Windows 8-ish

[Manco]

MOD EDIT: This thread split off from 'What does your desktop look like (V4) following on from this post.

MSoft would never make that into any Windows version. It looks nice and is practical!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p92QfWOw88I

Sup.

[Varrok]

Tbh I think new W8 Metro UI looks neither nice nor practical
http://www.howtogeek.com/geekers/up/...7c9a905137.jpg

[Manco]

So you don’t like Metro, but you like the mockups I posted? Because those are kind of the same thing.

Also your link 403s.

[Varrok]

Not exactly the same.

http://cdn.mactrast.com/wp-content/u...-Evolution.jpg - mirror of the link (which worked for me for some reason)

[Manco]

That’s an incredibly inaccurate comparison. Sure if you oversimplify you can draw those similarities, but Metro is vastly different to 1.0.

Gaudy colors is inaccurate. The Win8 screen used there uses bright, pastel colors, but it’s important to note that users will be able to select a color theme. The tile colors are defined by the apps pinned to the Start screen, just the same as how desktop icons work. 1.0 was limited by the color depth that computers of the time could display; Win8 uses subtle gradients and shades/tints to create a much more pleasant color theme.
As for the window management criticisms, the comparison here is flawed because Metro utilises varying typographic size, negative space and overall better layout – everything has breathing space and is clearly segregated. In 1.0, everything has to be crammed into the tiny screen, all type is displayed at the same size and there’s virtually no empty space, which creates a noisy look and feel.

[Varrok]

Gaudy colors is inaccurate. The Win8 screen used there uses bright, pastel colors, but it’s important to note that users will be able to select a color theme. The tile colors are defined by the apps pinned to the Start screen, just the same as how desktop icons work. 1.0 was limited by the color depth that computers of the time could display; Win8 uses subtle gradients and shades/tints to create a much more pleasant color theme.
As for the window management criticisms, the comparison here is flawed because Metro utilises varying typographic size, negative space and overall better layout – everything has breathing space and is clearly segregated. In 1.0, everything has to be crammed into the tiny screen, all type is displayed at the same size and there’s virtually no empty space, which creates a noisy look and feel.

I'm not complaining much about colors (the mockup's were more subdued though), more about the loss of freedom resizing/moving windows - I just don't want OS to decide for me which window placement is good (because its opinion is almost always an opposite of mine). I don't want the tiled desktop too. The UI integration may look good at default apps, but I don't use them often and it's not hard for me to imagine developers wouldn't bother to update all their apps just for them matching Metro's strict rules (especially with multiple-OS-compatible apps). On non-metro windows I could install many customisation apps, I don't think metro will agree to any. Is there any tray bar/system tray here? How will I use my internet messenger then? Would I have to switch workspaces just to talk to somebody? (Or use window stealing all desktop's height? I want a small square window at e.g. the center-bottom of the screen) The center of the screen is filled by apps/app icons, I want a freaking wallpaper herenormal wallpaper would also work for me lol.

Windows was being developed for over 27 years. The technology came much forward and could be utilized for users to make really creative desktops. And yet the best MS idea so far is to enslave users "enslave" if they want to use new UI to their stupid design?


PS: I noticed you have start bar at the top of your desktop, do you have problems with window titlebars appearing under that? I had those and annoyed me so I changed it back

[Manco]

I'm not complaining much about colors (the mockup's were more subdued though), more about the loss of freedom resizing/moving windows - I just don't want OS to decide for me which window placement is good (because its opinion is almost always an opposite of mine).

To an extent I agree – I’m skeptical of how it will work. But the Windows team have posted some really strong blogposts explaining how the UI works, and I’m optimistic. I really recommend going over these posts:
http://blogs.msdn.com/b/b8/archive/2...tart-menu.aspx
http://blogs.msdn.com/b/b8/archive/2...rt-screen.aspx
http://blogs.msdn.com/b/b8/archive/2...rt-screen.aspx

I don't want the tiled desktop too. The UI integration may look good at default apps, but I don't use them often and it's not hard for me to imagine developers wouldn't bother to update all their apps just for them matching Metro's strict rules (especially with multiple-OS-compatible apps).

I get the feeling most software developers will have the sense to make their software seamlessly integrate into Win8. Most Windows Phone app developers do it, and it really highlights how ugly the ones that don’t are.

But keep in mind that developers don’t have to use Metro style in their apps – the framework for building Win8 apps is based on the likes of HTML, CSS and Javascript, which have already proven themselves as versatile; and using Metro will likely not be a requirement for getting your app published on the app store.

On non-metro windows I could install many customisation apps, I don't think metro will agree to any.

I’m pretty sure new ones will be developed, and existing ones will be updated to work with 8. Even now people have figured out a hack to disable the Metro Start screen.

Is there any tray bar/system tray here? How will I use my internet messager then? Would I have to switch workspaces just to talk to somebody?

http://cybernetnews.com/windows-8-de...notifications/
http://thenextweb.com/microsoft/2011...notifications/

(Or use window stealing all desktop's height? I want a small square window at e.g. the center-bottom of the screen) The center of the screen is filled by apps/app icons, I want a freaking wallpaper herenormal wallpaper would also work for me lol.

The login/lock screen is where your wallpaper will go. This works extremely well for Windows Phone, and I believe it will work for Win8 as well. On top of that, you can change the Start screen’s background as well.

Keeping the tiles in the center is a good UI decision in my opinion; it keeps the user focused on them, and makes it easier to find tiles than in an unorganised mess all over the screen. Besides, I get the feeling that with the way tiles will work (fill with content, not just static graphics), a wallpaper would be superfluous.

Windows was being developed for over 27 years. The technology came much forward and could be utilized for users to make really creative desktops. And yet the best MS idea so far is to enslave users "enslave" if they want to use new UI to their stupid design?

Users get “enslaved” to a UI design no matter the OS they choose; the only way to get around it is to hack in a new UI. This is the same for every single OS UI I can think of.

PS: I noticed you have start bar at the top of your desktop, do you have problems with window titlebars appearing under that? I had those and annoyed me so I changed it back

The only programs I have which do that are games which are meant for fullscreen but are being run in windowed mode. For everything else, the taskbar automatically pushes titlebars out from under it if I try and move them there.

[Varrok]

I get the feeling most software developers will have the sense to make their software seamlessly integrate into Win8. Most Windows Phone app developers do it, and it really highlights how ugly the ones that don’t are.

The login/lock screen is where your wallpaper will go. This works extremely well for Windows Phone, and I believe it will work for Win8 as well.

I don't want a wallpaper on a login screen, I see it just for a seconds (or never if I use autolog), and I never use lock screen, it's not a phone and I've got screensavers

If I was you I wouldn't compare desktop to mobile solutions, you use PC in many more ways than you'll ever with your mobile phone. And MS had some ideas which turned out to be failures...

On top of that, you can change the Start screen’s background as well.

I guess you're right, that surely makes it up for me
No, I don't want to edit wallpapers just to match new UI

Keeping the tiles in the center is a good UI decision in my opinion; it keeps the user focused on them, and makes it easier to find tiles than in an unorganised mess all over the screen. Besides, I get the feeling that with the way tiles will work (fill with content, not just static graphics), a wallpaper would be superfluous.

Yet the wallpaper solution works in previous Windows and countless Linux dists (i'd much rather go with app filter solution in Ubuntu's Unity/Gnome3)

Users get “enslaved” to a UI design no matter the OS they choose; the only way to get around it is to hack in a new UI. This is the same for every single OS UI I can think of.

It's true, but other UIs do leave some freedom for user without hacks

The only programs I have which do that are games which are meant for fullscreen but are being run in windowed mode. For everything else, the taskbar automatically pushes titlebars out from under it if I try and move them there.

It didn't for my messenger (pidgin) :/ And it's one of mostly used apps on my pc

[Manco]

I don't want a wallpaper on a login screen, I see it just for a seconds (or never if I use autolog), and I never use lock screen, it's not a phone and I've got screensavers

The lock screen is going to become very useful very quickly, I think. Apps can hook into it to provide notifications (e.g. unread email count, calendar events, etc.), so it’s likely to become a very useful “at a glance” overview of the PC.

If I was you I wouldn't compare desktop to mobile solutions, you use PC in many more ways than you'll ever with your mobile phone. And MS had some ideas which turned out to be failures...

I use my phone to check emails, browse the internet, check Twitter, listen to music, watch videos, play games.

I use my computer to check emails, browse the internet, check Twitter, listen to music, watch videos, play games, and do work.

In case you hadn’t noticed, the gap between a modern PC and a phone is shrinking rapidly. We already have devices with full operating systems, installable apps, multitasking, fast internet connections, dual-core processors; we see hardware like laptops and touch monitors blurring the line; and lastly the huge growth in tablet and smartphone market share.

I guess you're right, that surely makes it up for me
No, I don't want to edit wallpapers just to match new UI

Do you honestly expect to be spending a lot of time admiring your Start screen background? Because I don’t, it’s pretty clearly designed as a springboard into the computer. The focus is on the apps, the tiles. Again, no Start screen wallpaper is the approach used in Windows Phone, and I don’t want or need a background there.

Yet the wallpaper solution works in previous Windows and countless Linux dists (i'd much rather go with app filter solution in Ubuntu's Unity/Gnome3)

The problem here is that those are very different UI paradigms. Metro is very clearly designed as a move away from the traditional desktop, so it’s important not to think of it in the same terms.

It's true, but other UIs do leave some freedom for user without hacks

How? Give me some examples, beyond color scheme and window size.

[MA]

i would also like to make a long post.











































there.

[moxco]

God MA, I waited for about five minutes for some image to load.

[Varrok]

Do you honestly expect to be spending a lot of time admiring your Start screen background?

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)

I use my phone to check emails, browse the internet, check Twitter, listen to music, watch videos, play games.

I use my computer to check emails, browse the internet, check Twitter, listen to music, watch videos, play games, and do work.

How? Give me some examples, beyond color scheme and window size.

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:

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

The problem here is that those are very different UI paradigms. Metro is very clearly designed as a move away from the traditional desktop, so it’s important not to think of it in the same terms.

I'd go here with traditional: "If not broken, why fix it?"

(I don't agree with "MS doesn't know what else it can do with Windows to make more money" explanation)

Also, MA's right.

[Manco]

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.

[Varrok]

You probably should update your Java, Dynamithix.

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.

Sometimes I do pay active attention to more than one window at the time, at my example I could see if and what somebody writes in my msgr without any alttabing/clicking, but ok, notifications. I sometimes run a small window for a movie/movie review in a corner in addition to programming and messaging - it's 3 windows I'm actually being focused on, if I dragged two of them (metro) into a screen they'd use more space than they need

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.

I don't really want to look like a conservatist here. I really do like new, innovative ideas. But I simply dislike the direction MS is going to. I'm not going to blindly accept every change they make (is there anyone who actually thinks UAC was a good idea?)

I can't bring up any more arguments, as I don't own W8 to check out about how much is true/false about it. I'll try it whenever I'll have the chance to, maybe I'll change my mind about it, but I don't think so.


PS: Windows 8's logo suck. Will you disagree with me that it's indredibly lazy (I don't care about the fact it's a refference to Metro) and the designer shouldn't earn more money than you/me ever will?
The logo is here

[Manco]

PS: Windows 8's logo suck. Will you disagree with me that it's indredibly lazy (I don't care about the fact it's a refference to Metro) and the designer shouldn't earn more money than you/me ever will?
The logo is here

I’m afraid we disagree on this as well. I won’t say it’s perfect (I personally would have the window graphic flipped and tone down the dramatic perspective), but I don’t see it as bad. The one-color/white-on-color look fits well with Metro, the move away from the old flag graphic has a more modern and minimalist feel to it and again ties with Metro, and the perspective view gives it a little depth and references the (gorgeous) “app opening” animation, as well as the fluidity/animated appearance of Metro.

And trust me, I doubt the designer got paid nearly as much as you think they did. Design is a very involved process that can take months to reach completion, and is filled with so much work with regards to identifying the target market and desired tone, brainstorming and developing concepts, presenting ideas to the client and then making alterations based on feedback, etc.

[sheridanm962]

I think the metro theme sucks, but we can always change it

[Havoc]

From what I've seen of Windows 8 sofar, I don't like it one bit. They are designing Windows 8 around touch. Everything can be tapped, swiped, docked, whatever. They are forgetting that their core market is still desktop PC's and that most users who have been using PC's for their entire life just want a regular desktop and not some fancy touch interface.

I might just hate change or getting old or something, but I havn't changed the layout of Windows ever since I started using it. Unlike most Windows 7 users I still have my quicklaunch menu next to my start button and every window has its own button in my taskbar, including its title. Just like it always has been since Windows 95. I hated the changed they did in Windows 7 and I hate the changes they are making in Windows 8. It's too bad they can't just keep the entire touch interface seperate, or at least not default.

I also think the entire square blocks touch interface looks horrible to begin with, but that's a matter of taste I suppose.

[Manco]

From what I've seen of Windows 8 sofar, I don't like it one bit. They are designing Windows 8 around touch. Everything can be tapped, swiped, docked, whatever. They are forgetting that their core market is still desktop PC's and that most users who have been using PC's for their entire life just want a regular desktop and not some fancy touch interface.

I think the problem with this line of thinking is that the way the tech market is moving paints a very different picture.

• The smartphone market has absolutely skyrocketed in the last few years. The number of smartphone users is huge, and the number of apps being created is astronomical.
• Tablets have also made huge leaps and bounds. The iPad alone has sold more than 55 million units, and they keep selling more.
• Touch screens have become commonplace in many areas outside of computing. Cash registers, restaurant table management, health services, information displays all use touch.
• The accessibility and ease of use of touch. Touch interaction is intuitive – we all know how to touch things, to move things around. It makes sense, and it’s faster and easier to learn than traditional desktop mouse and keyboard input.

We can already see touch being integrated into the PC world—graphics tablets, laptop trackpads (including those such as the MacBook which recognise multitouch gestures), multitouch mouses—but so far that integration has been slow. The mouse and keyboard have been around since forever, at least in part due to familiarity and unwillingness to upgrade, but I think that eventually there’s going to have to be a move towards something new.

Windows 8 may not be successful, but I think it’s the start of something big. And we can’t hold on to the old methods forever.

It's too bad they can't just keep the entire touch interface seperate, or at least not default.

One thing I’m really apprehensive about is the transition between the old taskbar-and-windows UI and the new Metro look. Looking through the developer blog, they seem to spend about as much time showing off the new features in the classic desktop as they do showing off the new Metro features. This is despite the new UI’s dominance.

It makes me wonder if the desktop is really going away as quickly as they keep making it out to be. Perhaps the classic desktop will still be a major part of the OS, and perhaps we’ll have the option to disable the new UI completely.

[OANST]

I have nine windows.

[Havoc]

Ok you've got a point about the touch, though I most certainly can't see myself bend over my monitor swiping and tapping everything on screen. A keyboard and mouse is, IMO, still the best way to operate a desktop computer and trying to change that is a bad move IMO.

[shaman]

I'm using windows 7 at the moment. Vista was an absolute dump. Let's talk about that some more.

[OANST]

I remember you. You're Shaman.

[Wings of Fire]

Ok you've got a point about the touch, though I most certainly can't see myself bend over my monitor swiping and tapping everything on screen. A keyboard and mouse is, IMO, still the best way to operate a desktop computer and trying to change that is a bad move IMO.

Not that I don't see where you're coming from and sympathize fully, but that line of reasoning is antithetical to innovation.

[Manco]

Ok you've got a point about the touch, though I most certainly can't see myself bend over my monitor swiping and tapping everything on screen.

I’d agree, but I can see the monitor market moving towards this kind of godly thing.

A keyboard and mouse is, IMO, still the best way to operate a desktop computer and trying to change that is a bad move IMO.

I think it depends on what you need to do on the PC. For precise work like laying out a document in InDesign, playing FPS games, and general creating/developing, mouse and keyboard will continue to dominate.

But for the millions of folks who need something to browse the web and check their Facebook, or the kids who need something to do their homework on, or even people who just need their work computer to do one or two basic tasks, touch input is going to work out just fine.

[sheridanm962]

I'm using windows 7 at the moment. Vista was an absolute dump. Let's talk about that some more.

I couldn't wait till Windows 7 came out, Good fucking Reddens!!!

[Dixanadu]

Windows 8-ish are structural weaknesses. Geth do not use them.

[Nomadpaec]

Windows 8 Is pretty pointless unless you have a TouchScreen with a fast enough processors. It'd be like a Windows 95 machine upgrading to XP SP3 or Windows 7 I guess.

Believe it or not there are companies out there that are making so to say Touch Screen glass to where you'd just plug it in via usb and enjoy it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ngrsTJ5o8w

Pretty cool stuff not what I was looking for but still you get the idea.

[Manco]

So I’m writing this from a laptop running Windows 8 Consumer Preview. I’ll write some quick thoughts here.

I think the new Metro UI is off to an interesting start, but could definitely use some tweaking. The design philosophy behind it is nice, and something that I think can be really successful (Windows Phone is a gorgeous OS and relies on the same ideals), but it needs some better optimisation for different input methods and resolutions.

A couple of examples would be how the UI and apps scale for different screen sizes. I’m running this on a 1440 x 900 monitor, and while the Start screen tiles and the desktop feel right, a lot of UI elements and content within the Metro apps feels too big – the tabs in IE10 could be about a quarter of the size they are right now and still fit comfortably on screen and still be touch-friendly, and the social feed columns and names in the People hub feel unnecessarily large.

There’s some weird UI stuff going on in the Mail and Messaging apps – it never really feels comfortable navigating around the main levels, and operating the apps never really feels intuitive.

The right-click functions feel a bit off, probably because context menus open as a bar at the bottom/top of the screen now, which could take some getting used to. I also feel that shift-click should really be implemented for places like the Start screen – selecting multiple tiles requires you to right-click on each individual one, when shift-click or click-and-drag marquee could be much more efficient.

One last thing that annoys me is how so much of the Settings still has to be done via the Desktop Control Panel – the Metro Settings are certainly more fully-featured than in the Developer Preview, but stuff like Power options is still inaccessible.


Now, on to some awesome stuff.

Firstly, the marketing line of “fast and fluid” really holds up. Doing pretty much anything is quick and responsive; opening apps, using the context menus and charms bar, switching/cycling between apps, even the traditional desktop feels like greased lightning.

Multitasking has been beefed up since the Developer Preview. App switching has been changed – the mouse now has different gestures from touch, which is much friendlier. ouch still uses the “swipe out from left” gesture for quick switching, but the mouse now has the infinitely-friendlier method of clicking in the top left. To see a list of all open apps, touch still has the “drag out then push back in” gesture, but the mouse now just needs you to go to the top left corner and slide the mouse down the side a little. Mouse multitasking now feels much easier, slicker and intuitive. The “close app” gesture is a lot of fun, just click and drag from the top to the bottom of the screen – you don’t have to take it slow or be precise either, so closing apps actually feels a little fun, at least to me.

Snap is easy to use as well. Pull and app out from the sidebar and you can drop it in beside whatever’s open. Switching to another open app automatically opens it in the larger side of the screen, and keeps the smaller column the same; opening a new app from Start has a similar effect. Dragging the separator bar is quick and slick, to the point where you can just sort of “flick” it to change the column sizes; you can also double-click it for the same effect. Dragging it completely to one edge of the screen (or dragging/flicking it in the direction of the smaller column) closes one of the columns, depending on which direction you move it in.


All in all, I think that this can be a very good and very powerful OS. It isn’t perfect and some things could use altering or fine-tuning, but it has the potential to be a game-changer. In its current form I think it’s already going to be a great tablet OS and works well on small screens.

The main problems I see right now are as follows:

• UI scaling needs to be better implemented. On a large high-res monitor some elements really have no business taking up the space they do, and when using mouse and keyboard some elements could be made smaller without hurting anyone.
• Discoverability and UI tweaks. A lot of gestures and UI features are hidden by default—did you know the headers in the App Store are clickable?—and finding them without a guide can be a pain. The best example is how the Shut Down option is hidden in the Settings option in the Charms bar. I like the idea of keeping unnecessary clutter off-screen, but without some pointers or help I feel that some of the more powerful features may be missed entirely by someone unfamiliar with the OS. And the most glaring flaw is how the Desktop is still very much Aero glass and chrome-y.
• More apps, more integration. I think the biggest Achilles' heel for Windows 8 is the lack of existing Metro apps – without a lot of apps to choose from, a lot of current software is confined to the Desktop. Microsoft needs developers to fill up the App Store with a powerful, high-quality variety of apps to get people weaned off the Desktop. I also think that more integration between apps and services needs to be done – right now you have Facebook, Windows Live and Gmail tied into your People and Mail apps, Flickr, Facebook and SkyDrive tied to Pictures, and your Xbox account tied into Games, but that’s about it. It would be awesome to see support for more services (which I think is in the works, or already possible but unseen due to lack of apps), and I hope developers can easily get their services tied in across the OS – nothing would please me more than seeing indie developers and service providers get the same integration that the big names do.

tl;dr off to a good start IMO but needs some further tweaking and better support.

[Havoc]

I've read this somewhere before...