Jensen Harris Tells the Story of the Design of Windows 8

Change is hard. But sometimes change is needed

Given the recent controversy around the design of Windows 8, it’s interesting that Jensen Harris, one of the people behind the Windows 8 design recently spoke at UX Week, and that his presentation is available online for all to watch. If you’re concerned about this topic, you’ll want to check it out.

I wrote about the Windows 8 design controversy in Dueling Views on Windows 8 Usability. Not surprisingly, Jensen falls on the pro-Windows 8 side of the debate. But given his involvement in the creation of Windows 8, his perspective on this issue is by definition very important.

His central argument is that while each Windows revision has been familiar to users since Windows 95, people are willing to change if you give them something better. He uses many examples of such change—the PlayStation controller was also familiar but then the Nintendo Wii changed everything, cell phones that saw incremental changes until the iPhone changed everything, how the Prius changed cars forever, and so on—to explain how other companies reimagined their respective markets. And Microsoft, of course, did this as well. It went from DOS to Windows and unseated an incredibly popular DOS-based word processor--Word Perfect 5.1, which had 90 percent market share—with Word for Windows. Change happens.

He doesn’t really say this, but at every one of these changes, there was a vocal crowd of critics explaining why the change was bad. The Kindle ruined the “new book smell” that people loved so much, or the argument that people would never be able to type on a phone’s glass screen and would need a real keyboard instead.

“Resting on familiar is the way to mediocrity,” Harris says, noting that Microsoft could have chosen to simply continue evolving Windows.

Agreed. Watch the video.

Discuss this Article 43

neonspark
on Nov 20, 2012

We've seen the negative impact reviewers had on vista, even if windows 7 is just vista plus! pack. So MSFT needs to move along quick to address the obvious drawbacks.

But at the end of the day, I think the press already made up his mind that everything about windows 8 is bad, even if iOS and android can't match many of its key features, like x86 compatibility and extensive hardware support.

With the majority of the reviews being a list of mistakes while ignoring the benefits, then it comes to no surprise that windows 8 sales will suffer. This is particularly upsetting because android 4.2 has huge issues and iOS is stuck in the last decade but few, if any reviews mention any negatives and hails both systems, none of which could run a single x86 app, as the apex of computing.

sulimir
on Nov 23, 2012

I really don't think reviewers and journalists can make a good product unsuccessful in the marketplace. Remember that the iPad had plenty of negative "its just a giant iPad touch" reviews. And as a windows user, I thought Vista was indeed bad... Until affordable hardware caught up with it's demands. By then it was too late.

emunews@msn.com
on Nov 20, 2012

You can tell how damning Nielsen's report is by how quickly Paul is scrambling to try to debunk it. Methinks that this effort is better spent trying to fix Windows 8's usability problems than trying to deny that the problems exist.

pthurrott
on Nov 20, 2012

Two things.

1) I don't scramble.

2) I'm not trying to debunk anything. I think he made some good points, as I note in my post about that topic. Jensen's video was just coincidental timing. I've written tons about what a mess the Windows 8 UI is. If you're going to be a dick, at least pay attention.

trohrer
on Nov 21, 2012

The very reason I keep reading these pages...I prefer not to waste my time reading authors who can be straightforward and call a dick a dick when its so and needs saying!! Thanks for this gem!

mebby
on Nov 20, 2012

If PT is a Windows 8 apologist then Microsoft is indeed in trouble. He has continually written about the stupid moves they have made in designing and rolling out Win 8. In fact, I - as regular reader of the Supersite for Windows and a regular Windows user - am slightly depressed reading Paul's work.

thalter
on Nov 20, 2012

Paul might nominally be a Microsoft supporter, but he is no fanboy. He calls them out when they've screwed up, and gives props to the competition (Apple, Google, Amazon, etc.) when it is due.

Marty
on Nov 20, 2012

I highly doubt that anyone outside the small circle of tech industry followers, many of who were aching to bash on Windows 8 the moment the product was announced anyway, cares anything about what Nielsen says about the new UI or what he refers to as usability issues.

rainking430
on Nov 21, 2012

I wouldn't give much credence to Nielsen's conclusions. He was negative on the Kindle Fire:

http://www.useit.com/alertbox/kindle-fire-usability.html

And on the iPad:

http://www.useit.com/alertbox/ipad-1st-study.html

And have you actually browsed his site useit.com? *shudder*

Lastly, have you used Windows 8 or RT yourself? It's fine if after giving yourself a fair chance to get used to the new interface that you still don't like it (we have lots of choices), but at least you wouldn't be just blindly repackaging others' (often agenda driven) comments as your own. I for one have been using Win8 on two different PCs since the consumer preview, and find myself often asking the question:

What usability problems??

Hanover
on Nov 21, 2012

Jakob Nielsen's opinion is about as damning as Fox News's.

85% of the noise I hear about Windows 8 is most likely coming from people who had formed their opinion before Windows 8 was released, used Windows 8 in a store for about 10 minutes, or haven't even used it at all. Those people are easily identified when the first sentence in anything they post is "Windows is a failure."

All Jakob Nielsen did was give people a false justification for their uneducated, inexperienced reviews and preconceived notions.

"This guy is important. This guy is the one and only usability expert in the world. This guy must agree with what I've already been saying. I must be right!"

The other 15% are from people like Paul, or sites like Ars Technica who give it a thorough multi-page review.

If Windows was a complete failure as these headlines claim, how come it enabled me to resurrect a bunch of old harddrives I had lying around with Storage Spaces? How come I converted the VM Ware Windows 7 image from my work MacBook to Hyper-V which has made it a lot easier to work from home? If it's a complete failure, how come I'm suddenly more productive than when I started?

Oh, you didn't know about Hyper-V or Storage Spaces? That's because these are the things a lot of the press conveniently overlooks when reviewing Windows 8. That's another issue I have with all of these reviews. They rarely go into the new features of the File Explorer or any of the things you don't see beyond the Start Screen.

Windows 8 is a new experience and there's not really anything quite like it. I can understand some of the confusion, because without having used a Windows 8 mobile device, Windows 8 is akin to trying to view a portrait standing two inches away. After awhile it it starts to make sense but it does take time. It's easier when you've used a Surface or a Windows 8 Phone because then you see the whole picture and suddenly having live-tiles on your desktop makes a little more sense.

After using my Surface for a couple of weeks, I now use the news app on the desktop all the time. I love how it presents the news in a nice, clean, magazine-like fashion. It's pleasant way to get away from your desktop for a few minutes and focus on the news. I've also found the split screen to be a convenient way to watch a podcast and do something on my desktop at the same time. It's a lot easier than trying to re-size browser windows. Since I'm using the SlapDash podcast app, it syncs between all my devices and keeps my podcasts organized. I can start watching a podcast on my PC and continue listening to it on my Windows 8 Phone in the car. This is the whole point, you can use your favorite apps on your desktop. Apps that are nice and focused on one task that keep that task organized. This is where the symbiosis between the desktop and live-tiles starts shining. Sure, you will still need the desktop to do things that require multiple windows, but not all the time. Not if you have a good app to take the place of what you normally do on a desktop...like watching a Podcast, or keeping an eye on an RSS Feed...or keeping an eye on sports scores...

(edited to clean up typos, grammar and to make it a little more concise)

vvincent1
on Nov 21, 2012

[edited as it really wasn't as funny as I thought]

Shopko
on Nov 20, 2012

Having used Windows 8 in various incarnations over the past year or so, I can say three things:

1. I love how he presented the aspect of craftsmanship that has gone into Windows 8. It's obvious that Microsoft is trying very hard to make something beautiful. It's for this reason that switching between the Start screen and the traditional desktop is incredibly jarring from a design perspective. Microsoft needs to make this a non-issue by removing the desktop completely.

2. Removing the desktop makes Windows 8 almost useless for content creators. The tablet is largely a consumption device, a task it is quite good at. Performing video editing on a tablet is a non-starter due to the lack of disk space and CPU performance. Photo retouching requires a pointing device more precise than a finger. Content creation requires a machine with more functionality and power than a portable, touch-based device can offer.

3. Windows 9 really needs to come in two major editions, one for portable and one for desktop. The desktop version will not be touch-based because it is designed for content creation using precise equipment (keyboard and mouse). The portable edition is essentially Windows 8 but without any need for the legacy desktop.

I don't think Microsoft can solve this basic design problem and maintain backward compatibility with prior editions of Windows. As you've said before, we need Windows RT for portable so that we can get away from the past and design for the future only. But we also can't ignore the past since there are wonderful applications we need and use every day. Microsoft chose a single OS platform, and in so doing they designed a jarring interface into the product. I strongly disagree with this approach, and I think they should have split the products.

With all of this said, do you ever see this happening? Or do you think we're forever stuck with the Dr. Jeckyll and Mr. Hyde design we have today?

WRowland
on Nov 20, 2012

Removing the desktop is not going to happen. There is no paradigm out there (and certainly not metro) that replaces the usability of multiple window environment with capabilities like cut and paste. It's what Windows was founded on and there's nothing out there that replaces it. What I do see happening is the desktop as an environment becoming just one more "app" in the metro space and apps that don't need to be windows (like most games) losing their need to run in a desktop environment.

Taking the concept in that direction gives Windows the ability to host multiple desktops configured for different uses, which could be quite compelling to content creators.

And splitting the OS back into multiple editions for tablet and desktop is akin to swallowing the business end of a shotgun...

Cthugha
on Nov 21, 2012

What they could do is simply make the start screen the desktop, or rather the desktop background (with windows opening on top of it). It might not be the most beautiful solution but would fix many of the issues people have with the switching between start screen and desktop.
I agree they shouldn't create different versions (apart from RT which is needed for ARM devices).

lorinkundert
on Nov 21, 2012

Very nice write up, one of the very few that are actually balanced, coming from the Engineering world it is true that 8 as it is now is unusable, I and many of my colleagues even go as far as using both a mouse and trackball at the same time, the mouse takes us where we need to be to zoom in, the trackball gives us the more precise movement needed for design work.

Microsoft needs to take note that we can do everything we need to on a Linux machine, it has been tested and is more than stable enough for our production environment.

euskalzabe
on Nov 20, 2012

FYI - If you're a registered Vimeo user you can download the video in various formats/sizes, even the original upload (beware though, that one is around 2GB... but I'd rather see the original file than a compressed-for-web one)

ghoward
on Nov 20, 2012

I run both a desktop Windows 8 and a SurfaceRT tablet.

In my experience, I rarely see the start menu on my desktop, and I rarely see the desktop on my tablet.

Yes, it seems these two experiences are "bolted together". No, it doesn't feel natural. Yes, I'll be encouraging people to use and like it.

There HAVE been some big changes. I no longer press "Start" in order to stop. Now I go to settings. It doesn't seem to make MORE sense, but it doesn't make any LESS sense. What I am finding is that I have less need to reboot. I have less need to shut down.

I find it amusing people commenting we need a separate OS for tablets than for desktops. Considering WindowsRT IS a separate OS.

Vinny4
on Nov 20, 2012

Really? Are we all still crying about the "problems" of Windows 8 usability? If you have a problem with using Windows 8 then there must be something wrong with you, or your just an Google/Apple fanboy.

nuff said.

lvthunder
on Nov 20, 2012

People will get used to both personalities of Windows 8 with the passage of time. Just like it took people time to get used to the ribbon. By time Windows 9 comes out people will be used to the way Windows 8 is and it won't be a big deal that there is the new UI and the desktop.

inreasonsimage
on Nov 21, 2012

"Harris says, noting that Microsoft could have chosen to simply continue evolving Windows." That is exactly what Microsoft should have done. The Metro design language is NOT the future. As other people have said before the Windows 8 Start Screen really does look like a Fisher-Price toy something out of a kindergarten classroom. Is this the face Microsoft wants to present to the world? What is Microsoft going to do if consumers reject Windows 8? Microsoft needs to abandon Metro as fast as possible or things will get ugly quickly. Microsoft is killing the goose that laid the golden eggs by forcing Metro onto their entire line-up. I was at Best Buy last weekend looking at TVs and I happened to walk past the Apple section. I was looking at a 27inch iMac and all I could think was, "Why can't Microsoft create a UI as elegant as this?" I've spent several years learning Microsoft technologies and I'm genuinely concerned about Microsoft's future and consequently my future. I really hope it works out for Microsoft. I hope I'm wrong, but I don't think I am.

lorinkundert
on Nov 21, 2012

"His central argument is that while each Windows revision has been familiar to users since Windows 95, people are willing to change if you give them something better."

Central point, it is not better unless you happen to have the mental capacity of a child and use the machine for only data consumption. In the real world where people actually have work to do, it is a productivity killer and lawsuit generator when the repetitive movement injuries start popping up.

qbob
on Nov 21, 2012

Interesting background talk by JH. Many activities work really well full screen whatever the size of the display. Most games, video streaming, browsing todays news. Its a long list. Opening up that space in a fluid way is what I like about the 'Metro' personality of Windows 8 and the way it expands possibilities.

However its only a part of how we use this tech. It would be interesting to hear what Jensen has to say about UX for all the other aspects of what we want to accomplish with PCs and devices that don't work as discreet full screen apps. Someone from Microsoft sure needs to elequently debunk the 'desktop is legacy' meme attached to Windows 8 UX messaging.

Memo to Windows Next planners. 'Reimagining the desktop' might make a good if predictable slogan. Looking back to 1992 again is not a bad idea, this time look at applications and what they were attempting to do. Don't be afraid of the critics and the inevitable "Schizophrenic? I'm bleeding Quadrophrenic." headlines (Pete Townsend, 1973).

Waethorn
on Nov 21, 2012

Splitting the OS into multiple versions is a bad idea. It's exactly why people (read: bloggers) decried the iPad as a productivity device, but similarly call for the iPad to run Office. Consumers still say that one of their top pet peeves with the iPad is that it can't run Office. If you read into that, what they want is a platform that runs the same stuff as their computer. This is why what Microsoft is doing makes sense.

Could they have done the Start/Desktop UX better? Until I see something else that offers the best of both worlds in a single platform, I'd have to say no. I really think Microsoft is the only company that can improve on their vision of a multi-form factor OS like Windows 8. I have yet to see anything of the other platform vendors. Take a look at the other platform vendors, and NOBODY is doing a multi-form factor OS: Google? Nope. Apple. Nope. Oracle/Canonical/Red Hat? Nope, nope, and nope. Only Microsoft is trying to bridge the gap between tablet, laptop/desktop, and eventually phone (more likely with WP9).

If you think multi-tasking is the reason why the Desktop is the better interface, I don't really see it. Start will likely improve the side-by-side app scenario, and I think it's absurd to think that they won't just enable Windows Store apps across multiple monitors in a future version or update. W8 apps are more energy-efficient, take less memory, and are easier to code, so when developers start porting their bigger desktop apps to WinRT, we can start seeing powerful apps that are hopefully more resource-friendly, and so they'll be quicker to swap between apps.

lorinkundert
on Nov 21, 2012

Nothing wrong about a separate GUI on multiple devices, what matters is the core OS.

Windows 8 touch will be useless and dangerous health-wise on a full size monitor if it is touch. It is a carpal tunnel magnet if you have to reach across your desk extending your arms to touch the screen, you will quickly damage yourself, some might then counter with "just move the screen closer" can you imagine a 30' screen 4 inches from your face?

Then you have Engineers that have to use programs like Comsol Multiphysics which is very intensive and requires in many cases 32GB of RAM and higher not to mention the multiple high speed cores that are needed to complete an a complex design analysis. I need two monitors with 6 windows opened to monitor the different simulations depending on the task, there is absolutely no possibility of a portable being able to handle that.

So with this what Microsoft has done is to abandon an entire industry that generates tremendous revenue on the high end, fortunately all of the tools I use in my company and consulting work have Linux and Apple versions available so we can certainly go that way without any problem and encourage our customers to do the same.

Victek
on Nov 22, 2012

I have only one issue with Windows 8 and that's Microsoft's unwillingness to allow users to choose between booting the "Metro" start screen or go straight to the desktop with the Start button/menu intact. I'm sure Windows 8 is an excellent experience on touchscreen devices, but it is clearly NOT on the desktop with mouse and keyboard. As a result there are numerous third party apps to restore the Start Button/Menu and bypass the Metro start screen, but this is an extra step for average users for whom this is not an easy process. I help many older users in my business and they are baffled by this sort of situation. Microsoft could have given users a choice on Desktop machines - so simple and it would have defused a great deal of bad feeling in the user community. I tell you it leaves a bad taste and it was completely unnecessary.

Vision33r
on Nov 22, 2012

This demo works better for the Apple crowd than the Windows folks. Windows has such a large user base, it's impossible to make a one size fit all OS with the newest ideas. Which is why I disagree with Windows 8 Desktop OS and Tablet sharing the same design.

Ever walk into your local DMV office and get your license or car reg renewed? Most of these offices are still using Windows XP or NT4 and that's all they need to get the job done. These are situations that make it difficult to push the latest and greatest OS as a solution. Majority of workplace are like that too, secretaries and office workers use a fully managed and corporate centric design for ease of support and usage. That's Microsoft's bread and butter right there. This Metro-fied change whether it's Windows 8-9 won't make it through large companies. Many companies are still on XP and even Office XP is proof that they can skip 2-3 major OS updates and still continue on with their business.

JeffinLondon
on Nov 22, 2012

The tiles are interesting although who wants all their personal messages and photos pop to the 'surface' when the device is lying about. I'd turn most of that off.

And I get the sweet design language, no chrome, typography, digital only. Surely an improvement over a grid of icons.

But why oh why did they attach the legacy desktop to the back end of this?

Better to have gone ahead with selling Win 7 another 5 years (a la XP) and make 'Metro' the new Win 8. Period.

The current two headed hydra is confusing to almost everyone.

emunews@msn.com
on Nov 22, 2012

Paul, *you* were the one who first connected Nielson's report with Jensen's talk. Did you forget what you wrote in the first two paragraphs of this very article?

Likewise, *you* were the one to claim that this independent study had been debunked. These are *your* words. Here's the link in case you forgot:

http://winsupersite.com/windows-8/dueling-views-windows-8-usability

So, now tell me, who's not paying attention?

Also, I did not address you uncivilly; there's no need for you to resort to four-letter words and personal attacks. If that's the best you can do, it only weakens your position.

pthurrott
on Nov 22, 2012

The article you're linking to here is the only fair treatment of this topic on the Internet. Or as *you* wrote, I "scrambled to debunk it." I "scrambled' to present it fairly. That's what I do.

As for civility, you get to eat what you put in the pot.

B to the L
on Nov 22, 2012

this would all be SO much EASIER if they would just put in a damn 5 minute tutorial upon first load!

snaidamast
on Nov 22, 2012

I happen to agree with the majority of the .NET Developer Community where they do not see the new "Start Screen" replacing the "Start Menu" as a productivity enhancement but a regressive move instead.

There was simply no reason not to provide an option for those using desktops and\or laptops that would allow for the standard desktop interface. And the fact that other environments have experienced successful changes over the years does not allow one to presuppose that changing a perfectly good working environment that has been quite stable and well appreciated by a majority of serious users of the Windows OS.

Mr. Harris also compares the change in Windows 8 to changes made in consumer-based products that have nothing to do with
serious use of a computer interface. In addition, these consumer products do not require the complexities that the standard desktop interface requires, which was the foundation of the successful adoption of these changes.

Windows 8 on the other hand, though a very stable OS based on my own testing, is attempting to be all things to all people and uses and that is simply a complete fallacy in design thinking. The result is that the decision was then made more as a result of what Microsoft "wanted" to do than compared to what was really necessary.

I happen to like the Metro interface very much but it simply does not have the capabilities that the standard desktop environment provides for serious and\or complex computer tasks. Luckily the Stardock Corporation has provided what will probably become the most popular utility for Windows 8, their new standard "Start Menu", which can be purchased for $4.95...

rhermsen
on Nov 22, 2012

Actualy liked the presentation a lot, specially the part about the animation of the charms and outlining of text in startscreen. The ocasional needle was well done also...kudos for Jensen;)

jah_subs@yahoo.com
on Nov 22, 2012

Paul:

I went to the nearby Microsoft store a week ago and tried typing on a surface using both the Touch (glass) Cover and the Type Cover. I took "touch typing" as a summer class before PCs were born and I THRIVE typing on a regular keyboard with a mouse for the pointing device. Fortunately, the Microsoft store had a Surface with Type Cover next to a Surface with Touch Cover and identical stools that enabled a good typing position for each.

For me, as a touch typist, I learned that my speed and accuracy depend upon sensing that I have actually pressed a key in a location where I expect it to be. The result is that I make far fewer errors with the Type Cover than with the Touch Cover. With the Touch Cover, I ended up omitting far more characters (partly because I could not tell that I had pressed down in the wrong place or not pressed hard enough in the right place.). I felt like I was typing the same speed on both keyboards. The Touch Cover might be suitable for people who never learned touch typing and still hunt and peck with their index finger(s), but it seems to be useless to me for touch typing.

I also remember back to when I used a Blackberry Curve. I learned to know what keys I was typing because of the pattern of the raised shapes and the general placement of my fingers on the keyboard.

If there are no Windows Phone 8 handsets with keyboards, the next smartphone that I buy will be a Blackberry or an Android.

SteveDev
on Nov 23, 2012

I find it very sad that the great principals Harris claims to have resulted in such a mess in the final product. I say this after a crazy amount of effort over the last couple of weeks with trying to get Win 8 to work for me.
If something like a brief bit of blue displayed once when setting up an account matters, why didn't all the things that you actually use get fixed?
As one example: how many people had to use Google to find out how to shutdown Win 8? And how many people will ever find the related options hidden under the 'General' line in Settings?

dhscrugco
on Nov 23, 2012

What is the big deal? Can't you click on that huge "desktop tile" located at the bottom left of your Metro interface? One click. Boom. You're in "Desktop". What could be simpler? Do you really need to purchase a utility to make one simple selection? Honestly, what is the fuss about?

fgobill
on Nov 23, 2012

Usability has an awful lot to do with actually "using" it. If you think about what the Start button was on the desktop and look at the average user's pre-Win8 desktop, you will see solid reasons why the Start Screen makes sense. All the Start button did was get you to a menu of application choices. And the average desktop is filled with shortcuts to applications and files. Why not cut out the middle man and make Start a screen of its own? And why not have a Desktop environment that is basically a virtual application to support legacy programs? That is win-win.

I have been using Windows 8 since CP and did get the Surface for home use to share with my family. Once you think about the Start Screen as just that, a customizable screen to organize the resources you want, then it all makes sense. Do you want legacy programs and Windows 8 Apps lumped together? Sure. Do it on the Start Screen. Who cares how and where it opens after that? There are enough resources available online now to show you how to move around with touch, a mouse, or the keyboard. My family is not technical. They just want stuff to work. A couple of minutes was all it took to show them how to move around in the system and why they would want to take a moment to customize their tiles on the Start Screen the way they wanted it. Now they just happily go about the business of using the computer instead of thinking about it.

Does Windows 8 make more sense on a tablet/touch experience? I think it does. But it isn't hard to work the mouse once you know how. And the future probably involves working with both at different times during the day. A consistent interface will only help matters in that regard.

sulimir
on Nov 23, 2012

I really like the WP7/WP8 look and experience but just can't get comfortable with Windows 8. Maybe if I had a more tablet-like device... But I want a desktop for my main PC. I know its just a click away, I know I can get a start button back with a hack but then I might as well just stick with 7. I am voting with my wallet by not upgrading until they figure out folks like me don't want the desktop to be considered legacy.

Siv
on Nov 24, 2012

I have used Windows 8 since the developer preview and the most obvious thing with it is that Metro is great for consumption and absolutely hopeless for productivity. I am typing this on my Windows tablet and it's clunky because the on screen keyboard is way too big and fills half the screen obliterating what I am working on. It's just about usable for typing into a comment box, but I wouldn't want to do serious work on it.
On my desktop PC I do development work and to be frank I find metro apps just too simplistic. After trying a number of them, the only ones I use are the games. Metro might appeal to Jenson's design ethic, but for me I have to be productive and even if the metro versions look great typographically I just find them too simple for what I want to do. I have tried the news applications and after a while using them I just find myself feeling too constrained and just end up going back to my desktop browser.
I hate IE10 for Metro, I think it is horrible to use, I much prefer the desktop version, everything is usable and in view, the metro version is just too clunky and actually makes me angry when I use it. I have tried to use it but the lack of Flash and the stupidity of hiding everything just gets my goat and detracts completely from the browsing experience.

This is the overall feeling I have about metro generally, it feels like the strict adherence to the metro guidelines has just produced applications that are very annoying to use.

Spektor
on Nov 25, 2012

OMG just listening to Mr. Harris' presentation explains a lot of the problems with 8's design. "Gd notices" he said about some of the details they worked on. Adding the team emulated Bauhaus reductionism in their work. Excuse me? Mr. Harris, you are neither Gd, nor Mies van Der Rohe, nor Gropius nor even Piet Mondrian with those tiles..... This superiority complex by the designers, lauding art and form over function, laced with the subconscious notion of working a Divine purpose, is in part what has so now badly crippled this product from a consumer's point of view.

One small example: Yesterday I went to a small, local computer store called Best Buy. Still no Surface available. But on the new touch laptops I was attempting to navigate 8. The task -- simply to rename or create a name for a group of tiles placed on the start screen. I had a salesman with me and asked how to do it -- say if I wanted to group my tiles into somewhat coherent groups, based on purpose, like the old start menu. "Programs" for example.

Nope. Neither he nor I could figure out how to do this. Simply rename or name a group of tiles. We tapped on the existing names, then pressed and held on them, then went into menus and the Lucky Charms menu..... Nothing worked. Then he asked his manager for help. Still NO ONE new how to do it.

If people at a computer retailer cant figure out a simple thing like this, I know for sure people like my parents wont be able to either. And if my mom can't easily get this, multiply that by the tens of millions of similar families across the country.

Despite Harris and his groupthink team hoping that millions of PC users have the time or the inclination to totally relearn how to use a computer he is just plain WRONG! People today have less time in their lives, and, sadly, are just less well educated than in the past. The average U.S. literacy level, as I was taught in journalism school, is grade 4.

Why make an OS more difficult to use? Less intuitive? Apple understands this quandry. The difference between tablets and non-touch PCs. Designing a One-for-All OS is bound to cause problems, and this is what has occurred with 8.

Hopefully, 9 will fix this with choices of interfaces -- a 7-type interface for non-touch PCs and an 8 type touch interface for consumption devices like tablets.

Otherwise, there is no rational reason for a 7 user to upgrade. Unless confusion and "apps" including advertsing is something one just must have. (And no, a boot time of a few seconds less, and mild stability improvements do not seem worth the hassle......)

neroas
on Nov 25, 2012

I don't care if anyone agrees with me or not. However, there are so many fundamental flaws with Windows 8. There is no "fixing" it. What they need to do is realize a few key points.

1) Touch Screen OS and Desktop OS needs to be separate.

2) Like many people. I only need one laptop, I have more than one desktop PC.

3) Desktop users will never use a touch screen as it doesn't make any logical sense at all, oh and yes people actually work on computers, like using them to make a living.... A touch screen doesn't make sens for that either.

4) Like many people I have a smart phone, however it's a far cry from what I can do on my desktop vs my laptop or phone.

5) Desktop users do NOT want "apps" we are using a computer not a phone, we want the more advanced options and multitasking capabilities.

As far as I am concerned, Windows 8 is a total failure to grasp what their customers want, until they realize this I would rather switch to a Mac, I never thought I would see the day. But they are pushing their Desktop market away in a hope to move forward and give people what they think we want. Which has resulted in this mess.

I have tried Windows 8 and the issues I have with it are glaring. I will not ever touch this OS and will use Windows 7 until it is no longer supported. Then will come the decision to switch to Mac or Linux if they keep on the same path.

winram
on Nov 26, 2012

Metro is a less than subtle way for Microsoft to get more money from developers by leveraging the install base of the core operating system and extend it to all platforms.

That dangling carrot would be very nice except that the usability of Metro and the underlying metro launcher (start screen) are poor for desktop users.

Metro apps must run in full screen or a third of the screen. At a risk of sounding childish, what is this, Microsoft Fullscreen 1.0? Why can't I have Windows on my Windows?

The start screen, while a great concept, has no ongoing function on a desktop. It's a launcher, no matter what Mr Harris is going to talk about how they combined data. And it's a poor launcher at that, because you can't see running programs BEHIND the launcher, and once you've launched the app, the "live tiles" are gone. The only way you can truly appreciate live tiles is if you sit there staring at all your programs.

I'm sorry, but that only really truly works on data consumption devices (phones and tablets) but not on productivity devices (desktop computers, some portable computers). To put this in perspective, I would love to have Word open writing a doc and have a weather widget open, an email widget, my monitoring software, etc all running. In Metro, I can pick two applications, and I can't resize them to my choosing, the mail app or weather app must consume a third of the screen while I write a document.

Now yes, you say I could do this in Desktop mode, but then I lose live tiles. Actually no matter what I lose live tiles. I'd have to stare at the start screen.

That makes no sense from a usability point of view. It's like putting live miles-per-gallon readouts for your car on your license plate. You have to stop driving to get out and look at what you want to look at.

The point of live tiles is to have "at a glance" data. But just like driving, at a glance really does mean you shouldn't have to stop what you're doing. On a phone I'll forgive the fact that I have to hit a button to power it on, but on a desktop, I will NOT forgive having to press a button to see my live tile data. Widgets/gadgets are that way for a reason, for you to position them as you like them, at a glance, you see what you need to see. Microsoft made them "live" but then forced them onto a screen where you can't do anything but oogle all your gadgets at once.

This entire OS just screams "I know more than you", or "You're holding it wrong." Except Microsoft doesn't have the fanboy base that Apple does.

Even Windows 95 had more ways to transition us into the new way of doing things, and allowed us to launch Program Manager. Windows 8 allows us ... nothing. Everything is forcibly removed and not even a registry hack will get back familiar features. A simple button would have appeased a lot of people. Stardock has made a truckload of cash over a silly button. When Mr Harris talks so strongly about how Windows 95 was the last radical rethinking of the OS 20 years ago, did he completely forget the fundamental reason why that was so easily received?

A few reasons:
1. It coddled users.
2. It had consistent rules which, once learned, applied uniformly ("right click is settings" for example)
3. It leveraged knowledge from the past, and certainly did not force a steep learning curve.

This last point will slow corporate adoption, but for some reason, I don't think Microsoft really cares about corporate users for this release. I think they're leveraging their StarTrek-ian curse of Every-Other-Release-Is-The-Corporate-Release by dipping their toes into the mobile ecosystem.

All I can say is ... what the hell??

It's pretty though. I like live tiles, but I don't want live tiles stuck to a start screen.

Don't get me started on how crazy ugly fullscreen metro apps are on large multimonitor desktop machines either. I've only touched on the start menu, but if Metro is the future, I want NO part of that -- unless of course my next machine is a tablet and of course, one screen and about 1/4 the size, where I only effectively run one program at a time.

No, Microsoft did not consider the usability of the power desktop user. And I don't think they care. They're going for the data consumer.

And there's the irony... Microsoft doesn't have an ipad competitor, really. They're trying to be a full computer. If Windows RT was sans desktop, that'd be a good competitor with a solid interface. A fully "walled garden" approach like Apple that actually I would have little complaints with since the interface would be consistent, uniform, and designed for the hardware.

But they overshot and suffered strongly for it.

aredhel
on Nov 27, 2012

For those folks concerned about Modern UI and the need for multiple windows (physics simulations etc.) - that can be easily mended: Multiple viewports in a single window (full screen size), which opens a host of new possibilities, e.g. semantic zoom.

You really need to shift your thinking where Modern UI is concerned, but it will be worth it.

Spektor
on Nov 27, 2012

What are you talking about? Multiple viewports? Every reviewer has acknowledged the fact that in Metro land, you get one app view at a time, or at most two, with one snapped to the screen edge and 1/3rd the screen. That's it. Unless you use a real program in Desktop land, where multiple windows are still used. Either way, one shouldn't have to do gymnastics or install 3rd party software just to fix an OS design flaw.

Please or Register to post comments.

IT/Dev Connections

Las Vegas
September 30th - October 4th

Paul ThurottYou'll have the opportunity to experience:
• 120 Technical
Sessions
• Networking with Peers
• Expert Speakers


Come See Paul Thurrott & Mary Jo Foley in Person!

Register Now

Office 365 InfoCenter

Get the latest insight and info from Paul

Read Now!

What I Use