boom,
your incoming calls reduce by half.

~~~
tammer
The problem is, we don't live in the year 2003. Grandma has a PC.

Sure, she doesn't know how to "use" it in the grand sense that we savvy users
might. But, she knows how to do things. She knows how to Facebook, she knows
how to send an email. Unlike us, she doesn't think of these things as general
concepts. They're very specific, down to the smallest detail. Email for her
_is_ hotmail.com

Now, grandma is presented with Metro (or as I like to call it, The Boxes). The
small, basic knowledge she gathered over time that gave her freedom of
communication is now worth nothing. Perhaps she'll explore, and perhaps over
time she might find that the interface is in fact easier to use. The problem
is she wants to send an email _now_ , and none (and I really mean NONE) of the
anchors, symbols or paradigms she's used to even exist anymore.

On a tablet, this makes sense. She can intuitively poke around and maybe get
to the email app. She's not used to touching a screen, and the opportunity
gives her a chance to learn something new.

With a mouse and keyboard, she doesn't know what to click on. She's never
clicked on text and had it perform an action. "Charms" bar? Corner of the
screen? Ha.

Now imagine we're not only talking about grandma, but instead average non-
technical office worker. Not only does said office worker need to send the
email now, she needs to send a dozen yesterday. She has no time to learn
something new. Her company paid good money for a device that's supposed to
save time.

I agree that this article gets to the bottom of the issue, though. Microsoft
has underestimated its users.

------
dman
How far will this divide go? There is a desktop version skype and a metro
version (ditto with IE). I recently cringed when I had to explain to a casual
user that they should be using the desktop version of Skype instead of the
metro version. Having to explain that there are two different versions of
Skype was jarring and bizarre.

------
tempestn
This actually makes me hopeful. It was looking a lot like Windows 8 was the
first step toward phasing out the desktop entirely. Certainly providing the
simplest, most streamlined default experience for casual users makes sense,
for the reasons specified. If they're explicitly thinking that that will then
allow them to provide more advanced tools for power users as well, since they
will no longer be right on the surface to confuse casual users, that's
fantastic. Makes me hopeful that Windows 9 will continue the trend shared by
Microsoft OSes and Star Trek movies.

------
higherpurpose
Funny because it's the _casual_ users that are staying away from Windows 8. At
least the "power users", if they really have no choice but using Windows 8, at
least they can get around it. But casual users have no idea how to do that,
and they are also who will be the most bothered by the "sudden change" in how
Windows works.

------
quarterto

      self-described UX designer
    

The "self-described" here seems redundant and patronising. It sounds like "
_so-called_ UX designer" or " _supposed_ UX designer". This is presumably the
guy's actual job title; do you see CNet saying "self-described CEO"? Nope.

~~~
pavlov
Did you read the article?

Cnet tried to confirm his job title, but Microsoft didn't want to provide that
information; hence "self-described".

------
brudgers
If you ever wonder why complaints about Metro rarely involve system
administrators it is because Microsoft started the interface redesign at the
command line with PowerShell.

And for a GUI, Metro provides significant and logical access from the
keyboard.

~~~
jbigelow76
I've never heard this. I stopped spinning up Windows Server 2012 VMs and went
back to 2008R2 instead because I absolutely detested Metro on the server (I
happily installed Win8 on my laptop and have a Surface too so it's not about
hating on Win8), it destroyed the ability to multitask.

From a sysadmin perspective maybe hardcore Powershell jockeys don't mind it as
much but if that's the case Windows Server 2012 has a GUI less install option
that would suit them even better than Metro.

------
GSimon
If Microsoft purposely did that with the intention of making the desktop
default in Windows 9, that's kind of smart trick. A cruel, but smart one, that
is if they do make the desktop in Windows 9..

~~~
jfoster
The Windows 8 pricing does seem to support the theory that Microsoft knew it
wasn't good. The non-upgrade version was much cheaper than it was for previous
iterations of Windows.

~~~
GSimon
Yea but you take that also as them needing to compensate for the loss of
sales, so a higher price for less volume. Or you could take it one step
further and suggest they did it so that less people would buy it (because of
the higher cost), thus making Windows 9 that much more appealing in
comparison.

------
skc
Funny enough, there's no proof this guy was a Windows 8 designer.

Wonder if this is a case of "It's true because it's on the internet"

------
radicalbyte
Interesting; I've just switched to Mac from PC and the thing I love more than
anything is the virtual desktops.

Windows is just painful to use nowadays.

------
throwwit
I see it as a big push to monetize screen real estate just like what's
happening with xbox.

------
acqq
"It was for your good." Pure spin, no content. Flagged.

~~~
ars
Did you actually read it?

He's saying that by splitting windows they can add all sorts of power features
to desktop, while not messing with the more casual users since they stay on
metro.

Personally a little option box that turns on those power features and defaults
to off makes more sense to me <shurg>. Like how Pine (and Alpine) do it.

~~~
acqq
What you refer to doesn't change my observation of the article as just a spin.
Specifically, this:

"Now that the casual users are aware of their new pasture, we can start
tailoring. It will be a while before the power users start seeing the benefits
of this (that's why I said they'd benefit in the long run). Right now we still
have a lot of work to do on making Metro seem tasty for those casual users,
and that's going to divert our attention for a while. But once it's purring
along smoothly, we'll start making the desktop more advanced. We'll add things
that we couldn't before."

Bull. They just did what they thought was the best for them: "everything must
be Windows (even if we try to catch up with Apple's success.)"

~~~
ars
I'm OK with you calling it spin, but don't say "no content" because that's not
accurate.

~~~
acqq
"Somebody on the internet claims that he is from Microsoft, it is unconfirmed
but here's what he writes (and nothing new is inside)"

Content? Not for me. Waste of time. Including this one, having to explain. I'm
surprised you see that much worth in the article to even discuss it with me.
Do you have any direct involvements? That would explain...

~~~
ars
> it is unconfirmed

It actually was confirmed.

> I'm surprised you see that much worth in the article to even discuss it with
> me.

A bit - is their strategy of splitting power and basic really the way to go? I
don't agree, but it's a valid argument even if I disagree.

You claim no content, but there is content - the very argument I repeated in
the paragraph above this one.

> Do you have any direct involvements? That would explain...

No, it would not explain. Not only do I not work for Microsoft I hardly ever
even use any of their products. Linux for me, and I used OS/2 for many years.

