| News | Features | Interviews |
| Blog | Contact | Editorials |
| Windows 8's desktop mode: Microsoft's 'Classic' |
| By Thom Holwerda on 2012-03-06 23:27:08 |
| As you may have seen, David's been taking care of OSNews for a few days because I'm quite busy with work. Still, there's one thing I'd like to talk about: the desktop mode in Windows 8. I wish I could've added this to the first impressions article, but I only arrived at this conclusion yesterday: desktop mode in Windows 8 is Microsoft's equivalent of Mac OS X's Classic mode. |
|
| RE[2]: Mac OS X's Classic mode |
| By orestes on 2012-03-07 02:03:40 |
| Just like UAC made the users demand developers stop making software that asked for admin privileges? That was the theory behind it's creation you know. |
 - Score: 2 |
| RE[3]: Metro |
| By tomcat on 2012-03-07 02:37:20 |
|
> People are sheep who go with whatever's installed on their drive when they buy their computer. Always have been, always will be. If a Linux distro were to get the marketing right it could very well gain momentum. Not that I lament their not moving en masse to some form of Linux one bit. The market has spoken. Move on already. |
| - Score: 2 |
| A bit torn on this one |
| By WorknMan on 2012-03-07 02:37:50 |
|
I don't think many home users are going to have any trouble with WIndows 8, since Metro and the app store is probably going to be more secure and less of a hassle than the 'classic' desktop. On the other hand, I'm sure many power and corporate users are going to hate it. Metro is obviously an environment more for grandmas and tech tards than people who need to get real work done. So I think the article's premise is right... during the transition from 'classic' to Metro, Metro will probably 'grow up' during this process, at which time most of the people who hated it in the beginning won't mind. On the other hand, if it doesn't catch on like MS hopes, just like with WPF/Silverlight, they could change they're mind again, decide to scrap Metro, and go with the new Framework of the Month. It's obvious by now that they're content to keep throwing shit against the wall until something sticks, so I wouldn't be surprised to see this happen. |
| - Score: 5 |
| RE: A bit torn on this one |
| By neticspace on 2012-03-07 02:51:05 |
|
I think it's time for Microsoft to make a dedicated work-oriented operating system. Of course, Windows 8 doesn't look work-friendly IMO. Instead, Windows 8 looks very gamer-friendly. |
| - Score: 5 |
| RE: A bit torn on this one |
| By tomcat on 2012-03-07 03:05:19 |
|
> I don't think many home users are going to have any trouble with WIndows 8, since Metro and the app store is probably going to be more secure and less of a hassle than the 'classic' desktop. On the other hand, I'm sure many power and corporate users are going to hate it. Metro is obviously an environment more for grandmas and tech tards than people who need to get real work done. There's another way to look at this. The desktop, as it currently stands, is a kind of Wild West. Apps pretty much do whatever they want, they jerk focus away from you, when you least want them to. They pop up all kinds of toasts and hook themselves into everything to alter the desktop experience. They're constantly vying to be topmost window. They are wildly inconsistent wrt UI standards. In other words, the desktop has become really lame. Metro is about restricting the UI paradigm so that the user gets to decide about how apps will get used, not the other way around. Apps can't just create multiple windows. They can't take focus away from one another. They get shoved to the background, and they stay there. They can't call certain APIs. There are restrictions on their privileges. Many geeks will see these things as unnecessary restrictions. But we've all seen what happens to the desktop when you let geeks do whatever they want: It turns into a roiling cesspool. The desktop has its place. It's primarily about content creation -- whereas Metro is about content consumption -- so there's nothing which says you have to choose between one or the other. People can simply decide which world they prefer to live in. > So I think the article's premise is right... during the transition from 'classic' to Metro, Metro will probably 'grow up' during this process, at which time most of the people who hated it in the beginning won't mind. Agree with you on this. It's a transition. > On the other hand, if it doesn't catch on like MS hopes, just like with WPF/Silverlight, they could change they're mind again, decide to scrap Metro, and go with the new Framework of the Month. It's obvious by now that they're content to keep throwing shit against the wall until something sticks, so I wouldn't be surprised to see this happen. I don't think so. The iPad has become a very real competitive threat to Microsoft's laptop market, and it has to make a longterm commitment to this market. I'm sure they will evolve their application model, but it seems unlikely -- given the investment in the App Store, etc -- that they will scrap it entirely. |
| - Score: 3 |
| RE[2]: A bit torn on this one |
| By tomcat on 2012-03-07 03:06:53 |
|
> I think it's time for Microsoft to make a dedicated work-oriented operating system. Of course, Windows 8 doesn't look work-friendly IMO. That's Windows 7. Which is why a ton of enterprises upgraded to it. |
| - Score: 2 |
| Comment by Luminair |
| By Luminair on 2012-03-07 03:21:06 |
| your analogy is a stretch. |
| - Score: 4 |
| Its more seamless then Classic in OS X |
| By Windows Sucks on 2012-03-07 03:27:59 |
| Um yeah didn't Apple do that like 13 years ago or so? I mean really. MS again copies Apple then makes it sound like they are doing it better. Really? |
| - Score: 2 |
| Not Classic |
| By n4cer on 2012-03-07 03:44:15 |
|
Classic implies the Desktop is deprecated -- soon to be removed. Microsoft has stated otherwise (I believe Jensen Harris' BUILD session was one such occasion). Certain applications (e.g., AutoCad, Maya, Visual Studio, Photoshop [though to a lesser extent perhaps]) derive definite benefits from the Desktop, and will likely continue to be Desktop applications (though could have Metro variants). More likely -- WinRT will grow to include a Desktop application model, fully replacing Win32 (but Win32 won't be removed for a long time [if ever] for compatibility's sake). Also, the whole Metro vs Desktop is somewhat misleading since it's possible to create a Metro Desktop application (e.g., Zune). It was better when MS referred to Metro-styled apps as "Modern" at least when referring to the current, most visible, WinRT app type vs general Desktop applications. Maybe WinRTv1, since I fully expect WinRTvNext to include the Desktop. It's also probable that Windows 8's Desktop gets a Metro theme by Release Candidate stage. Edited 2012-03-07 03:45 UTC |
| - Score: 3 |
| RE: Its more seamless then Classic in OS X |
| By tomcat on 2012-03-07 03:45:50 |
|
> Um yeah didn't Apple do that like 13 years ago or so? I mean really. MS again copies Apple then makes it sound like they are doing it better. Really? Um, no. Apple didn't "do that". Apple ran a classic app in its own little standalone, carbonized VM. MS is running two side-by-side environments here. |
| - Score: 2 |
| News | Features | Interviews |
| Blog | Contact | Editorials |