POST A COMMENT

113 Comments

Back to Article

  • Dennis Travis - Thursday, March 01, 2012 - link

    Agree with you on the Metro interface. Feel it would be an excellent Tablet OS, but on a desktop or even traditional Laptop? Not for me! Reply
  • Baron Fel - Thursday, March 01, 2012 - link

    I totally disagree about metro's usefulness on a laptop or desktop. Only been using the CP for a couple hours and already I love task switching with a mouse and the corners, its super intuitive and smooth.

    The live tiles look great and have lots going on with updating info. I thought IE10 would be totally useless for desktop use, but its actually a pretty immersive browsing experience. Not as good for browsing hard as IE9 desktop but still great.

    I see no appeal in touchscreen desktop displays (yet anyway), but a laptop with touch would be amazing, especially with a form factor like the Lenovo Yoga. Metro on the Zune HD and WP7 is quite enjoyable to use, Id love to interact with my laptop in the same way while still having desktop apps and input. Metro apps on the desktop will be pretty weak but they'll be great on laptops like the Yoga.

    even after only a couple hours use (and almost no use of the dev preview) the only real way the UI messes me up is that I reflexively hit start and then my computer whenever I need to manager folders and such. Going to take some time to unlearn that reflex.
    Reply
  • MonkeyPaw - Thursday, March 01, 2012 - link

    I've only tried W8CP for 20 minutes or so on Virtual Box, and I'm having a hard time getting on board with the start screen. I have serious doubts it will ever pass the Wife Test, as it's a very big departure from normal. The live tiles might be nice for some, but they don't do much for me. It's not like opening the application takes that long.

    I will still continue to try it and see if it grows on me, but I get a bad feeling this will be another Vista for MS. It should be more stable than Vista thanks to a mature driver model, but I see this really causing a lot of pain and suffering for those that are used to the way things were. Having to unlearn things is one thing, but having to unlearn acceptable ways of doing things for the sake of different is a whole different matter.

    I just get the feeling MS is changing things for the sake of changing them.
    Reply
  • apinkel - Thursday, March 01, 2012 - link

    Yeah, I'm in the same boat. I'm still reserving judgement since I only got to play with it for about 15 mintues last night but the desktop UI does seem completely alien.

    If I didn't know all kinds of shortcuts I'm not sure how I would have navigated around. Just figuring out how to power down the OS baffled me. Not a good sign so far.
    Reply
  • daniel142005 - Friday, March 02, 2012 - link

    I would have to agree. The user friendliness of Windows 8 on a desktop is a step backwards. I originally used the developer preview and it at least had a start button still, but with the consumer preview it took me a good 15-20 minutes of using the Windows key to realize you have to move the mouse to the corner for it to show up. I guess in a way it's faster, but if you have multiple monitors it's a pain in the ass trying to get the side panels to come up. Reply
  • niva - Friday, March 02, 2012 - link

    Right on with your comments. I'm really enjoying reading these articles.

    I'm also going to reserve judgement until I get to play with it for a while. A similar experience was when ubuntu switched to Unity, I didn't like it at first at all, but eventually got used to it and now I can't stand the Gnome2 experience anymore. Over time Unity grew more stable and feature rich, now I'm really looking forward to the first LTS with it.

    MS should implement some type of a classic desktop though and at least the ability to reconfigure the desktop regardless of the device. I'm not sold at all on touchscreens for anything other than tablets and cell phones.

    For production sake such as system admin, software dev, art/graphics, monitoring data, etc and working with huge arrays of big displays touchscreens are generally useless.
    Reply
  • enealDC - Saturday, March 03, 2012 - link

    I haven't played with the preview yet, but as people are commenting I thought of the unity interface for Ubuntu. At first I hated it because it was such a dramatic departure from the classic gnome interface, but after using it it grew on me. Now I can't live without it. Metro sounds like its going to give Windows users a similar experience. Reply
  • alcalde - Friday, March 02, 2012 - link

    "nd already I love task switching with a mouse and the corners, its super intuitive and smooth"

    Then why weren't you using KDE on Linux years ago? :-) Best thing is... you can get that with a traditional interface. Click a button though and you've got a touch interface! You're not forced to use one or the other.
    Reply
  • Termie - Thursday, March 01, 2012 - link

    Agree on problems with Metro interface. Just installed it on my old laptop, and I think I'd go for it with a touchscreen, but otherwise, I'm not sold.

    I think Microsoft is on to something with the Metro start page, which just makes more sense than clicking on start every time you want to see a program. It's like a the task bar shortcuts scaled up 100 times. But the problem is that far too many critical components of the OS are almost impossible to find, such as the control panel and Device Manager. Furthermore, I flat out do not understand the role of the desktop. It's as if Microsoft realized it couldn't make the metro screen work for computers actually used for work, and decided to have two non-compatible overlapping interfaces built in.

    Unless I can't run future apps on W7, I won't be upgrading to W8 on my desktop. Microsoft simply has to make Metro work or not do it at all for desktop users. I am, however, very interested in using W8 on a touch-enabled laptop, if such models arrive along with the OS.
    Reply
  • damianrobertjones - Friday, March 02, 2012 - link

    I don't. Oh well Reply
  • pandemonium - Thursday, March 08, 2012 - link

    The only way I can see Metro functioning well for a laptop or desktop is if we replace keyboard, mouse, and display with the desk itself. We'd all be using drawing board-like desktop computers if that develops. Reply
  • GoodBytes - Thursday, March 01, 2012 - link

    On my laptop I have noticed that I have some sever latency issues, using: http://www.thesycon.de/deu/latency_check.shtml (free).

    I am using WIn7 64-bit drivers. I have the Dell Latitude E6400, Core 2 Duo P8400 2.2GHz, 4GB of RAM, Intel Wireless 5100-N, Nvidia Quadro NVS 160M (using Nvidia latest Win8 drivers). All drivers installed and checked with Device Manager panel. Runs Win7 64-bit above and beyond.
    Reply
  • GoodBytes - Thursday, March 01, 2012 - link

    Dam submitted by mistake.

    I wanted to say that perhaps the latency issue is more uncommon for this OS, and could play a part in the reduced battery life.
    Reply
  • cdube - Thursday, March 01, 2012 - link

    Ever since Metro was released, I've thought it to be very well suited as a touch interface. But on a full size screen and mouse / keyboard input, it seems very slow, clunky, and counter-intuitive. With the dev preview and this preview now, I'm just trying to get it back like Windows 7. Fortunately I can just alt-tab out of vmware. But I don't think Windows 8 will be much of a sales success for MS, except for tablets perhaps. And even then, all I can see it doing is fracturing the windows ecosystem. Reply
  • Baron Fel - Thursday, March 01, 2012 - link

    The only way Windows 8 will be less successful than Windows 7 is if PC sales decrease and Windows 8 fails to compete in the tablet space. Both of these are pretty much impossible imo.

    Stop thinking about Metro for a sec. Windows 8 has a huge amount of improvements to the core OS. So people will definitely be buying and upgrading their PCs, probably more people than 2009 cause perpetual growth is just how things work. And then you add in places Windows hasn't really been before like sleek x86 and Arm tablets, where itll no doubt destroy Android tablets and compete hard with the iPad.

    So yeah I think in a few years Windows 8 will replace Windows 7 as the best selling OS of all time.
    Reply
  • Cobra Commander - Thursday, March 01, 2012 - link

    If PC sales decrease is pretty much impossible?

    Wake up and smell the coffee, you're not living in reality.
    Reply
  • Baron Fel - Thursday, March 01, 2012 - link

    http://www.gartner.com/it/page.jsp?id=1786014

    PC sales are still growing. Recently they've been down slightly, because of the HDD shortage. When that gets better and the economy picks up, people will buy more.
    Reply
  • steven75 - Thursday, March 01, 2012 - link

    That link includes Macs, which are growing much faster than PCs are. Reply
  • Paulman - Thursday, March 01, 2012 - link

    This may be obvious... but you're sure that the age of the battery wasn't a factor in these tests, right? Because depending on how many charge cycles (or how much trickle charging) that battery has been put through... its max battery life may have shortened considerably from when you did that first test.

    Unless you re-ran the Windows 7 test around the same time you did this new Windows 8 test. But looking at the benchmark numbers, it's the exact same result as from Jan 2011's test (416 minutes), so I'm guessing not... http://www.anandtech.com/show/4084/intels-sandy-br...
    Reply
  • solipsism - Thursday, March 01, 2012 - link

    Battery health is certainly a factor but after 2.5 years the health shouldn't account for that much disparity with normal usage unless their is a problem with the battery. Still, that should be tested or at least have Win7 installed and retested. Reply
  • Cobra Commander - Thursday, March 01, 2012 - link

    Unless there is a problem with the battery is correct and extremely common in 2.5 year's time... this is not just a consideration to factor, this is a very common real-world issue Paulman raises.

    ...the importance of revealing benchmarking methodology is as-important as the benchmark results themselves.
    Reply
  • OoklaTheMok - Thursday, March 01, 2012 - link

    At 2.5 years old, you will definitely start seeing diminished battery performance. If the win8 battery life test was done using an old battery, and the win7 was done when the battery was less aged, then this test was pretty much invalid. Reply
  • B3an - Thursday, March 01, 2012 - link

    These tests shouldn't even be on Anandtech. Serious lack of quality here. Completely different and dated browser vs a new fully GPU accelerated browser? WTF? And on top of this it looks like the tests for the IE8 system are old too, so as said the battery may have degraded.

    This shouldn't have been posted. I'd expect this on Engadget where they will post any crap for page views, but not here.
    Reply
  • JarredWalton - Thursday, March 01, 2012 - link

    Yes, because we wouldn't want to know that IE10CP + W8CP appears to suck down battery life like an SUV. [rolls eyes] Reply
  • Gammo - Thursday, March 01, 2012 - link

    Sure we want to know if if sucks down juice-- But you know what, we'd like to know that proper care has been taken in putting together the benchmarks, and you're not just shooting in the dark! This site is better than that! Reply
  • Omoronovo - Thursday, March 01, 2012 - link

    I'm glad someone pointed this out, I was saddened to see yet another Windows 8 article trodden down into metro bashing.

    My own laptop, a pitiful HP, only lasted about 8 months before battery life started to diminish - this is from heavy use, of course, and it was AMD based so it ran very hot which I doubt helped.

    Regardless, if this test machine is the *exact* machine that was used for the initial tests, it should be at LEAST retested with windows 7 to generate apples to apples comparisons.
    Reply
  • ssj4Gogeta - Thursday, March 01, 2012 - link

    I think they should also test with Chrome on both platforms, just to remove the beta version of IE from the equation. Reply
  • JarredWalton - Thursday, March 01, 2012 - link

    Working on it, as noted in the article. Testing battery life unfortunately is very time consuming. I've got a couple other laptops I'm going to test as well. Reply
  • MacGyver85 - Thursday, March 01, 2012 - link

    The following site did do its homework:
    http://www.itworld.com/windows/254380/hands-window...

    Goes to show how much credibility Anandtech has these days: none and that is very sad.
    Reply
  • nathanddrews - Thursday, March 01, 2012 - link

    Great link! I guess that's what happens when you publish articles like this without proper evaluation. Reply
  • JarredWalton - Thursday, March 01, 2012 - link

    It's a pipeline article for a reason, and I specifically cite IE10CP as a potentially major factor. As far as battery goes, HWMonitor is showing 2% wear, so that's not going to be a factor. I'm going to rerun, and then use a different browser, and then test idle and video battery life as well. Guess what: at about four to eight hours of drain time for each test, plus another three or four hours to recharge, it's not something you can actually evaluate in one day. Hence, it goes in the pipeline as a "preliminary look at battery life." Reply
  • Gammo - Thursday, March 01, 2012 - link

    The FIRST test done should have been to "calibrate" the battery life against a known result, just because HWMonitor reports 2% wear doesn't mean it's at all accurate.

    While it might well be that IE10CP is a battery hog, the result is basically meaningless since you don't really know the state of the battery--Does HWMonitor measure the health of the battery after a full discharge and recharge? Or does it take a wild stab in the dark on boot-up?
    Reply
  • JarredWalton - Thursday, March 01, 2012 - link

    It measures what the battery reports, which in my experience with modern batteries is generally accurate. It might be off by 1-2%, not 20%. Got some more results from a second laptop I'm adding now.... Reply
  • Aikouka - Thursday, March 01, 2012 - link

    Psst. It's called "A Quick Look" for a reason, and no definitive statements about battery life are made.

    I'm actually wondering if the issue is with the laptop choice. I don't know what the Compal unit in question is equipped with (Jared, to be honest, the specs should be listed), but the lack of proper drivers could easily cause a more power hungry GPU to use more power than necessary (no reduced clocks, etc.).
    Reply
  • JarredWalton - Thursday, March 01, 2012 - link

    I linked back to the original review where we list the specs; for a pipeline piece I figured that was sufficient.

    Also, for the above people talking about the battery, please note that the battery is not 2.5 years old; it's one year old and this laptop hasn't been used regularly during that time. Basically, it's capable of holding a full charge still (according to HWMonitor, there's 2% wear, but that's not much different than the 1% wear many batteries report when they're brand new).

    Still working on running more tests, though....
    Reply
  • B3an - Thursday, March 01, 2012 - link

    Shouldn't have posted this Jarred. IE8 vs IE10 alone is just silly. IE10 is completely GPU accelerated and up to date, where as IE8 is a dated POS and completely different, including the rendering and javascript engines.

    And even if the battery is just a year old it's still something that isn't acceptable for Anantech IMO.
    Reply
  • JarredWalton - Thursday, March 01, 2012 - link

    IMO you're wrong. The battery doesn't degrade sitting on a shelf. If I were using the laptop daily, it would be different, but this laptop has been mostly gathering dust, only being pulled out for occasional back-testing of SNB/HD 3000. And the fact that IE9 posts very similar battery life to IE8 also says you're wrong in that area. However, IE10CP is early and very likely not well optimized. So, the question is whether the tests show that Win8CP has issues with battery life, or if it's just IE10CP. I'm guessing the latter, and that in itself is something worth knowing.

    But I suppose knowing that the IE10CP uses more power than Safari is just silly. I shouldn't tell people stuff like that! It's not acceptable for readers to be given any information!
    Reply
  • Gammo - Thursday, March 01, 2012 - link

    That's not right at all if it's a lithium-ion battery. They DO have a limited shelf life, and they do lose capacity permanently in storage, particularly when stored at higher temperatures or at high levels of charge. Reply
  • JarredWalton - Thursday, March 01, 2012 - link

    Yes, eventually, but after ten months of on again, off again use? I'm inclined to think it might have degraded a few percent, not 20+ percent. Reply
  • MacGyver85 - Saturday, March 03, 2012 - link

    Even if my initial response was a bit extreme I still stand by it: I, and every other Anandtech reader with me, expect facts and reliable data. Even if your assumptions would be correct they're still assumptions!
    My laptop's battery has gone from 90ah to 70ah in slightly less than one year of less than heavy use which is 23% down.

    That said it does seem like you're on to something so kudos!
    Reply
  • JarredWalton - Saturday, March 03, 2012 - link

    Tables have been updated. The results for Internet battery life on Win7 with IE9 are 425 minutes, compared to 416 minutes originally with Win7 and IE8. I've run Win8 + IE10 three times, reporting the best result, and it's still abysmal compared to the Win7 result. However, I still need to run with a clean Win8 install -- the K53E doesn't drop nearly as much, and possibly it's because of the clean Win8 install. (It's also possible that Win8 + IE10 is just putting more of a load on a quad-core CPU for some reason.) Reply
  • MacGyver85 - Tuesday, March 06, 2012 - link

    Maybe interesting to look at the average CPU frequency on both.
    Have you already run a powercfg /energy report? Might be that it immediately makes the problem visible.
    Reply
  • gorash - Thursday, March 01, 2012 - link

    You're right, Metro f*cking sucks for desktop. They should have just released a different desktop version. Reply
  • Nathanb - Thursday, March 01, 2012 - link

    No start button, no deal. Checked out Win8 on my laptop last few days and I gotta say, if they don't give you the option to disable Metro....I'll stick with Win7 as long as possible. Maybe it's good for a touch screen but I don't care about that, I'm a desktop/Laptop user. Terrible interface IMO Reply
  • Shadowmaster625 - Thursday, March 01, 2012 - link

    I watched the Samsung series 7 Slate hands on with windows 8 video. Near the end of the video he opened task manager and much to my horror it showed even more bloat than previous windows versions! What a sick joke. This was an i5 2 core 4 thread CULV sb processor and it was loaded at about an average of 15%. Clearly a battery is not going to last very long with that much load. He wasnt even really doing much of anything. Just moving windows around. The whole time it should have been 1-2% average load. I hope microsuck goes bk for screwing up this badly. Reply
  • rruscio - Thursday, March 01, 2012 - link

    When there's a decent virtual touch pad, using Kinect hardware, Metro will be cool on a desktop.

    Till then, I'll avoid doing the arm raises my current office layout implies.
    Reply
  • n0x1ous - Thursday, March 01, 2012 - link

    Metro is an absolute disaster for desktop/laptop, they need to wake up and at least give the option to disable it.

    Maybe the option to turn off comes with Pro/ultimate/Enterprise
    and the home version is stuck with it.

    Cant imagine business users try to set this up for their users. What the hell is MS thinking?
    Reply
  • Cobra Commander - Thursday, March 01, 2012 - link

    I understand your commenting about an upgrade, but that does not excuse Microsoft from the VERY poor showing here. The majority of regular people upgrading to Windows 8 will, um, <i>upgrade</i>. Most regular people have absolutely zero inclination to clean-install a new version of Windows.

    The fact of the matter is, <i>upgrading</i> to new versions of Windows historically has created a muddy, undesirable Windows environment and Microsoft has not rectified this <i>ancient</i> problem.

    Let us speak plainly about the elephant in the room and please do not excuse Microsoft anymore. It's freaking <b>2012</b> now, they're <i>reactively</i> trying to innovate to catch up to the competition (in a market even Dell has forsaken!), and it's not good enough.

    We need wholesale change here and it won't come under Ballmer's direction. Everything up to and including their outdated major release-only product delivery... good grief, I'm not getting started this early in the morning.
    Reply
  • Braumin - Thursday, March 01, 2012 - link

    Actually, most people will just get it with a new PC. Only tech people upgrade. Reply
  • mi1stormilst - Thursday, March 01, 2012 - link

    Well really that is what we are talking about here. A reinvented OS interface and better integration with hardware. I think before I load up the consumer preview I am going to get a touch pad or a wacom tab to try it out. I like the look and function of the new OS so far. Reply
  • quiksilvr - Thursday, March 01, 2012 - link

    Seriously, just run Firefox or Chrome and see how they stack up. Reply
  • fishbits - Thursday, March 01, 2012 - link

    "I also performed an in-place upgrade from Windows 7"
    You what?! Really? For testing purposes to be reported to the public? What?"

    "I've only had a chance to run the battery drain test once so far, so consider the above results very preliminary."
    But publishable, right? And without bothering to remove obvious variables like battery aging or using the same browser?

    "...while the UI seems like it would work great on a tablet I’m ready to go on record as saying it sucks for traditional desktop and laptop users"
    The UI? Or did you mean the Metro portion of the UI? Because that's a pretty important distinction, I'd think. And that has what to do with a battery test?

    This is sloppy and weak, a trend that's been going on recently here. Hope Anand's still on top of things, because what's been going on is a far departure from his methodology and presentation style.
    Reply
  • jdmackes - Thursday, March 01, 2012 - link

    I'm glad someone else pointed those comments out. If you've only tested the battery once, how can you publish an article like this? You're accusing microsoft and windows 8 of having poor battery life without even doing proper tests. Reply
  • JarredWalton - Thursday, March 01, 2012 - link

    One word: pipeline. It's not a full article, and if you'd notice it does say "a quick look". I'm still testing and will follow up with more numbers once I can charge/discharge the battery about six times under different workloads. But thanks for pointing out the obvious concerns that I specifically spelled out in the text and then saying that we're going downhill. Reply
  • fishbits - Thursday, March 01, 2012 - link

    Knowing that your methodology was so shabby, by your own admission, you shouldn't have published this until you could do something proper. Not "definitive" or "authoritative" or "exhaustive..." simply proper.

    If the results were within 10% of each other one could say that's reasonable variance, but that follow-up is to come. When the discrepancy is that huge, most objective testers would prefer getting it right to.... what is your goal? Why would you publish something that *you* say was poorly observed?

    And yes, compared to the Anandtech that I've read for many years, rushing to publish results the author knows are flawed IS going downhill. Anand is relentless in trying to weed out his own biases, assumptions and bad observations in his own writing. He isn't perfect, but he sure tries, and that level of effort is appreciated.
    Reply
  • JarredWalton - Thursday, March 01, 2012 - link

    It's not poorly observed, it's a poor result. And I've rerun the test a second time (so the battery is likely holding a better charge after one full cycle) and the results were 4.8% higher than the first run.

    I've got a second laptop running the exact same test, this time with a clean install. I've made sure it has the latest Intel HD Graphics drivers (those were missing on the system in this test, so I've updated and am currently running the test yet again). The current estimate is 313 minutes with Win8 + IE10, compared to 360 minutes with the original Win7 configuration. But that's only an estimate based on the "battery life remaining" and "estimated time", so I wouldn't take those results as proof of an improvement until the battery is actually fully drained. It's closer to the Win7 result for sure, but it's also still a 15% drop.

    So questions that still remain and need to be answered:

    1) Is the poor result because I did an in-place upgrade of an existing Win7 install?

    2) Did the outdated Intel HD driver cause a severe drop?

    3) Will we see better battery life results with a different browser instead of IE10CP?

    4) What about battery life in other scenarios (e.g. idle and video playback)?

    5) Does dual-core vs. quad-core CPU use show any relative differences between Win7 and Win8?

    There are probably a few other points that we could raise, but those are the main items right now.
    Reply
  • toytanks - Thursday, March 01, 2012 - link

    I ran two tests with a laptop I bought around Black Friday (Samsung RC501, I think) pitting the DP against Windows 7 SP1. For the first I ran a program called Battery Eater and the second I looped Apocalypse Now on Netflix until the battery died and in both cases the DP lasted longer. Unless they did something godawful in the CP these results are hard to believe. Reply
  • Braumin - Thursday, March 01, 2012 - link

    I am so sick of these "power users" who try Metro for 10-20 minutes, and then say they hate it.

    You know what? I used to hate brussel sprouts as a kid, but I tried them enough that now I love them.

    Huge changes like this are going to take some time to adapt to. Give it some time, and maybe you will love it and hate going back.

    Every time there is a new version of Windows, it always takes some adjustment before you can intuitvely do what you want. With a change this big, it is going to take slightly longer than 20 minutes.

    Do you really think average joe consumer will complain as much as you? They are going to log in to their desktop, and see their live tile for mail, and it will show them they have 10 unread emails. Then, they will see that they have 5 facebook updates on their facebook app. I would argue that average consumers are going to transition to this way easier than so-called power users, who are so stuck in their old paradigms that they don't want to learn anything new.

    As for the battery life (what this article was supposed to be about), it is obvious Jarred did not do his homework here. I would suggest he retracts this, and runs a proper set of tests.
    Reply
  • mongster122 - Thursday, March 01, 2012 - link

    Have you personally tried Metro with keyboard and mouse?

    My comment with Win 8 is it seems like we're back to Win 3.1 and Win 95 where you have Windows running on top of DOS. Microsoft is touting one single OS for all devices but it doesn't feel like it. For touch devices and less resource-intensive apps you have Metro, for the more resource-intensive and "business" apps you go back to classic Windows. That's the same for IE 10. You get Metro IE and then you have classic IE. Why not just one that can "sense" if it's running in a touch or a desktop environment and launch the appropriate version?

    Metro is good but I wish it would run on the classic desktop. I don't want to be having to switch to Metro and back every so often. The Start button doesn't have to completely go. Just get rid of the icons in the classic desktop and replace Metro with it. That way we can get the best of both worlds. I think the only reason MS can't do that is Metro and classic Windows are still two separate entities and not one seamless OS. That way they can disable classic Windows when running on mobile devices that need Metro only. Another way of saying it is Windows 8 feels like running Windows 7 with Windows WP7 on virtual machine.

    I'll wait til MS can meld Metro and classic Windows together better.
    Reply
  • Braumin - Thursday, March 01, 2012 - link

    Yes, I have used it. I have used the Developer Preview, and am looking forward to the additons they have made in the CP for mouse and keyboard users.

    I think it looks great.

    As with anything, you just need to get used to how it works. Soon it will be second nature to hit the corners with your mouse.

    I am glad Classic Desktop is there - obviously the huge number of apps written for Windows need somewhere to run, but over time, you are going to use less and less of those as you replace them with Metro apps. Then you may never use the desktop again.

    One thing I HATED in the DP was the multitasking. Only being able to have two apps open was a severe limitation at the time, and not being able to close apps you were not using made it terrible to switch apps, because there could be a large number of them to switch through. I think they changes they have made there with the task list, as well as the ability to drag windows off the desktop to close them, is a huge improvement.

    Do I think it is going to be perfect? Of course not, but this is basically a Beta, and with the huge strides they have made in keyboard mouse usablitly from the DP to the CP, I only expect it to get better by the time the next version is out.
    Reply
  • JarredWalton - Thursday, March 01, 2012 - link

    Let's go through some problems with this Metro stuff.

    1) You can't see what's actually running unless you Alt+Tab or switch to the desktop.
    2) To close Metro applications, if you don't know the Alt+F4 shortcut there's no visible way to exit.
    3) As soon as you have a decent number of programs installed, the only reasonable way to find something is to type its name.
    4) Thanks for assuming I "tried it for 10-20 minutes" -- more like tried it for several hours yesterday.
    5) As mongster122 points out, this feels like Metro on top of Windows rather than a unified UI. It feels very forced right now on laptops and desktops.

    I can keep going with lots of little tidbits that are annoying to me, but the basic gist is that yes, this is beta, but this is also getting close to feature complete. I don't like it already, and unless there's a fundamental UI overhaul I don't expect that to change.
    Reply
  • faizoff - Thursday, March 01, 2012 - link

    Some comments on your observations:

    "1) You can't see what's actually running unless you Alt+Tab or switch to the desktop."

    If you place your mouse to the left top corner and then bring up the task switcher you can take a look at all open windows or apps.

    "2) To close Metro applications, if you don't know the Alt+F4 shortcut there's no visible way to exit."

    Again as stated above once you bring the task switcher, right click and hit close.

    "3) As soon as you have a decent number of programs installed, the only reasonable way to find something is to type its name."

    I can see this becoming an issue once you have plenty of programs that show up as tiles on the main startup UI. I think a temp solution for this is to disable whatever you don't need on the Metro UI. You can see them all anyways if you right click on the 'Start' Metro UI and click all apps. That does the same thing as clicking on all programs as before.

    "5) As mongster122 points out, this feels like Metro on top of Windows rather than a unified UI. It feels very forced right now on laptops and desktops."

    I agree with this assessment, though on a very fast system they probably will blend as one since you can switch back and forth quite easily.

    My thoughts on the Metro UI has changed from I hate it to I really like it. Things have moved around a bit but I find I can do all that I did before.

    Still exploring the changes. Interesting to say the least.
    Reply
  • Baron Fel - Thursday, March 01, 2012 - link

    close metro apps by pointing at the top of the screen and dragging it to the bottom.

    also the top left corner task switching thing is a pretty major part of using metro.
    Reply
  • JarredWalton - Thursday, March 01, 2012 - link

    And this is intuitive how!? On a tablet, sure, on a desktop or laptop, no. The corner thing is totally not working for me right now. The top-right corner has a delay before it pops up, and it sometimes disappears before I can get where I wanted. The top-left just to see open apps again feels silly. I have plenty of screen space so that switching between apps is easy. On tablets where people don't multitask much if at all, this sort of UI makes more sense, but on a quad-core desktop/laptop where you can have dozens of apps running, why try to hide them?

    For the record, I also hate dock apps where you have to go to the top of the screen (or left or right or whatever) to have it pop open. Dell, HP, and others have all tried to include such apps as a value add and I've disabled every one of them. Same goes for stuff like that for webcams, audio, etc. The "go to a corner" feels very similar to me in terms of UI.
    Reply
  • Braumin - Thursday, March 01, 2012 - link

    Right click->close is not intuitive enough? Reply
  • faizoff - Thursday, March 01, 2012 - link

    I think the timing of the corners should be tweaked a bit. This goes mainly for the bottom left corner for the Start app. Not sure how to explain it right now but I'd like a delay and a better range for it to stay.

    These are little quirks which at least should be allowed for users to manipulate in some capacity. I also think there should be a shorter route to shutting down the computer like introduced in Vista/Win 7. Start-> shutdown.

    Right now as it stands, it's slide the mouse to the right bottom corner, bring up the charm bar, click Settings->Power icon->shutdown.

    While I think the rationale for this maybe to avoid accidentally turning the device off in tablets, an option for desktop users to reconfigure should be made available down the line.

    Again these are just minor changes I think can be useful.
    Reply
  • Braumin - Thursday, March 01, 2012 - link

    See, as faizoff replied, your issues actually have answers, you just don't know them yet.

    Several hours is not enough to grasp a new system.

    I mean the CP has been out for a day now. Lets actually try these things for a bit before we knock them.
    Reply
  • Braumin - Thursday, March 01, 2012 - link

    I just have to say one more thing. If I tried Linux for several hours, and said I hated it, people would scoff at me for not even giving it a shot.

    I don't like Linux, but I have been using it for several years now.
    Reply
  • bk212 - Saturday, March 03, 2012 - link

    1) Dragging your mouse to top left corner of screen is better than trying to decipher some cropped names in a taskbar.
    2) Metro apps don't have to be closed! They don't use cpu resources when not in use.
    3) This is NO different than the old Win 7 Start Menu. Do you think snaking and zig zagging through a Start button menu is faster? You can choose to remove or keep any tile on Start screen.
    5) You haven't mentioned anything that deserves a "sucks" criticism.
    Reply
  • JarredWalton - Saturday, March 03, 2012 - link

    Look, it's a personal opinion. I've played with it, it feels alien, and it definitely doesn't feel better than the Windows 7 Start Menu. There you had recently launched applications (I'd usually set it to 20), and if you needed something else you either started typing or clicked All Programs to get an alphabetical list. The Metro Start Screen feels like an interface designed for a touchscreen and a tablet or a phone; on a laptop or a desktop (which is where I've tried it), it just isn't working for me. So, I think it "sucks". Reply
  • bk212 - Sunday, March 04, 2012 - link

    -You feel it's okay to have 20 icons in your Start menu but tiles on your Start screen are bad?? At least with Metro Start screen, you don't even have to click a Start button.
    -Once again, typing on Metro Start screen does search also only better.
    -Right clicking on Start screen brings up all apps option for alphabetical list.

    To each his own. MS can't please all one billion users. Just thought that the "sucks" comment was overly harsh for respected website like anandtech.
    Reply
  • kyuu - Thursday, March 01, 2012 - link

    "I am so sick of these "power users" who try Metro for 10-20 minutes, and then say they hate it."

    ... Are you serious? This is a site frequented by "power users" and run by "power users." You think Joe Consumer who can barely operate his computer well enough to use Facebook and check his email is spending time on a site like this?

    "You know what? I used to hate brussel sprouts as a kid, but I tried them enough that now I love them."

    Cool, good for you. Brussel sprouts still taste like ass to most people, though granted my tortoises love them. Myself, I'm not interested in trying something that tastes awful over and over until I develop a taste for it. I'd rather just eat the food that tastes good in the first place. Are we getting tired of this analogy yet?

    "Do you really think average joe consumer will complain as much as you. [Blah blah blah...]"

    You may be right, but on the other hand, "average joe consumer" is quite averse to change and may not be interested in relearning how to interact with their computer when they've been trained to use the desktop model for the past 20 years. Especially when the new UI doesn't offer any compelling functionality compared to the classic desktop and actually seems to just complicate things unnecessarily.

    "As for the battery life (what this article was supposed to be about), it is obvious Jarred did not do his homework here. I would suggest he retracts this, and runs a proper set of tests."

    Wow, people are way too ready to jump down people's throats without actually reading the article. All the issues people like are you pointing out were pointed out by Jarred himself *in the freaking article*, it was specifically labelled a *preliminary* look at battery life, and he said he is going to do a more thorough set of tests and come back with the results later.
    Reply
  • Braumin - Thursday, March 01, 2012 - link

    If average joe consumer was so averse to change, then why is the iPad selling so well to average joes? If we listen to you, average joe would still be running Windows 98 because that is what he grew up with. You know what? People figure stuff out, and adapt.

    You would think people as technically smart as the ones that visit this site would actually try something for a while before they complain about it, but that is definitely not the case.

    And no, a couple of hours of playing around is not enough.
    Reply
  • B3an - Thursday, March 01, 2012 - link

    Completely agree. Even though i'm a "power user" and likely even more so than the vast majority of people here, i'm proud to say i'm one of the few thats actually not scared of change.

    On desktops the Metro UI is not even replacement for the desktop UI so i dont know why people are bitching about this, because it's not like you dont have an option to choose whatever UI is best suited to your needs or input method. Simply use whichever is best for you.

    And as for the Start menu thats not even needed anymore! Glad it's gone. The one and only thing i used the Start menu for was search, and for searching Metro is a vast improvement.
    Reply
  • madseven7 - Thursday, March 01, 2012 - link

    I'm sorry but even in a *preliminary* look at batter life you do not use an outdated test where you know certain variables have changed and then compare it to something new. That is not an apple to apples comparison, and then say the OS sucks at battery life.
    Where in the article does it say he used a new battery? After a year of use (maybe heavy usage) do you not think that the battery wear level may impact this *preliminary* battery review or "quick look".
    I guess an hybrid car with new power savings from 2012 with a 2012 battery will perform worse than a new hybrid car from 2012 with a 2011 battery.

    8
    Reply
  • JarredWalton - Thursday, March 01, 2012 - link

    2% wear level is what the battery reads, and as noted the big problem right now appears to be IE10CP. Reply
  • c4v3man - Thursday, March 01, 2012 - link

    I rarely gripe about a post here, but this is pretty pathetic. The test was run once, and was on an upgraded install, to beta software. The only way you should test something like this is by doing a clean install on both platforms, and testing back to back. Even if the battery wear is listed at 2%, batteries age in storage, especially if stored under sub-optimal voltage levels. The Wear level is rarely anything more than an estimate...

    And beyond that, the article is about battery life, and you take a jab at Metro at the end? It doesn't fit in line with the article, and comes across as someone who is simply attacking the platform prematurely.

    Test it out for a week, doing scientific tests, and get back to us. Even as a "pipeline" article this is incomplete, biased, and out of line for Anand's standards. Sure you might get some extra traffic, but it's amazingly unprofessional.
    Reply
  • madseven7 - Thursday, March 01, 2012 - link

    totally agree Reply
  • JarredWalton - Thursday, March 01, 2012 - link

    Sorry you feel that way, but pipeline posts are exactly for stuff like this. I suppose you'd rather not know that Win8 CP with IE10CP has substantially worse battery life than Win7 + IE8/9 right now? I'm rerunning the test right now, but the funny thing is you call this unprofessional because I actually spelled out exactly how I tested.

    When I've tested battery life in several scenarios, I'll wipe and do a clean install and retest, which will then put to rest any of your notions that the upgrade install somehow hurt battery life. (10 to 1 odds that it didn't.) Then after running those tests I'll wipe and reinstall Windows 7 and run the tests again, to verify that the age of the battery hasn't substantially altered the results. (100 to 1 odds that Win7 still wins the IE9 vs. IE10 comparison for battery life by a huge margin.)

    As for the jab at Metro at the end, it's a blog, and in a blog I get to tell you what's on my mind. And after playing with Windows 8 for a bit on a laptop, I don't like it. It feels like an interface designed for a touchscreen being pushed on a non-touch platform. Disagree? Great. That's what opinions are for. That doesn't make it unprofessional, though.
    Reply
  • madseven7 - Thursday, March 01, 2012 - link

    Did you happen to see the link one of the posters posted. Tested on different laptops and with better results on all the platforms (one of being a macbook air) Reply
  • Braumin - Thursday, March 01, 2012 - link

    Jarred, I think we all just don't want to see Pipeline turn into DailyTech... Reply
  • JarredWalton - Thursday, March 01, 2012 - link

    I'd like to think that this is in quite a different category. I was interested/curious to see what battery life would be like on Win8 CP. I didn't expect it to be better at this stage -- particularly not in the IE10 CP test that I ran -- but even I was appalled at the poor showing. Are there other tests where Win8 will be better? I'm sure there are. But you'll note that the title is "A Quick Look at Battery Life" and not "OMFG Windows 8 Battery Life Is Horrible!"

    This wasn't intended as a sensationalist article; I presented the facts, I explained the test, I linked to the hardware, and I listed all the caveats I could come up with (not enough test runs, battery age, upgrade vs. clean install, IE10CP vs. IE8, etc.) It always amazes me how people like to think they somehow know something that I don't because they don't like the numbers in an article. Of course there are explanations for these results, and no I don't think the shipping version of Windows 8 will be this bad in battery life (for Internet testing). All I'm saying is that right now, W8CP with IE10CP very clearly isn't doing so hot in our battery life test. That's all.

    Oh, and I'm saying my initial impressions of Metro are not good. Does that mean I hate it and can never change my mind? Nope. It just means that my first real encounter with it was negative. Also, Solitaire on Windows 8 sucks -- Win7 had much better solitaire games. :)
    Reply
  • madseven7 - Thursday, March 01, 2012 - link

    Here's the link again http://www.itworld.com/windows/254380/hands-window... Reply
  • JarredWalton - Thursday, March 01, 2012 - link

    Yes I saw that, and yes I understand that what I'm showing in this pipeline doesn't agree with their results. As I noted in the text, I have a good suspicion that the biggest problem right now with Win8 CP battery life in my test is IE10CP. IE10CP feels quite sluggish compared to even IE8/9, and much worse than Chrome and Firefox. But it's beta so that's not really a huge concern. Please stop reading more into this than what I said in the original text; this is a preliminary look at one test scenario and I have plenty more testing to do. Reply
  • Bull Dog - Thursday, March 01, 2012 - link

    I for one have no issues with this pipeline. I also appreciate Jarred's take on the Metro interface. Reply
  • madseven7 - Thursday, March 01, 2012 - link

    I also agree with that too. I just like an apples to apples comparison though Reply
  • c4v3man - Thursday, March 01, 2012 - link

    I'd rather see pipeline articles be early/single test results from a complete set of scientific tests. For example, it may take a few days/weeks to get around to testing Win8CP such as boot/standy/shutdown time, game fps, encode speed, compression speed, cover all the new features, etc. I realize that takes time.

    A pipeline should been 1 test FROM THE OFFICIAL TESTS, not some half-baked one-off test with a laughable number of variables. The fact that other testers are seeing performance opposite of what you're seeing proves the point. Will you apologize for these misleading results if your "official" findings are the complete opposite?

    No credible reviewer would take "upgrade" scores seriously. Whether or not you state how unprofessional the tests are doesn't change the fact that the tests are unprofessional and shouldn't have been published in the first place.
    Reply
  • JarredWalton - Thursday, March 01, 2012 - link

    No other site has shown results "opposite" from mine because none of them are testing Internet battery life with IE10CP. They're using other metrics that may not test the same aspect. Reply
  • NGneer - Thursday, March 01, 2012 - link

    Was the battery used for the Win7 test some time ago the same one used for the Win8 test? If so, it has probably lost some of its capacity and you won't have a fair comparison until you re-run the Win7 test on the same battery.

    Just my $.02
    Reply
  • JarredWalton - Thursday, March 01, 2012 - link

    Read the comments. Wear level as noted earlier is 2%. Initial wear level was 1%, so we're looking at a 1% margin of error. Reply
  • madseven7 - Thursday, March 01, 2012 - link

    I was really excited about metro. Thinking this would be great on everything. Now having used it on the desktop (limited time usage), I'm pretty bummed about it. Not good on the desktop. It kind of reminds me about Unity in Ubuntu; great idea but not practical. Mouse and keyboard not good for metro. Too many clicks and mouse movements to where I would like to get too. It takes me longer to get to where I want to go.
    I'm going to keep trying windows 8cp and become more familiar with it. Maybe it'll grow on me but for now,
    I'll stick with windows 7 but hopefully MS will change how metro and desktop work together in windows 8.
    Reply
  • B3an - Thursday, March 01, 2012 - link

    If you actually bothered to use it for longer than about 5 seconds you might realise it's good. And how about learning keyboard shortcuts? Even with mouse clicks it's often quicker, but again you've not bothered to find these methods out. Reply
  • madseven7 - Friday, March 02, 2012 - link

    LOL...Like I've said, I've used it for a short period. I'm continuing to use it be find it a little hard to find some of the shortcuts. I do like it but sometimes there are so many mouse movements it actually takes longer to get to where I would like to get to. I still think its better suited for tablets than a desktop computer. Reply
  • GoodBytes - Thursday, March 01, 2012 - link

    My laptop has ~11h of battery life on idle, minimum brightness, wireless on, Win8 64-bit. W00t!
    That up from ~10h in Windows 7 64-bit, and that is up from 9h from Vista 64-bit.

    My laptops is the Dell Latitude E6400 (~4 years old, but battery was changed last year)
    - 9-cell battery
    - Core 2 Duo P8400 2.2Ghz
    - 4GB of RAM DDR2
    - Windows 8 64-bit
    - Nvidia Quadro NVS 160M
    - No Bluettoth card
    - No web cam
    - LED back light screen non-glossy
    - Dell Extended battery life power scheme loaded (This Windows power scheme turns off power to the SD card reader, optical drive, reduce power of USB, turns off firewire).
    Reply
  • guidryp - Thursday, March 01, 2012 - link

    I downloaded the Preview and tried it on my desktop.

    Hate it.

    I really think Microsoft is going to face bigger push-back on Win8 than they did on Vista.

    It seems this change is massively controversial, seemingly love it or hate, I can't judge by comments if more love it, or more hate it.

    Has there been any polling?

    I am hoping with enough pushback Microsoft has a contingency to give us a less metro infected desktop.
    Reply
  • faizoff - Thursday, March 01, 2012 - link

    For the Metro UI I really like the option for multitasking seeing as other touch interfaces mainly iOS doesnt have option.

    Though I'd hope for some adjustment allowed for sizing the windows. Right now the ratio is locked which seems to be 75:25 between 2 windows. I'd like that to change to at least have a 50:50 option. I wouldnt mind even allowing 3 windows to be opened as well. But this is an improvement from the Developer's preview and I'd like to think it's headed in the right direction.
    Reply
  • shriganesh - Friday, March 02, 2012 - link

    Win8 tries to address all usage patters, form factors and almost all input forms. When working in a non-touch device (desktop/laptop) we don't need metro at all! If we have a tablet/touch enabled ultrabook we can load the metro interface and play with it when we want. It we have an ARM tablet we only have the metro interface! Reply
  • stephenbrooks - Friday, March 02, 2012 - link

    Jarred said: "What’s more, getting a touchscreen for a desktop or laptop isn’t actually something I’m clamoring for."

    Couldn't disagree more with this. I'd really like to see touch become standard on all screens, because I like having the option to prod the screen as well as mouse, keyboard etc. (particularly when a dialog box comes up with a big "OK" button I'd like to just poke it rather than move the mouse).

    As for your comments about the screen becoming covered in finger prints, I'd hope the proliferation of touch should encourage screens with sturdier and easier-to-clean surfaces.
    Reply
  • georgewillow - Friday, March 02, 2012 - link

    Windows 8 looks great for tablets, but it's is a disaster for a PC OS. Metro should be a separate product or if nothing else at least an option. It's reminds me of Media Center, I mean you could at least make it optional like that. It's not optional by forcing the start screen. I typically use the start menu to search for a program and arrow down to select and press enter to launch. People are saying that you can do the same thing in Metro, but it's not true. The start screen search does not provide the same results as the Windows 7 start menu. Try searching for printers, uninstall, or system. They don't appear with the Windows 8 start screen search. What about the recent activity's that pop out from the side of a W7 start menu pinned app. For me I use remote desktop and virtual PC a lot and the last connections or machines are right under the arrow. Much more efficient. Also, how about this workflow to restart a PC - mouse over lower left, click to launch start screen, mouse over to lower right, mouse up to settings, mouse down to power, click restart. That's just ridiculous. Lastly, have you all noticed that IE is not the only duplicated program. There are metro and desktop versions of Remote Desktop and Windows Media Player. In each case the metro version only makes sense on a tablet or touchscreen. It's just extra bulk to a desktop OS. I also can't believe companies are going to be thrilled that the default start screen is pretty much dedicated to your personal life and has nothing to do with business. Reply
  • Jeff7181 - Friday, March 02, 2012 - link

    I haven't had a chance to play with it, but with everything I've seen about the new UI, I can't say I'm interested in it. In fact, I imagine it could be undesirable enough that I may just continue using Windows 7 for a while longer rather than upgrade as soon as it's available. This would be a big change for me as I've be an early adopter of Microsoft OS's since Windows 98, having skipped only Windows ME.

    I have a feeling Windows Server 8 is going to have all of the "under the hood" improvements that Windows 8 will have, but with a more traditional UI. If that ends up being true, I may just end up using Windows Server 8 on my laptop and desktop.
    Reply
  • brentpresley - Friday, March 02, 2012 - link

    Just curious, but if this is the same laptop you did Win7 testing with over a year ago, did anyone bother to put a fresh battery in the laptop?

    Lithium Ion batteries degrade over time and don't hold the same charge, so if the battery is not running comparable to past levels while testing, this is an invalid result. The other option would be to rerun the Win7 tests now.
    Reply
  • JarredWalton - Friday, March 02, 2012 - link

    Read the text... I'm currently rerunning the same tests on Windows 7 to verify if the battery has degraded at all. Initial results are that battery life dropped 5%, which is reflected in the charts now (see "Update #4" in the article). I'm going to do a clean install of Windows 8 next to see if that helps battery life. Reply
  • abhishek6893 - Saturday, March 03, 2012 - link

    I didn't understand anything from this article. Does the author want to say that Windows 8 CP consumes lots of battery life? Just like Windows Vista? Reply
  • Hella-D - Saturday, March 03, 2012 - link

    I Dont Mind Having A "Hot-Spot" For The Start Menu, But I Belive Users Should Have The Option Betwen A Standard Windows7/Vista Start Menu (Or Even A Much Smaller Non-Full Screen Version Of The Metro Start Menu) And Metro Upon Install. The Rest Of The Interface (Including The "Hot-Spot" For The Start Menu) Are Fine Including The New Maximize/Minimize/Close Button Style And The Rest Of The Standard Desktop.

    I Love The Rest Of The OS As It Currently Stands, And Metro Would be Fine On Any Touch Device But On A Standard Laptop/Desktop A Standard Start Menu (And Again, Or Even A Much Smaller Non-Full Screen Version Of The Metro Start Menu) Would Be Much More Practical.
    Reply
  • ananduser - Sunday, March 04, 2012 - link

    "If you clean install instead of upgrade (see below), you should check your PC manufacturer's website to make sure you install any specific drivers that they provide there. Many laptops will get better battery life with a power-optimized driver that is specific for that PC (often known as ACPI, Power, or Chipset driver)."

    Hear that Jarred Walton ? Good...now update your update.
    Reply
  • JarredWalton - Monday, March 05, 2012 - link

    Did you actually bother to read what you posted? Let me help you:

    "If you clean install..." I didn't do a clean install on the i7-2820QM, and that's where I'm getting the worst battery life drop result. As an upgrade MS implies the Win7 drivers will be sufficient. Either that's not the case, or the 2820QM laptop doesn't have an up to date driver. I'll find out soon enough when I do a clean install of Windows 8 on that laptop and see what happens; I'm guessing results will be better than the upgrade install, but still nowhere near what I got with Windows 7 + IE9.
    Reply
  • B3an - Monday, March 05, 2012 - link

    Should do a clean install of both 7 and 8. Then install the exact same drivers on each. Then run the tests with another browser being as IE10 isn't on Win7 yet. Because IE9 and IE10 are too different. It's not like a small upgrade from Chrome 15 > 16. I honestly wouldn't have even posted these results on a forum. Reply
  • JarredWalton - Monday, March 05, 2012 - link

    Already underway with the clean install tests on the ASUS K53E. Finishing up the Win7 clean install tests on the 2820QM, after which I will do the Win8 clean install tests. Reply
  • ananduser - Monday, March 05, 2012 - link

    Laptops, since this is about laptops, always had "quirky" model specific drivers outside of the generic ones. Me wanted to imply that battery optimizations on laptops come with those drivers. Even if you did a clean install, without vendor W8 targeted drivers, no battery improvement will come out of testing. Reply
  • crispbp04 - Tuesday, March 06, 2012 - link

    not sure why you're having trouble with metro on a desktop. It's fantastic. use your mouse wheel to scroll horizontally (yeah.. they should make mouses with horizontal scroll buttons if they commit to the side scrolling scheme).

    I love being able to bounce from the metro ui and desktop with the start button and rarely find myself using the corner hot spots if at all. I like the metro app docking.

    Live tiles rule. They are great on a phone and even more fantasic on a desktop. I can see updates and information from everything without having to dive into applications or open a web browser.

    The music integration is great and will only get better. This is the future so everyone needs to start learning the fun tricks.

    there is no benefit of the old start menu. none. you get all the same features with metro. hit the start button and start typing = search results (same as win7)

    I haven't heard a single valid argument of using a "classic" start menu over the metro start.
    Reply
  • JarredWalton - Tuesday, March 06, 2012 - link

    Old start menu is alphabetized automatically when you click "all programs". There. One valid argument. Here's another: the live tiles are much much larger than a single one line entry with a name. That's two. I can't see my various open applications with their content while also viewing live tiles on the start screen. Three. I could keep going....

    You can love the metro UI all you want, but we'll just agree to (strongly) disagree. Every single one of your points (other than music integration, which I haven't played with) is something I would rather not have on desktop. Live tiles? Oh, you mean sort of like what we had with gadgets on Win7 if you used those? Well, I didn't use them as they just take up space. Why would I want to look at a huge screen full of rectangular live tiles when I could just have a few far more detailed screen of information visible, e.g. on my browser?
    Reply
  • aGreenAgent - Tuesday, March 06, 2012 - link

    It's kind of like gadgets, except it's tightly coupled with the application. I found gadgets to be kind of worthless, since they're basically like a live tile, with no associated program - and the gadget uses memory, which live tiles don't (or barely do).

    If I'm understanding you correctly, I think your underlying point though, is that you're getting less for the same amount of screen real estate - filling it up with things you wouldn't use. I would argue however, that this is more of an illusion than a reality. The old start menu, didn't really display that much data. You could make a strong argument that it's just because the old start menu was small, vs. the metro's full screen - that's a fair point. However I still maintain that most people's complaints about this are because of lack of familiarity.

    I've been using it for a few months (the builds leading up to the CP), and it has grown on me. I had a similar reaction to the DP, but one underestimated result of the metro start screen, is that you get the spatial awareness benefits you get from the desktop and phone screens. Things are in a static position, and your spatial memory allows you to open apps without even reading the text.
    Reply
  • noname3 - Sunday, March 11, 2012 - link

    I tried playing with the dev build, I tried the CP, same conclusion: I cannot live with Metro UI on anything anymore, I really had it with all these rectangles.

    It is not about ease of use or having to learn a thing or two, it is all about “what is the point?”, it is ugly and adds zero functionality. On my desktop I cannot think of any more pointless UI than this.

    If I had to choose between living with Vista for the next ten years or Windows 8 I would have chosen Vista anytime. Thank God there is Windows 7 to go back…then again do I still want to support a company that is going down the history as the dumbest software company ever? As a developer I embarrassed already for what is coming out soon. Now I hate my Windows Phone 7 too (because of my disgust for Windows 8) so I gave it to my wife and got myself a blackberry.

    Maybe Microsoft should leave the unification theory experiments to the physicists and focus on some good old engineering and common sense. They should kill this Metro on the desktop experiment before you become the ridicule of the industry.
    Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now