If you looked at the keynote making your app Metro can be as easy as a couple of lines of code. So why not add those couple of lines of codeto make an app also work in metro.
Also not seeing how "a few lines of code" magically does all the work of converting a desktop UI metaphor to a useable tablet version. Apple has spend a lot of time and effort to write iPad versions of things like the iWork suite, and I'm pretty sure there's more to it than a few lines of code.
Anyone have any idea how that works? Does it just map all those drop down menus and buttons and mouse sized targets onto bigger, touchable regions? Because that's exactly why previous versions of Windows for tablets have failed in the market place. Just making something open within a different framework is a fair ways away from making it optimal, and I call bullshit if MS is saying you can turn a desktop app into a actually useful tablet app with nothing more than a few lines of code.
And just to drive the above point home, if it's that easy to convert to Metro, where were the marquee apps at the keynote? All they had were a handful of proof of concept stuff (written by students, apparently?)
Is it that apps have to be written from the ground up to be Windows 8/Metro ready? If so, how does that work as a big win for "we must have Windows compatability" folks? If not, why not show Office in Metro after writing those few lines?
Had to Cmd-Ctrl-D on snafus, & wasn't surprised to read:
"noun
a confused or chaotic state; a mess : an enormous amount of my time was devoted to untangling snafus.
adjective
in utter confusion or chaos : our refrigeration plant is snafu."
How the heck does Sinofsky mean: "there are going to be more of them"? Meaning it is a pre-beta, I presume? A pre-beta. Wow. Reminds me of GMv2. MS hasn't changed a bit.
Snafu is actually an acronym= Situation Normal: All Fxxked Up
Also not seeing how "a few lines of code" magically does all the work of converting a desktop UI metaphor to a useable tablet version. Apple has spend a lot of time and effort to write iPad versions of things like the iWork suite, and I'm pretty sure there's more to it than a few lines of code.
Anyone have any idea how that works? Does it just map all those drop down menus and buttons and mouse sized targets onto bigger, touchable regions? Because that's exactly why previous versions of Windows for tablets have failed in the market place. Just making something open within a different framework is a fair ways away from making it optimal, and I call bullshit if MS is saying you can turn a desktop app into a actually useful tablet app with nothing more than a few lines of code.
Prolly talking about CSS. It's all about CSS
Microsoft has this thing called WPF that they're pushing for making desktop applications, and in theory, it separates presentation from data/logic. That might be what "a few lines of code" refers to, in this case, you slap on a different presentation layer in there and call it a tablet. But I'm skeptical.
So here's what I'm not getting, maybe someone can clarify for me: do the same apps run under both classic Windows 8 and Metro? That is, can I open a file in "Windows" while docked, then take off and continue to work on the same file within a touch friendly interface?
Yes. That is correct.
Its the same as most all windows programs - they look one way when running, for example, XP, but when you use Windows 7, they have the new interface.
And you can choose to use the old interface if you prefer.
So existing apps will use the Metro interface unless you want to use the classic Win7 look.
That was hilarious. I watched in real time as that guy developed carpal tunnel of the elbow. He splits the keyboard then uses one finger to type. Pulling menus and apps and whatever from the sides only worked part of the time. The interface was unresponsive and ugly. And would it be asking too much to have the demo people skilled in using the product?
Depending on how they are written the two apps could share most of the same plumbing, but if you wanted a touch friendly UI and a "classic" Windows application that is going to be two separate UI apps the developer needs to deploy.
Not in the past: the UI is in the OS. The app hooks into the OS and displays the app with the OS's visual paradigm.
Unless you want to use the classic view, which has always been available in the past.
How is a useful standard Windows desktop that's too big and heavy to be a good tablet or a good tablet that's too small to make a useful standard Windows machine not a compromise?
When you add an external monitor to your dock. If you feel the need.
And my guess is that because Windows 8 will run on a wide variety of devices, the vendors will develop many different types of machines for many different types of users.
Its the same as most all windows programs - they look one way when running, for example, XP, but when you use Windows 7, they have the new interface.
And you can choose to use the old interface if you prefer.
So existing apps will use the Metro interface unless you want to use the classic Win7 look.
So, again, apps are magically rewriting themselves with "a few lines of code" to become first class tablet citizens? Because the move from mouse to finger friendly is vastly more complex than just updating UI chrome ala XP to 7-- a fact that has hindered Microsoft's tablet efforts in the past.
And if existing apps will use the Metro interface (sounds so straightforward) why didn't MS show any of them? I mean, Word just launches in Metro if I want, right?
When you add an external monitor to your dock. If you feel the need.
And my guess is that because Windows 8 will run on a wide variety of devices, the vendors will develop many different types of machines for many different types of users.
Yes, a bewildering array of form factors has certainly served MS well in their tablet efforts so far. I particularly like the idea of having a tablet device which trades computing power for low power consumption, size and weight getting docked to act as my desktop machine. Then, I just fire up the standard Windows desktop and run Photoshop really badly. It's a win win!
I and my wife have some issues with our IPad 2. It looks nice in aluminum case, but there are not many things I can do with IPad apart from reading Internet contents, playing games and viewing photos like digital photo frame.
Sure you can watch paid movies and listen paid songs, but you really need to have Apple home theater. So, at the moment, it is a failed product in terms of media player.
It is not as good for movies or TV because it is not widescreen. Even as an eBook reader, I'd prefer longer pages. Many Web pages are designed for widescreen as well.
For music, it needs to be plugged in, or you need headphones. The tiny speakers are crap.
I can't make a compelling use case for my personal needs, even as many other people find it perfect. I like the idea of being able to detach the screen from my desktop lair, and being able to carry it with me and use it as a touchscreen. The iPad cannot work with a mouse, and so I can't see ever using it in a dock.
Eventually, 90% plus of computers users. Just like every other version of Windows. Remember - it is not just a phone OS. It will work with many different devices.
If you just want a tablet, with a tablet OS, it will work fine for that. Just a desktop? It can do that too. Want a hybrid? It covers that use pattern as well.
Eventually, 90% plus of computers users. Just like every other version of Windows. Remember - it is not just a phone OS. It will work with many different devices.
If you just want a tablet, with a tablet OS, it will work fine for that. Just a desktop? It can do that too. Want a hybrid? It covers that use pattern as well.
IMO Windows 8 will sink or swim as a tablet OS based on the market's response to Metro. The "it's a desert topping/floor wax" schtick is more of a gimmick, and hybrid use likely to be a niche.
That's not to say that Metro won't be successful, just that it will need to succeed on its own merits as a tablet UI, not as some kind of magical "Windows to go."
Sooo..... get the iPad keyboard dock. (And how is that in any way shape or form different than the Win8 tablet dock in the video?)
The difference is that with an iPad, you need to move your whole arm up and forward to touch the screen. With Win8, your touchpad will work with just a finger motion, or your mouse will work with wrist motion.
I can't see any ergonomic advantage to using a dock for a touchscreen device.
I've had a Windows 7 tablet before. DEAR. SWEET. JESUS. Yes you can use Windows apps on a tablet, but you really, really shouldn't. The lack of optimisation is a killer in every regard.
Which is the reason M$ is optimizing every aspect of their new OS. I kinda thought that was a main point of the exercise.
It is not as good for movies or TV because it is not widescreen. Even as an eBook reader, I'd prefer longer pages. Many Web pages are designed for widescreen as well.
For music, it needs to be plugged in, or you need headphones. The tiny speakers are crap.
I can't make a compelling use case for my personal needs, even as many other people find it perfect. I like the idea of being able to detach the screen from my desktop lair, and being able to carry it with me and use it as a touchscreen. The iPad cannot work with a mouse, and so I can't see ever using it in a dock.
I have a $99 Apple TV, so getting music to my stereo system is easy-- as will getting most video and screen content onto my flatscreen come iOS5 and air mirroring.
I can create and sequence music on my iPad, build presentations, do technical layout, paint, create and edit documents (if I tire of the soft keyboard there's nothing stopping me from using a bluetooth keyboard), edit photos, edit movies, manage my email accounts, do data base work, etc.
I often read people declaring that the iPod is "only good" for web surfing and media consumption, I find that mystifying.
The difference is that with an iPad, you need to move your whole arm up and forward to touch the screen. With Win7, your touchpad will work with just a finger motion, or your mouse will work with wrist motion.
I can't see any ergonomic advantage to using a dock for a touchscreen device.
And I can't see the logic of using a relatively underpowered tablet for a desktop machine.
Comments
If you looked at the keynote making your app Metro can be as easy as a couple of lines of code. So why not add those couple of lines of codeto make an app also work in metro.
Also not seeing how "a few lines of code" magically does all the work of converting a desktop UI metaphor to a useable tablet version. Apple has spend a lot of time and effort to write iPad versions of things like the iWork suite, and I'm pretty sure there's more to it than a few lines of code.
Anyone have any idea how that works? Does it just map all those drop down menus and buttons and mouse sized targets onto bigger, touchable regions? Because that's exactly why previous versions of Windows for tablets have failed in the market place. Just making something open within a different framework is a fair ways away from making it optimal, and I call bullshit if MS is saying you can turn a desktop app into a actually useful tablet app with nothing more than a few lines of code.
What will MS think of next?
I have a name for this ... the ZuneTab.
Is it that apps have to be written from the ground up to be Windows 8/Metro ready? If so, how does that work as a big win for "we must have Windows compatability" folks? If not, why not show Office in Metro after writing those few lines?
Had to Cmd-Ctrl-D on snafus, & wasn't surprised to read:
"noun
a confused or chaotic state; a mess : an enormous amount of my time was devoted to untangling snafus.
adjective
in utter confusion or chaos : our refrigeration plant is snafu."
How the heck does Sinofsky mean: "there are going to be more of them"? Meaning it is a pre-beta, I presume? A pre-beta. Wow. Reminds me of GMv2. MS hasn't changed a bit.
Snafu is actually an acronym= Situation Normal: All Fxxked Up
Edit: replied before I saw MyopiaRocks post
Also not seeing how "a few lines of code" magically does all the work of converting a desktop UI metaphor to a useable tablet version. Apple has spend a lot of time and effort to write iPad versions of things like the iWork suite, and I'm pretty sure there's more to it than a few lines of code.
Anyone have any idea how that works? Does it just map all those drop down menus and buttons and mouse sized targets onto bigger, touchable regions? Because that's exactly why previous versions of Windows for tablets have failed in the market place. Just making something open within a different framework is a fair ways away from making it optimal, and I call bullshit if MS is saying you can turn a desktop app into a actually useful tablet app with nothing more than a few lines of code.
Prolly talking about CSS. It's all about CSS
Microsoft has this thing called WPF that they're pushing for making desktop applications, and in theory, it separates presentation from data/logic. That might be what "a few lines of code" refers to, in this case, you slap on a different presentation layer in there and call it a tablet. But I'm skeptical.
Snafu is actually an acronym= Situation Normal: All Fxxked Up
Edit: replied before I saw MyopiaRocks post
FIGMO!
So here's what I'm not getting, maybe someone can clarify for me: do the same apps run under both classic Windows 8 and Metro? That is, can I open a file in "Windows" while docked, then take off and continue to work on the same file within a touch friendly interface?
Yes. That is correct.
Its the same as most all windows programs - they look one way when running, for example, XP, but when you use Windows 7, they have the new interface.
And you can choose to use the old interface if you prefer.
So existing apps will use the Metro interface unless you want to use the classic Win7 look.
From what I know at the moment I would say no.
Depending on how they are written the two apps could share most of the same plumbing, but if you wanted a touch friendly UI and a "classic" Windows application that is going to be two separate UI apps the developer needs to deploy.
Not in the past: the UI is in the OS. The app hooks into the OS and displays the app with the OS's visual paradigm.
Unless you want to use the classic view, which has always been available in the past.
How is a useful standard Windows desktop that's too big and heavy to be a good tablet or a good tablet that's too small to make a useful standard Windows machine not a compromise?
When you add an external monitor to your dock. If you feel the need.
And my guess is that because Windows 8 will run on a wide variety of devices, the vendors will develop many different types of machines for many different types of users.
Yes. That is correct.
Its the same as most all windows programs - they look one way when running, for example, XP, but when you use Windows 7, they have the new interface.
And you can choose to use the old interface if you prefer.
So existing apps will use the Metro interface unless you want to use the classic Win7 look.
So, again, apps are magically rewriting themselves with "a few lines of code" to become first class tablet citizens? Because the move from mouse to finger friendly is vastly more complex than just updating UI chrome ala XP to 7-- a fact that has hindered Microsoft's tablet efforts in the past.
And if existing apps will use the Metro interface (sounds so straightforward) why didn't MS show any of them? I mean, Word just launches in Metro if I want, right?
When you add an external monitor to your dock. If you feel the need.
And my guess is that because Windows 8 will run on a wide variety of devices, the vendors will develop many different types of machines for many different types of users.
Yes, a bewildering array of form factors has certainly served MS well in their tablet efforts so far. I particularly like the idea of having a tablet device which trades computing power for low power consumption, size and weight getting docked to act as my desktop machine. Then, I just fire up the standard Windows desktop and run Photoshop really badly. It's a win win!
It might not kill the iPad, but I think it will kill android on tablets in the long run.
Personally, I doubt it will "kill" either one. And I hope that it does not. I'm not even sure where this "killer" meme came from.
Radio did not kill live concerts. TV didn't kill movies. Movies did not kill plays. TV did not kill radio. VCRs did not kill TV. Neither did DVRs.
Usually old tech survives, with huge overlaps.
I and my wife have some issues with our IPad 2. It looks nice in aluminum case, but there are not many things I can do with IPad apart from reading Internet contents, playing games and viewing photos like digital photo frame.
Sure you can watch paid movies and listen paid songs, but you really need to have Apple home theater. So, at the moment, it is a failed product in terms of media player.
It is not as good for movies or TV because it is not widescreen. Even as an eBook reader, I'd prefer longer pages. Many Web pages are designed for widescreen as well.
For music, it needs to be plugged in, or you need headphones. The tiny speakers are crap.
I can't make a compelling use case for my personal needs, even as many other people find it perfect. I like the idea of being able to detach the screen from my desktop lair, and being able to carry it with me and use it as a touchscreen. The iPad cannot work with a mouse, and so I can't see ever using it in a dock.
Who is going to buy this?
Eventually, 90% plus of computers users. Just like every other version of Windows. Remember - it is not just a phone OS. It will work with many different devices.
If you just want a tablet, with a tablet OS, it will work fine for that. Just a desktop? It can do that too. Want a hybrid? It covers that use pattern as well.
Eventually, 90% plus of computers users. Just like every other version of Windows. Remember - it is not just a phone OS. It will work with many different devices.
If you just want a tablet, with a tablet OS, it will work fine for that. Just a desktop? It can do that too. Want a hybrid? It covers that use pattern as well.
IMO Windows 8 will sink or swim as a tablet OS based on the market's response to Metro. The "it's a desert topping/floor wax" schtick is more of a gimmick, and hybrid use likely to be a niche.
That's not to say that Metro won't be successful, just that it will need to succeed on its own merits as a tablet UI, not as some kind of magical "Windows to go."
Sooo..... get the iPad keyboard dock. (And how is that in any way shape or form different than the Win8 tablet dock in the video?)
The difference is that with an iPad, you need to move your whole arm up and forward to touch the screen. With Win8, your touchpad will work with just a finger motion, or your mouse will work with wrist motion.
I can't see any ergonomic advantage to using a dock for a touchscreen device.
I've had a Windows 7 tablet before. DEAR. SWEET. JESUS. Yes you can use Windows apps on a tablet, but you really, really shouldn't. The lack of optimisation is a killer in every regard.
Which is the reason M$ is optimizing every aspect of their new OS. I kinda thought that was a main point of the exercise.
It is not as good for movies or TV because it is not widescreen. Even as an eBook reader, I'd prefer longer pages. Many Web pages are designed for widescreen as well.
For music, it needs to be plugged in, or you need headphones. The tiny speakers are crap.
I can't make a compelling use case for my personal needs, even as many other people find it perfect. I like the idea of being able to detach the screen from my desktop lair, and being able to carry it with me and use it as a touchscreen. The iPad cannot work with a mouse, and so I can't see ever using it in a dock.
I have a $99 Apple TV, so getting music to my stereo system is easy-- as will getting most video and screen content onto my flatscreen come iOS5 and air mirroring.
I can create and sequence music on my iPad, build presentations, do technical layout, paint, create and edit documents (if I tire of the soft keyboard there's nothing stopping me from using a bluetooth keyboard), edit photos, edit movies, manage my email accounts, do data base work, etc.
I often read people declaring that the iPod is "only good" for web surfing and media consumption, I find that mystifying.
The difference is that with an iPad, you need to move your whole arm up and forward to touch the screen. With Win7, your touchpad will work with just a finger motion, or your mouse will work with wrist motion.
I can't see any ergonomic advantage to using a dock for a touchscreen device.
And I can't see the logic of using a relatively underpowered tablet for a desktop machine.