:
|
Maybe not a lot of time, but I definitely spend some watching my wallpaper at start and between switching apps. It's one of the things making my desktop look unlike bilions of other people's desktops. And its pretty (if e.g. I use some hi-def art as wallpaper)
|
The difference here is that Win8 boots faster,the Start screen runs instantly, and apps open far faster.
The OS is designed for you to spend less time waiting around – app tiles animate and fill with information, apps open and perform quickly, the layout and design cuts out distracting chrome and unnecessary elements. So with that in mind, I don’t feel that an intricate background image sitting behind the Start screen is going to be a necessary feature.
You
can still change the image, but I think more minimalist/abstract images would be more appropriate. Complex high-def images would be better suited for the lock screen, where it would be fullscreen and have almost nothing sitting over it. And as I said, the lock screen is going to become very useful.
:
For example I'm currently using my PC to do some programing while doing multiple files operations and talking to somebody, the screen looks that way:
http://i.imgur.com/GlLyel.png
It may look like a mess, but I can easily maneuver between windows by clicking/touching (if I had a touchscreen) the visible parts, I don't even have to Alt-tab. If it was Metro UI I wouldn't be able to set the windows that way and If I wanted to see how many % of files were copied, I'd have to either drag myself to other workspace or drag it to me, stealing unnecessarily all screen's Y (and wasting my time, as touching the part of the screen is still faster than touching and dragging the edge) . The point is the lack of the freedom I have now is enough for me to be unable to work properly |
Now see, I disagree. At first glance, I see a cluttered and incredibly busy desktop.
I can see several windows and applications. Now, you’re trying to tell me that having them all on-screen is more efficient. I can see why that seems to be the case – you can click between them quickly, and you can get a quick look at each window without switching.
But the problem here is that at the end of the day you are only using or paying attention to one window at a time. You could have ten windows open on the same screen, but you’ll only ever be looking at one.
That’s the logic behind Metro, I think. By making fullscreen apps, your undivided attention is set on the open app. You can Snap in a single additional app on the side of the screen if need be—think music, Twitter feed or Messaging—but at the end of the day you don’t need a screen full of apps to get stuff done.
App switching is still very quick – I really think you are exaggerating how slow Alt+Tab/dragging in from the side is. And as for file managing or messaging, this is where
desktop notifications and
push notifications come in – a quick, unobtrusive notification to let you know something happened in the background, or something needs your attention.
And let’s not forget the reduced load times for booting up and running apps. The time shaved off there should be
more than enough to make up for a slightly slower Alt+Tab.
:
|
I'd go here with traditional: "If not broken, why fix it?"
|
I bet they said that about vinyls, tapes, CDs...
That’s a narrow-minded view, and I don’t think it encourages new ideas. I’d rather see Microsoft try new things and make radical changes to an operating system which has had relatively minor UI changes up until now.
As I said, the gap between phone, tablet and PC is rapidly shrinking. PCs are really the only place where touch has yet to catch on – think of supermarket checkouts, restaurant cash registers, hospital equipment, SatNavs; they all use touch, and even games consoles are beginning to move into similar territory (Wii, PSMove, Kinect). PCs have been using mouses for how long now? And even now Macs are
integrating multitouch into their software and
hardware, and other companies
aren’t far behind.