Windows: Say goodbye to the Desktop
-
Ed Korsberg wrote:
I among many others agree that Windows 8 for a desktop machine in the hands of a developer is a major step backward. I find zero redeeming value in the Windows 8 UI, none whatsoever. I have 3 big monitors, many simultaneous windows and applications open. In fact if I had the resources I could easily fine use for more monitors. Between running multiple editors, device emulators, monitoring tools, etc, it is a challenge to fit even on three screens. I think this Metro UI is idiotic and I hope that someday the industry will awake from this delusion and return to a sensible approach where not one size fits all.
It's hard to say whether the thing is going to make it or not but to folks like us it's clearly not going anywhere. I can see it fulfilling a purpose in the tablet space (similar to iOS), but you're not going to see the desktop environment go away. It may not be as visible out there, and that's OK. Microsoft and anyone else that understands anything realizes that the desktop environment is where REAL work gets done. Yeah, sure, I'm going to design a SQL database or write a software application on a touch Metro style screen. No, that may be the TARGET of a development effort but it's not going to replace the development environment which is a desktop. VS2013 is a DESKTOP app. I'd really like to see MS put it's developer tools into Metro. Yeah, right! Microsoft may be trying to fade the desktop into the background all right, but they're not going to destroy the bread-and-butter here. I believe there will always be some kind of desktop system. It may take a bit to get to it but it will be there and it will continue to be supported. The presence of all this mobile technology does not mean that the MASSIVE ecosystem built around the desktop is going to just roll-over and die. That is unless MS plans to do ALL the development itself or is willing to port ALL of it's development tools into "Metro" and force the developer community there. I think that idea is a bit of a stretch! As for any individual developer, just pick which platform you want to develop to, get the tools and get to work. You can't do everything - don't try to. If you like "Metro" then get VS2013 and get busy. If you don't (like I don't) then do something else. There's a lot of angst over this one which I, personally, think is unecessary.
I have some good news to update. First I updated (not upgraded) to windows 8.1 and at first glance I think the UI experience was worse than 8.0. But I had planned on installing "Start is back" so was not worried. See www.startisback.com . I just did this and highly recommend it. It does exactly what is claims to do and now Windows 8.1 works sanely like windows 7 AND allows for a better access to the new metro apps.
-
dpminusa wrote:
The reliabilty, privacy, and security issues trouble me.
Not to mention of course the fact that it is a company. And if all of your company assets are on another companies computers and that company goes away you are in a lot of trouble in the short term and perhaps even the long term. To me it seems like no one (no developers) consider that when your assets are hosted that they must be backed up to a different hosting site (to a different company.) This isn't just hypothetical as it has already happened when people lost their content. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megaupload#Data_retention[^]
Yep!! To me this the third iteration of large off-site server farms in the industry. The first were Data Centers, the second were Application Service Providers (ASP). I saw some of my peers buy into the ASP paradigm and invest hundreds of thousands. They all failed and some had law suits to deal with exactly for the reason you stated. The technology and sensibility is better now to try the ASP idea again and call it the Cloud. It would NOT be a good idea to call it an ASP again. Most of the reasons the ASP's failed are still issues that are not well resolved. Robustness, Capacity, Security, Service, Price Mobiity, Data Managment, etc., etc. It is just very timely for other reasons. Maybe mostly because the largest industry corporations can benefit tremedously by becoming the new "cable-esque" companies with devices, services, subscribers, and near monopolies. I would prefer a flatter, broader, level playing field myself. Some of our potential safeguards are influencers like YouTube, Twitter, Yelp, etc. Public opinion can be very quickly expressed and felt. We need these watchdog vehicles. I am unconfortable with the direction of the internet as it morphs from its initial intent. I was very surprised to see Berners-Lee starting to chime in with the large players now. He an organizations like the EFF were keeping more of them honest in the past. Some thoughts for what they are worth. Maybe I have just been in the industry too long.
"Courtesy is the product of a mature, disciplined mind ... ridicule is lack of the same - DPM"
-
Microsoft releases a new version of it's OS and it puts users in a UI-shellshock, it breaks many of their current applications, it near-forces users to need a touch display (are there many touch displays for desktops out there?) and they expect everyone to be happy? Apple releases a new OS and gives it a catchy name, adds tabbed-browsing to their version of Windows Explorer, integrates a map feature into the OS and makes only a few other minor changes, while strengthening the core of the kernel. I use to be a hardcore Windows Developer and lover. I even blogged about it as a young developer and waxed philosophically of how the behemoth of Microsoft loved it's developers and equipped them to make wonderful software for the masses. However, that era has past. I need consistency and nominal updates to the operating system that fix what's broken and, as a result, continues to empower me to make exceptional software for the masses. Sure, you can make the GUI prettier but don't break your OS, at it's core, to do it! Goodbye Microsoft. Our relationship was a good one while it lasted. However, your obsession of breaking new ground at the expense of breaking important OS fundamentals has forced me to search for an alternative.
I hadn't noticed Windows 8 break a single one of my existing applications. Indeed most of them run better due to improved performance. I rarely use the new UI, but it rarely causes me problems either. I do wish they would allow me to access some of the new API from desktop app's too, but that hardly breaks anything!
"If you don't fail at least 90 percent of the time, you're not aiming high enough." Alan Kay.
-
A story that makes me feel that I now have to buy hardware according to which OS sucks the least. Microsoft Moving to Redefine Windows[^] Paul Thurrott is an interesting commentator in that he can be particularly outspoken on stupidity and poor decision making (when it comes to the satisfying the consumer) in the IT industry. He's particularly vocal in his distaste in most things Apple, preferring to focus on the bad instead of the good, but on Microsoft he treads a very careful line in his criticisms - possibly to protect his cherished access to their inner circle - so it's hard to know where he stands on this one. In a nutshell: Desktop mode in Windows will go and Metro will rule. Desktop will become the new Terminal Window: a tool for those who need deeper access than the Windows GUI can provide, and de-emphasised to the point of being hidden out of view. There will be one Windows To Rule Them All: on phones, on tablets, and on (as he says) the increasingly archaic desktop. It will be the same Windows with the same apps and drivers across all devices. Which is fine: The Holy Grail of Operating Systems (and software development) is the one platform on all devices, and it's obviously the direction the industry will, and must, go. However, does this mean that I will do all my input using touch? Does this mean that my PC - a tool I use to input and create - will have the same UI focus and experience as a phone that is primarily a device for consuming, not creating, content? I need to get on my soapbox here. I know this discussion has been had a million times since the release of Windows 8 but I am at a loss to understand how the Metro UI in its current form can be considered a sensible direction. Maybe I'm wrong, but I simply do not work with one (or at max two) windows open at once, taking up the entire screen. I find UIs where you have to hover carefully for a period in unmarked areas to get access to features to slow me down. Having to click (or drag) from the very the top of the screen all the way down to the bottom to close an app? Since when were 'close' buttons truly that awful? Features such as usability, the frustration of confusion of feature discovery and the forcing of users into a window management paradigm that simply doesn't fit the way many need t
I whole-heartedly agree. I'd even go a step further and say many of these arguments apply as well to tablets: (a) many of the new gestures require too vast movements on an 10 inch screen or greater, and (b) hiding away some of the core functionality in corners doesn't make sense on a reasonably sized tablet screen. (c) also the two window limit seems arbitrary and unneccesary: what about utilities that do nothing but indicate a status in a tiny frame (time, connection status, battery power)? Why can't those all be viewed along with the active application? There's more, but I'd just be reiterating other articles and postings. For me Windows died with Windows 8, and MS failed to resurrect it in 8.1. I've been using 8.0 on my ultrabook for half a year and I hate it, in spite of all the tweaks I installed to return the W7 experience. On my desktops I'll run W7 for as long as possible, and once I need to retire it I'll probably switch to Linux. I may even switch my Ultrabook to Linux before then, it so annoys me. (It's not even the UI - I run it in desktop mode using ClassicShell - it's some of the W8 "features" under the hood that make me consider dumping it altogether!) I used to prefer Windows over Linux because it worked out of the box. With W8, this is no longer true.