Windows 8 RTM vs win8 release preview

[heatlesssun]

The B8 blog has quite clearly mentioned the rationale for the removal of many features, which is that most people didn't use them according to their telemetry. This is a stance I and many others disagree with and find terrible, since it leads to the dumbing down of any product.

They also say that they don't just use telemetry particularly with enterprise customers as they understand that they tend to turn it off. I guess I don't understand then how Microsoft is supposed to develop the product. Based on anonymous internet posts of people that probably haven't used the Windows 8 for five minutes. It's not like

MS has also clearly stated that Win 8 is a touch first OS, and the desktop exists purely for legacy apps.

This is what they have officially said on the subject:

We do not view the desktop as a mode, legacy or otherwise—it is simply a paradigm for working that suits some people and specific apps. This is very much like the person who uses a mobile “phone” but really uses it for the mobile browser and mail client and rarely uses apps or the phone. It is like the person who has a brand new tablet but only uses the web browser.

The desktop is a great way to work with mouse/keyboard and a large monitor or several monitors. It is a powerful and flexible paradigm, allowing for pervasive control over the size and layout of windows on the screen.

If you only want to “live in the desktop,” if you never plan on using a PC with touch or using any apps from the Windows Store whatsoever, Windows 8 still has a lot to offer. The Windows 7 desktop experience has been brought forward and significantly improved, with additions such as the new Task Manager, new Explorer and file copy UI, Hyper-V on the client, multi-monitor taskbar and wallpaper, etc. And all in a package that uses fewer system resources than Windows 7. The new Start screen is simply a continuation of the Windows 7 trend of unifying disparate elements of the user interface—starting, launching, switching, and notifications.

It is really your choice. You can use only desktop apps if you want. You can use only new apps and never leave them if you want (in which case all of the desktop code is not even loaded.) Or, you can choose to mix and match apps that run in both environments. We think in a short time everyone will mix and match, simply because there is so much creative development energy being put into the new scenarios made possible by new Windows 8 apps.

http://blogs.msdn.com/b/b8/archive/2012/05/18/creating-the-windows-8-user-experience.aspx

 

[devil22]

The B8 blog has quite clearly mentioned the rationale for the removal of many features, which is that most people didn't use them according to their telemetry. This is a stance I and many others disagree with and find terrible, since it leads to the dumbing down of any product.

MS has also clearly stated that Win 8 is a touch first OS, and the desktop exists purely for legacy apps.

'substanceless and random attacks', really?

Removing features does not automatically mean the product is dumbed down, first of all. Removing unused features decreases costs, testing, debugging, bugs, performance issues, confusing/cluttery interface aspects, etc. So it can be a good thing, all depends on what features are removed and whether an individual wants them. Basically, it's subjective. If you tell us what feature was removed, maybe we can suggest a good work-around you hadn't thought of. But I guess that would be no fun.. And all of a sudden MS is an oracle of truth? It's odd to me how people who would check outside if MS said the sky is blue, will quote MS like it's gospel when MS says something that agrees with them. Such comments as 'Windows 8 is touch first' (where did MS say that exactly again?) could be pure marketing to get tablet fans interested. You seem to have a very in-the-box view on these things, imo. Most counter-culturist do, they just don't realize their out-of-the-box thinking is actually just a different box from what they align against.

 

[heatlesssun]

Such comments as 'Windows 8 is touch first' (where did MS say that exactly again?) could be pure marketing to get tablet fans interested. You seem to have a very in-the-box view on these things, imo. Most counter-culturist do, they just don't realize their out-of-the-box thinking is actually just a different box from what they align against.

Microsoft has use the phrase "touch first" a lot in the Building Windows 8 Blogs. However when you read what is said in context I don't think that's what they really mean. Whether one agrees with what they are saying they do go to a great length in words saying how well Metro works with keyboards and mice and touch and even pens in some cases. And overall it does appear that this is correct. Not all apps behave well with keyboards and mice but plenty do, it's really up to the design and coding of the app that determines good keyboard and mouse operation.

 

[Eman D. Rahym]

MS has also clearly stated that Win 8 is a touch first OS, and the desktop exists purely for legacy apps.

With all due respect, do you happen to have a link to where it was that Microsoft said this? Do you recall who said it? Ballmer? Sinofsky? I'm not trying to needle you, but I don't recall ever see anything to the effect of what you said. I'd be curious to see it if truly they did.

I got the impression that Microsoft has been saying that Windows 8 makes touch a first class input method, but that doesn't mean that touch is "first" and everything else second or third. Rather it means that touch is now in the same class as keyboard and mouse, which too are first class input methods.

Further, of course the desktop exists purely for legacy apps. What else would you use it for? Modern UI apps run in their own space. I'm guessing the unstated fear you have is that Modern UI means that the legacy desktop is being phased out. I'd say any fears regarding that are premature and are really out of Microsoft's hands in any case. If Modern UI flops, and many on this board argue vehemently that it will, then Microsoft will have no choice but to stick with the legacy desktop. That or go out of business. Even if Modern UI is wildly successful that's no guarantee that the desktop will disappear. The market will make that call, not Microsoft. So long as their is a demand for desktop applications you can bet Microsoft will continue to milk that cash cow.

 

[Eman D. Rahym]

Whoa! I guess you touched a nerve there MrCrispy!

 

[devil22]

Whoa! I guess you touched a nerve there MrCrispy!

Heh, well, Nuclear bombs 'touch a nerve' and Justin Beiber 'touches a nerve', so we haven't narrowed down much..

 

[devil22]

Microsoft has use the phrase "touch first" a lot in the Building Windows 8 Blogs. However when you read what is said in context I don't think that's what they really mean. Whether one agrees with what they are saying they do go to a great length in words saying how well Metro works with keyboards and mice and touch and even pens in some cases. And overall it does appear that this is correct. Not all apps behave well with keyboards and mice but plenty do, it's really up to the design and coding of the app that determines good keyboard and mouse operation.

Well, probably just to make the average ipad fan say "gee, maybe I should check out Win 8 devices" (as if the average ipad fan would be that open minded...), people put way too much meaning into other people's words. I like to imagine myself in a parallel reality, where for instance MS did not say that, is "Windows 8 is touch first" the conclusion I would reach from using Win 8 there? Not really, as I've said, I see Windows 8 as a merging of tablet and desktop, taking the best of both and creating something superior to either and MS personnel just don't put much thought into what words they use so they just say 'tablet first' or maybe they don't even understand their own invention's potential that well. I like to keep an open mind, unless it's something physically dangerous.

 

[MrCrispy]

I am not a 'counter-culturist', I'm in fact running Win 8 RTM (and used the DP, CP and RP) on my home pc's, and in fact quite enjoy the OS. While it may seem that I hate it, my objections are based on experience with seeing non-techie users trying to use it, and also looking at things from a broader perspective. Also, as a developer, I don't like the direction WinRT is evolving, it is simply a sandbox for Metro and will not allow everyone to use the new API.

I got the impression that Microsoft has been saying that Windows 8 makes touch a first class input method, but that doesn't mean that touch is "first" and everything else second or third. Rather it means that touch is now in the same class as keyboard and mouse, which too are first class input methods.

I believe this is the correct explanation and intent, in practice I disagree. Touch is a completely different input method, it's impossible to have it be a 1st class citizen without deprecating other input methods. e.g. the right click menu in Metro apps (where it exists, like run as admin). The options show up in the bottom bar, and that is simply harder to use as well as visually not coherent or obvious.

As another example, the new Xbox UI has been optimized for Kinect. This lead to the text entry control (in apps like Netflix) now being shown as a single bar of text across the top, like so -

"abcd........... 890"

This is so that you can wave with your hand to select. But of course this means normal entry with the controller is much more tedious.

Apart from the touch issue, it feels like they started converting all of Windows to Metro and just never finished and are shipping what they have. I can think of no other explanation why there are bits of Metro that show up on the desktop.

I'm guessing the unstated fear you have is that Modern UI means that the legacy desktop is being phased out.

This is already true if you are a desktop app developer and want to take advantage to WinRT. There are tons of utilities, freeware, open source etc which could benefit from the richer API, but desktop apps can't use it. There's some documentation that WinRT can be shared but the situation isn't very clear and the clear direction is Microsoft wants you to write Metro apps, and submit them to the app store. And by implication, Metro apps are all people should be using.

Think of any normal Windows install - people have tons of little programs like video players, IM clients, archivers, games etc etc. Should all these be thrown away and Metro version used instead? Why not allow the App store to handle desktop apps, make them sync settings (by having the app publish a manifest containing its registry settings), and installing them to the desktop (thus not needing to be verifiably secure). It would have benefited everyone involved.

Beyond the kernel improvements, I simply don't see a productivity improvement when using Win 8, and in many cases its more cumbersome. It really could have been so much more and truly unified computing.

 

[devil22]

Well I think it's important to keep in mind that this is basically a v1.0 of the metro and Win RT stuff. If there's demand, possibly they will add more desktop integration into Win RT. Perhaps they wanted to but did not have the time (because it required further testing, and development, or what have you.) Like someone else said, it's all market driven really. If the market wants it bad enough, better believe MS will provide it. Now MS has something out there, and people can bang on it, look at it, and give feedback about where it lacks, where it excels and so on. It's part of the cycle of progress I suppose.

 

[Lyric Suite]

I'm curious to hear what Windows 8 has 'limited' you from doing. Please elaborate.

I'm interested too. I've started deploying it and if there's something that doesn't work, I really need to know.

Offhand these programs are working:
firefox
office 2010
office 2013
filemaker 11
smart notebook & drivers
vsphere 4.1
cisco anyconnect
vmware workstation
CS6
symantec endpoint protection
steam
path of exile
dungeons of dredmor
virtual clone drive

Limited in my options to customize it to my needs, based on the context of the line i was quoting. You guys are far too adept at purposely misinterpreting things to your own advantage. I think its called making a "straman".

 

[devil22]

Limited in my options to customize it to my needs, based on the context of the line i was quoting. You guys are far too adept at purposely misinterpreting things to your own advantage. I think its called making a "straman".

Dare I say a straw man is better than the majority of the content you've posted. But anyway, why not elaborate like the person you quoted requested? (with detail, not "I can't do stuff")

 

[Eman D. Rahym]

I believe this is the correct explanation and intent, in practice I disagree.

Again, with all due respect, what you are saying here is that not only can you not provide a link to the rather inflammatory quote you posted above, but you also think it was incorrect? Again, I'm not trying to needle you, but do you understand how this impeaches your credibility?

Touch is a completely different input method, it's impossible to have it be a 1st class citizen without deprecating other input methods.

OK, I disagree with you here. So do many of the other posters on this forum. So does Microsoft itself.

As another example, the new Xbox UI

I confess, I know nothing about the Xbox UI. Between you and me, I really could not care less about it either. Let's stick to talking about the PC UI, OK?

Apart from the touch issue, it feels like they started converting all of Windows to Metro and just never finished and are shipping what they have. I can think of no other explanation why there are bits of Metro that show up on the desktop.

The Modern UI is Microsoft's new baby. Legacy Desktop is the child that grew up and moved out of the house years ago. There is no guarantee that Modern UI will even survive to see Christmas, 2013. By contrast, Legacy Desktop has been earning billions of dollars a year for years now. Given their relative strengths, is it any wonder Microsoft is putting its efforts at present into Modern UI? Legacy Desktop has resoundingly shown it can take care of itself. It has done so for year upon year in the past and will continue to do so for the foreseeable future. Legacy Desktop controls over 90% of its market. Microsoft doesn't have to do anything and Legacy Desktop will continue to be a successful earner for years to come. By contrast, Modern UI faces two huge challenges: the schoolyard bully, Android and the hulking ogre, iOS. Either could crush Modern UI without breaking a sweat. Do you really begrudge the resources Microsoft is diverting from Legacy Desktop, if indeed that is what it is doing, in order to help Modern UI take flight?

 

[heatlesssun]

Beyond the kernel improvements, I simply don't see a productivity improvement when using Win 8, and in many cases its more cumbersome. It really could have been so much more and truly unified computing.

You have to start somewhere. No one really known where Windows 8 is going. There's plenty to do with the new UI and creating a more seamless experience but truly making to the desktop and merging Metro with it and creating one single UI that works within the constraints of a mobile OS and still retains traditional desktop capability simply in far too much work to achieve in single version of Windows.

No the unification isn't perfect but is practical. Windows 8 devices can run desktop programs and these programs work just like on prior versions of Windows and they can run touch and tablet centric apps and they work just like they would on iOS or Android devices and this can be done on a single device. No current OS can do this and to discount this ability because it is not a total unification I think misses the very practical aspects of the hybrid design.

 

[Dogs]

Limited in my options to customize it to my needs, based on the context of the line i was quoting. You guys are far too adept at purposely misinterpreting things to your own advantage. I think its called making a "straman".

Yeah, no, I don't like that answer. Elaborate please. I'm looking for details, not vague, meaningless 'examples' that don't tell me anything.

 

[TechLarry]

Someone apparently forget about QuickLaunch ? Worked well without taking up the entire damned screen with huge Baby Blocks.

It's been explained many times. To sum up:
1. I can launch any program I have in 2 clicks in Win 8, one click to open start screen then another click on the app. To open a program on Windows 7, I need to click to open the start menu, click to open all programs (if my app is not in the first list which many times it is not.), click to open the folder and sometimes another click for a nested folder, click the app. Win 7 is more error prone because you have to click more, against smaller icons.
2. I can click one button, and see live tiles from nicely made metro apps, giving me information like weather, email, calendar data and so on. To do this on Windows 7, I need a bunch of haphazard gadgets and programs, which are insecure vs. metro apps, and frequently less stable (never seen a metro app crash yet.) Metro apps also look much nicer and more modern, tend to be smoother (hardware accelerated Win RT), and I can get them from a centralized store where they are verified to be malware free, instead of hunting down random things on the web that have no verification.
3. Not a big deal, but having the start screen for apps, allows me to unpin everything from my task bar, so I know everything there is running (that has bitten me in the past on Windows 7.)
4. Hard to describe this exactly, but my motion through Win 8 and the start screen is much more fluid and automatic, I do less thinking about where I'm clicking, where I need to click next, and so on, while making fewer mistakes. I had the mental image of Tarzan freely swinging through the jungle as I was navigating to upload some pictures to the skydrive app for the first time a few minutes ago.

So there are reasons, but you reject them and prefer to form an opinion based on typical internet misinformation.

 

[ccman]

I find it hard to understand that people are willing to admit and realize that Microsoft might not want to spend time maintaining seldom used features and duplicate methods to do things but do not see that the same might apply to this new way of doing things in Windows 8 - Modern UI and Windows RT. Certainly we can see how certain things are currently duplicated between Modern UI and Desktop/Classic UI. The easiest example to bring up is task switching, but surely the Windows Runtime and the Windows API contain many duplications. I think Win32, .NET Framework, and now Windows Runtime all likely contain their own Application Model, Communications, Data, Graphics, Media, Devices, and Printing pieces.

Also, it's acknowledged that Microsoft does not want to maintain separate, different platforms. However, there are two different flavors of the Windows 8 generation, Windows 8 and Windows RT. Windows RT doesn't support Win32 and doesn't support .NET Framework programs with the exception of Office 2013. With Windows RT, it seems Microsoft is wanting to make a clean break, and that clean break does not include Win32 or .NET Framework (except through Windows Runtime). In this case, I hear people say that it doesn't matter what Microsoft wants to do, but what consumers and enterprise customers force Microsoft to do. I've read many times that Microsoft does not consider Win32 or the desktop as legacy, but their actions seem to imply differently.

 

[devil22]

Someone apparently forget about QuickLaunch ? Worked well without taking up the entire damned screen with huge Baby Blocks.

QuickLaunch can have live updates? Is a rational place to put 20+ programs? And what difference does it make if it takes up the whole screen? Talk about OCD... "I can't see the program on the desktop while I open a new program, someone hold me!" Those large tiles allow very useful information to be conveyed without opening and switching to a program, if it is baby-ish to be efficient, then I'm cool with that. It's going to be a long day of pettiness, I can see.

 

[dnottis]

OK this might be a stupid question as I just dove into the Windows 8 RP. Will it continue to "drop" to the desktop when running command prompt etc?

most apps will still send you to the desktop. Only the metro apps dont.

 

[MrCrispy]

Again, with all due respect, what you are saying here is that not only can you not provide a link to the rather inflammatory quote you posted above, but you also think it was incorrect? Again, I'm not trying to needle you, but do you understand how this impeaches your credibility?

http://blogs.msdn.com/search/searchresults.aspx?q="touch first"&sections=12943

The Modern UI is Microsoft's new baby. Legacy Desktop is the child that grew up and moved out of the house years ago. There is no guarantee that Modern UI will even survive to see Christmas, 2013. By contrast, Legacy Desktop has been earning billions of dollars a year for years now. Given their relative strengths, is it any wonder Microsoft is putting its efforts at present into Modern UI? Legacy Desktop has resoundingly shown it can take care of itself. It has done so for year upon year in the past and will continue to do so for the foreseeable future. Legacy Desktop controls over 90% of its market. Microsoft doesn't have to do anything and Legacy Desktop will continue to be a successful earner for years to come. By contrast, Modern UI faces two huge challenges: the schoolyard bully, Android and the hulking ogre, iOS. Either could crush Modern UI without breaking a sweat. Do you really begrudge the resources Microsoft is diverting from Legacy Desktop, if indeed that is what it is doing, in order to help Modern UI take flight?

I am all for Modern UI and change, if its done in a manner that doesn't affect users negatively. Microsoft has traditionally been extremely predictable in this area - there are tons of neat ideas from MSR that never made it past a meeting into an actual product, and lots of good ideas from prototypes and visions that were never fulfilled.

The problem is treating legacy and Modern as 2 different entities that you have to choose between. A gradual transition between them would have been much better. There is never going to be a moment when 100% of apps and users switch from legacy -> Modern and legacy support is dropped.

 

[heatlesssun]

I hear people say that it doesn't matter what Microsoft wants to do, but what consumers and enterprise customers force Microsoft to do. I've read many times that Microsoft does not consider Win32 or the desktop as legacy, but their actions seem to imply differently.

There's just so much built on Win32t hat try as they may, Microsoft it's going to be impractical to just ditch it. WinRt is actually built on Win32. Modern touch and tablet software is difficult to develop on Win32 proper though because Win32 is so wide open. One thing that's radically different between WinRT and Win32 is the enforcement of power consumption rules for background tasks.

Having studied WinRT app development for a while now it's quite clear that WinRTis no where near a replacement for Win32 at this time, it's not even trying to be.

 

[heatlesssun]

The problem is treating legacy and Modern as 2 different entities that you have to choose between.

I don't see this as a problem, in fact I think it's desirable for now at least. There's simply too much Win32 and desktop code that will never be transitioned and has to remain compatible. Touch and mobile applications have much lower system requirements and much higher power constraints. A "true" melding of the desktop and tablet Involves much more than the OS alone.

I think this subject gets a little over thought. On Windows 8 there are desktop/Win32 apps and there are WinRT apps and you mix and match between the ones that you need, want or like. A few desktop apps work well with touch, most WinRT apps work well with a mouse and keyboard. You pick the ones that suit your needs. It's very similar now to
using a separate tablet and desktop device except it can all be done on one device.

 

[ccman]

There's just so much built on Win32t hat try as they may, Microsoft it's going to be impractical to just ditch it. WinRt is actually built on Win32. Modern touch and tablet software is difficult to develop on Win32 proper though because Win32 is so wide open. One thing that's radically different between WinRT and Win32 is the enforcement of power consumption rules for background tasks.

Having studied WinRT app development for a while now it's quite clear that WinRTis no where near a replacement for Win32 at this time, it's not even trying to be.

I could easily be mistaken, but I get this impression that WinRT is a replacement for Win32 from a few places:
From Microsoft itself: http://blogs.msdn.com/b/malaysia/archive/2012/02/13/windows-8-and-the-future-of-xaml-the-windows-runtime-winrt.aspx
From Intel:

And from commentators WinRT is Replacing Win32 by Paul Thurrott (albeit dated)

 

[Wrench00]

Again, with all due respect, what you are saying here is that not only can you not provide a link to the rather inflammatory quote you posted above, but you also think it was incorrect? Again, I'm not trying to needle you, but do you understand how this impeaches your credibility?


OK, I disagree with you here. So do many of the other posters on this forum. So does Microsoft itself.


I confess, I know nothing about the Xbox UI. Between you and me, I really could not care less about it either. Let's stick to talking about the PC UI, OK?


The Modern UI is Microsoft's new baby. Legacy Desktop is the child that grew up and moved out of the house years ago. There is no guarantee that Modern UI will even survive to see Christmas, 2013. By contrast, Legacy Desktop has been earning billions of dollars a year for years now. Given their relative strengths, is it any wonder Microsoft is putting its efforts at present into Modern UI? Legacy Desktop has resoundingly shown it can take care of itself. It has done so for year upon year in the past and will continue to do so for the foreseeable future. Legacy Desktop controls over 90% of its market. Microsoft doesn't have to do anything and Legacy Desktop will continue to be a successful earner for years to come. By contrast, Modern UI faces two huge challenges: the schoolyard bully, Android and the hulking ogre, iOS. Either could crush Modern UI without breaking a sweat. Do you really begrudge the resources Microsoft is diverting from Legacy Desktop, if indeed that is what it is doing, in order to help Modern UI take flight?

Yeah except IOS and Android are not primary desktop Interfaces.
Android is Mobile only.
IOS is mobile only as well, you don't see Apple saying fuck you everyone no more Apple Bar everything is going to be like an iOS.
Expose is an option that is triggered with a button, but its not a primary interface for OSX.

You argument is invalid.

 

[devil22]

Yeah except IOS and Android are not primary desktop Interfaces.
Android is Mobile only.
IOS is mobile only as well, you don't see Apple saying fuck you everyone no more Apple Bar everything is going to be like an iOS.
Expose is an option that is triggered with a button, but its not a primary interface for OSX.

Why do Apple and Linux have to do something before it's considered legitimate? If those entities did have mobile friendly desktops, would it alleviate your frustration with Windows 8? Because I can't even see how what apple and Linux do have anything to do with how you and the others feel about Windows 8.

You argument is invalid.

If you can't invalidate an argument, you can always declare it to be invalid anyway I suppose.

 

[heatlesssun]

I could easily be mistaken, but I get this impression that WinRT is a replacement for Win32 from a few places:
From Microsoft itself: http://blogs.msdn.com/b/malaysia/archive/2012/02/13/windows-8-and-the-future-of-xaml-the-windows-runtime-winrt.aspx
From Intel:

And from commentators WinRT is Replacing Win32 by Paul Thurrott (albeit dated)

This diagram really is pretty misleading. Notice how .NET shows as having no lower dependency on Win32 which is dearly does on Windows.

 

[Dogs]

This diagram really is pretty misleading. Notice how .NET shows as having no lower dependency on Win32 which is dearly does on Windows.

Or better yet, look at 'Internet Explorer'. By that diagram, it's built on top of the 'Windows Kernel Services', while I would argue there should be a Win32 in-between those two.

 

[heatlesssun]

Or better yet, look at 'Internet Explorer'. By that diagram, it's built on top of the 'Windows Kernel Services', while I would argue there should be a Win32 in-between those two.

Good point.

 

[Eman D. Rahym]

http://blogs.msdn.com/search/searchresults.aspx?q="touch first"&sections=12943

Thanks for the links! I feel a little red faced as I guess I could have done that for myself.

Looking them over, two things come to my mind: first, they seem to be more unfortunate marketing-speak rather than any declaration of policy, and second, they seem to refer to apps running in Modern UI rather than Windows 8 as a whole. Nothing in any of those quotes makes me worried that Microsoft is going to take the legacy desktop and, in the words of Steve Jobs, "put a bullet in it's head." I'm not saying Microsoft wouldn't be thrilled if the market as a whole decided to do that, I just don't think Microsoft themselves intend to do that without first getting clear feedback from the market.

I am all for Modern UI and change, if its done in a manner that doesn't affect users negatively.

I would argue that this is exactly what Microsoft is doing with Windows 8. I honestly don't understand how Modern UI negatively affects users other than by requiring a very mild and short learning curve. Certainly there has been an astounding amount of acrimony and petulance directed at Modern UI, but so far all the objections I've seen seem merely to be finicking. When used as intended Modern UI works and works well. It also adds in capabilities that the old Start Menu couldn't dream of doing.

The problem is treating legacy and Modern as 2 different entities that you have to choose between. A gradual transition between them would have been much better.

This reminds me of a British joke: the government finally decided to put Britain in line with the rest of Europe by mandating that Britain would switch to driving on the right hand side of the road. However, to try and ease the impact of the change, they decided to implement it gradually.

 

[heatlesssun]

The WinRT API is a lightweight power constrained, and sandboxed API. At this point, even if Microsoft did intend WinRT and Metro to become the new desktop, its technically impossible at this point. I can't predict the future or Microsoft's intentions but the direction I see this going is a better integration of the two environments over the coming versions but never a complete merging or replacement. There's nothing in it for Microsoft to dump the Win32 API or the desktop, those are two of Microsoft's most powerful assets and the main selling point of Windows 8 (not so much Windows RT) is that it is no compromises environment. And from the standpoint that Windows 8 is practically 100% program and hardware compatible with Windows 7 and runs those programs exactly as Windows 7 (except maybe a bit faster) and that it can run exactly the same types of touch and tablet software as iOS or Android, that statement is correct.

That's not to say that it can't or won't happen but at this point the hybrid approach is far more practical and achievable. Revamping the desktop to the point of requiring the entire catalog of Win32 to be rewritten, that's just never going to happen.

 

[ccman]

I'm not saying you guys are wrong. Certainly this could be market-tecture as opposed to actual architecture, but that diagram comes from Microsoft material. For example, see slide 5 in this slide deck video.ch9.ms/build/2011/slides/PLAT-874T_Lovell.pptx.
Also, this Mozilla blog implies that Win32 and WinRT are two separate entities: http://weblogs.mozillazine.org/asa/archives/2012/05/why-windows-classic-.html

I haven't looked at the issue in depth, but so far what I've seen suggests there is Windows Runtime and Win32. It looks like Windows Runtime accesses Native API, not Win32.

 

[ccman]

Ok, tell me this is wrong:
"So let's talk about what the Windows Runtime is and the new platform we're introducing with Windows 8. So, you'll have seen this picture yesterday describing the APIs available to Metro-style applications, and this is one view of the Windows Runtime. It's the what can it do for me view of the Windows Runtime. And, in fact, not absolutely every API on this slide is a Windows Runtime API, some things are done with Classic Win32 APIs you're familiar with. Initialize critical section is still initialize critical section. It's down there in the low level fundamentals, but almost everything you see here is a modern Windows Runtime API that provides you with attractive natural access to the core of the Windows platform directly calling into it, and so I'm not going to talk about most of these APIs. In fact there are hundreds of talks this week talking about the specifics of each one of these boxes. I'm going to talk about how these guys come together, how you can use them, how you can make Windows Runtime work for you. And so where you saw this picture yesterday in Alecia's talk, I'm going to show you a deeper dive below this picture into the green box in the center, into the Windows Runtime itself."
Martyn Lovell Development Manager, Windows Runtime, Microsoft Corporation
http://ak.channel9.msdn.com/build/2011/mp4/874.mp4
http://channel9.msdn.com/Events/BUILD/BUILD2011/PLAT-874T
"Ok, here's the Windows Runtime architecture slide. Most scarily, it's going to build up in pieces, which means I must be some sort of PowerPoint wiz. Ok, we have the core of Windows. This is the Windows that you know and love. It has a kernel, it has a user mode, it has services, and the Windows Runtime is the exposure of that to you. It's not a layer on top of it, it's part of that core Windows, but in this picture I'm drawing it on top to show you the pieces I'm going to break out to you in today's talk."
- Again, Martyn Lovell

 

[Arainach]

I'm not saying you guys are wrong. Certainly this could be market-tecture as opposed to actual architecture, but that diagram comes from Microsoft material. For example, see slide 5 in this slide deck video.ch9.ms/build/2011/slides/PLAT-874T_Lovell.pptx.
Also, this Mozilla blog implies that Win32 and WinRT are two separate entities: http://weblogs.mozillazine.org/asa/archives/2012/05/why-windows-classic-.html

I haven't looked at the issue in depth, but so far what I've seen suggests there is Windows Runtime and Win32. It looks like Windows Runtime accesses Native API, not Win32.

WinRT is another set of APIs, just like Win32. I'm not sure what your point is. Both are still valid and supported. Win32 isn't going away. Side note: Win32 IS the "Native API". It's the lowest level of API exposed to apps.

 

[MrCrispy]

No one said Win32 should die. When .NET was introduced (a decade ago) it was meant to be the new API for app developers, even though a majority of it was just wrappers on top of Win32. Over time, more and more functions became native to .NET. The goal for Longhorn (before the Vista reset) was to have the entire shell use .NET as well.

The problem is WinRT is limited to ModernUI apps, because that's the only kind of app Microsoft wants you to write. If you want to write desktop apps, you can use any of the 100's of current technologies like COM, Win32, WPF, WinForms etc. But not the latest one with the richest API. WinRT IS meant to replace Win32 over time, but I'm pretty sure in ~2 years we'll have yet another API which is typical practice for DevDiv.

Again, the fundamental issue is why WinRT can't target desktop apps. There's no technical reason, its purely political to push people towards ModernUI exclusively. Remember the fiasco with VS Express no longer supporting desktop apps, which caused such huge backslash they had to give in? This is a similar kind of blackmail - want to use our newest API, you have only one target.

 

[thecrafter]

What's an easy way to access system utilities from the desktop? Such as calculator, defrag, etc. Without using run or searching/digging them up from the Windows directory.. Is there no more a central location of tools collections?

 

[dnottis]

What's an easy way to access system utilities from the desktop? Such as calculator, defrag, etc. Without using run or searching/digging them up from the Windows directory.. Is there no more a central location of tools collections?

nope, that's why you want to use Start8 or classicshell if you are using desktop in Win8.

I could deal with no "start" menu if there was a way to access your programs / apps from the power users menu (right click bottom left screen) but there isnt.

I'm also missing having a "games" folder that all games go into. Not everything I own is in Origin and Steam. But wtf does microsoft care, just push me a phone interface on my PC. I swear no one at MS knows how to actually use a fucking PC anymore they play all their games on their R_ROD boxes (360). Some of us do other things on our PC than just surf and send email to grandma. If I only did that I'd buy another tablet...or an ipad like the other surf/emailers do.... but sorry MS I do way more than just email and surf on my PCs.

 

[thecrafter]

nope, that's why you want to use Start8 or classicshell if you are using desktop in Win8.

I could deal with no "start" menu if there was a way to access your programs / apps from the power users menu (right click bottom left screen) but there isnt.

I'm also missing having a "games" folder that all games go into. Not everything I own is in Origin and Steam. But wtf does microsoft care, just push me a phone interface on my PC. I swear no one at MS knows how to actually use a fucking PC anymore they play all their games on their R_ROD boxes (360). Some of us do other things on our PC than just surf and send email to grandma. If I only did that I'd buy another tablet...or an ipad like the other surf/emailers do.... but sorry MS I do way more than just email and surf on my PCs.

Wow man.. if you don't like W8 why not just reinstall Windows 7 or whatever your preference is? I'm not liking W8 so far either but I could never see myself caring enough about something like this to waste my time with angry posts on the internet

 

[dnottis]

Wow man.. if you don't like W8 why not just reinstall Windows 7 or whatever your preference is? I'm not liking W8 so far either but I could never see myself caring enough about something like this to waste my time with angry posts on the internet

1. its not an angry post, it's truth.
2. I'm dual booting Win7 and Win8. I never gave anything up.

MS is as bad as these game developers that never bother to fire up their port on a PC and then have a huge launch day failure on their part. You gotta test this shit on the PC if you are gonna sell it.

 

[heatlesssun]

nope, that's why you want to use Start8 or classicshell if you are using desktop in Win8.

You can create shortcuts to pretty much anything you like in the File Explorer. People seem to forget that the Start Menu is nothing more than a file folder.

 

[devil22]

nope, that's why you want to use Start8 or classicshell if you are using desktop in Win8.

I could deal with no "start" menu if there was a way to access your programs / apps from the power users menu (right click bottom left screen) but there isnt.

I'm also missing having a "games" folder that all games go into. Not everything I own is in Origin and Steam. But wtf does microsoft care, just push me a phone interface on my PC. I swear no one at MS knows how to actually use a fucking PC anymore they play all their games on their R_ROD boxes (360). Some of us do other things on our PC than just surf and send email to grandma. If I only did that I'd buy another tablet...or an ipad like the other surf/emailers do.... but sorry MS I do way more than just email and surf on my PCs.

So why not pin your game shortcuts to the start screen, and group them into a group called 'games'. Two clicks to open any game, the start menu can not be any faster really. And if the interface works (and the user uses it appropriately) better, then it doesn't matter what it was designed for.

 

[heatlesssun]

So why not pin your game shortcuts to the start screen, and group them into a group called 'games'. Two clicks to open any game, the start menu can not be any faster really. And if the interface works (and the user uses it appropriately) better, then it doesn't matter what it was designed for.

Yeah, I don't really get his rant about all of this. I play games on my Windows 8 PCs and use Steam and Origin and have created title groups for those things. Again and again I'm seeing people who want to claim that Microsoft hasn't tried or tested things when in a lot people criticizing Windows 8 don't seem to have used it enough to know really what they are talking about.

At first I didn't like the lack of folders on the Start Screen but the more I used it and the more I worked with grouping and naming important stuff and arranging things in important and using the zoom, I've come to conclude that this is a great way to deal with a large lit of arbitrary items that works great with a keyboard and mouse.

What's tripping some people up on this is that they just can't let go of the past and try something different. If it's not JUST like the old thing then Microsoft is stupid and hasn't tested it. Again not saying it's perfect and if you don't want to figure it out or don't like it fine. But that's a personal situation, it doesn't mean that the new stuff doesn't work and isn't efficient.