... with one caveat. The ability to use native Windows applications on the tablet will greatly increase it's appeal. Need to see a Word document? Open word and read it or sync it to your SkyDrive and use Office online (or 365). This IMO is where Apple has failed to captialize so far. If Lion would have ushered in a seamless iOS / OS X experience Microsoft would have less of an advantage.
As it stands right now there is no such things as Pages online and I can't run an iOS app on my Mac (natively).
See, that's just it: you've been able to buy and run Windows tablets since the days of Windows 3.11. You can buy a Windows tablet TODAY and open your Word docs and sync it with SkyDrive, etc. All the stuff in your example. So, what are you trying to say? IF ONLY Apple would do the same, then...what? The iPad would finally outsell Windows tablets? Am I missing something here with all these pro-Windows tablet comments??? What are you guys trying to say?
So if Windows tablets are so awesome, why haven't you owned one since 1997? They've been around forever. What's stopping you?
I see that you know tablet computers been around since 1997. Honestly, I did not know its existence and I did not need one as I was busy outgoings and working. I have now come to a stage where I read newspapers and online articles alot at my free time. I wanted Samsung GT 10.1 but my wife fell in love with Ipad2's aluminum case and slick design.
Window tablets mean that I can do much with it, that is appealing to me. Sure it is not user friendely to kids and elderlies. But between them, I am sure most of them would want it if they have Window computers.
See, that's just it: you've been able to buy and run Windows tablets since the days of Windows 3.11. You can buy a Windows tablet TODAY and open your Word docs and sync it with SkyDrive, etc. All the stuff in your example. So, what are you trying to say? IF ONLY Apple would do the same, then...what? The iPad would finally outsell Windows tablets? Am I missing something here with all these pro-Windows tablet comments??? What are you guys trying to say?
I'm saying the first person to make it extremely user friendly and portable wins the war. Right now it's advantage Microsoft on the PC side and advantage Apple on the tablet side. The Metro UI has the possibility of giving Apple a run for its money. Add to it the ability to provide a seamless experience between a workstation and tablet then businesses may latch on to it as well since the tablet is running the same OS as the desktop and can be attached to the domain.
If you've used Windows phone 7 device, the first thing you notice besides the buttery fluidity of the kinetic movement, scrolling etc., is the game changing significance of the live tiles.
Metro UI on a phone creates a compelling user experience that feels MUCH more live, organic and engaging than Ios.
If you've used Windows phone 7 device, the first thing you notice besides the buttery fluidity of the kinetic movement, scrolling etc., is the game changing significance of the live tiles.
.
I've heard lots of good things about WinPhone7. Unfortunately, the software comes from only a single vendor. Because of that, I wouldn't even consider buying one.
I see that you know tablet computers been around since 1997. Honestly, I did not know its existence and I did not need one as I was busy outgoings and working. I have now come to a stage where I read newspapers and online articles alot at my free time. I wanted Samsung GT 10.1 but my wife fell in love with Ipad2's aluminum case and slick design.
Window tablets mean that I can do much with it, that is appealing to me. Sure it is not user friendely to kids and elderlies. But between them, I am sure most of them would want it if they have Window computers.
Yes, I also used those tablets. Going back to Windows 3.11. Different size screens, from 6" to 12", black and white LCD to color. Used mostly with a stylus. Microsoft literature will sometimes call it "pen computer" but it was always a tablet. Battery life was pathetic on most hardware. And they were heavy as notebooks and usually more expensive than a notebook.
There were two major problems with Microsoft's vision for tablets back then:
(1) No reason to buy a tablet. Windows tablets were not defined by capabilities not found in Windows laptops, nor was it defined by a different user experience. It was defined by the ability to run conventional Windows on a tablet. That aspect had no obvious appeal (other than, gee, that's kind of neat). At the time, the thinking was that tablets needed a "killer app" that would finally give consumers a reason to buy tablets over conventional laptops.
(2) Windows tablets were basically modified laptops. Not just conceptually, but literally speaking. Some tablets had swivel screens that allowed you to fold the keyboard behind the screen. They had fans, hard drives, they weighed over 5lbs. and short battery lifes. And the Windows with Pen Extensions was just regular Windows with a virtual keyboard and support for pen input drivers. Most devices had modifier buttons so you could "right-click". It was always more awkward to use over a conventional laptop. Newtons, which were around in 1997, had a better pen input user experience over heavy, pen-enabled conventional Windows tablets.
Given the choice between a Windows tablet and a Windows laptop, for the purpose of running conventional Windows applications (as opposed to some fabled "killer tablet app"), why would anyone choose the tablet?
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?
No. I think we are getting our terminology mixed up.
The "classic" desktop UI elements have been given a metro "look and feel" overhaul (just like Lion updated UI elements in OSX) and applications written for the "classic" Windows desktop will automatically have this style applied. However classic desktop apps do not run in the start screen UI.
Imagine if Apple made a "OSX App" on iOS that when you opened it displayed a full OSX desktop. When you click on the iPad home button that app was minimized just like your iPad Mail or Safari app would be.
Now imagine if Apple put this version of iOS on all iMacs and MacBooks as well as the iPad.
That is what Microsoft are doing with Windows 8.
If Apple put iOS on an iMac most "mainstream" consumers would never venture outside of that UI (i.e. they would never launch the "OSX App"). Windows 8 will be the same.
No. I think we are getting our terminology mixed up.
The "classic" desktop UI elements have been given a metro "look and feel" overhaul (just like Lion updated UI elements in OSX) and applications written for the "classic" Windows desktop will automatically have this style applied. However classic desktop apps do not run in the start screen UI.
Imagine if Apple made a "OSX App" on iOS that when you opened it displayed a full OSX desktop. When you click on the iPad home button that app was minimized just like your iPad Mail or Safari app would be.
Now imagine if Apple put this version of iOS on all iMacs and MacBooks as well as the iPad.
That is what Microsoft are doing with Windows 8.
If Apple put iOS on an iMac most "mainstream" consumers would never venture outside of that UI (i.e. they would never launch the "OSX App"). Windows 8 will be the same.
No. I think we are getting our terminology mixed up.
The "classic" desktop UI elements have been given a metro "look and feel" overhaul (just like Lion updated UI elements in OSX) and applications written for the "classic" Windows desktop will automatically have this style applied. However classic desktop apps do not run in the start screen UI.
Imagine if Apple made a "OSX App" on iOS that when you opened it displayed a full OSX desktop. When you click on the iPad home button that app was minimized just like your iPad Mail or Safari app would be.
Now imagine if Apple put this version of iOS on all iMacs and MacBooks as well as the iPad.
That is what Microsoft are doing with Windows 8.
If Apple put iOS on an iMac most "mainstream" consumers would never venture outside of that UI (i.e. they would never launch the "OSX App"). Windows 8 will be the same.
If Apple put an OS X app on an iPad it would be next to useless because OS X isn't built for touch. That's what iOS is for. Sure, you could dock your iPad and do stuff, but a sub 10" screen isn't much of a desktop experience even if you make it work with a mouse.
I'm not sure what you mean by a "Metro look and feel." There's vastly more to a touch interface than biggish chrome. You have to rethink everything about how the app works, the UI, etc.
Having "Windows" as an app on a tablet is all well and good, but when running that app it means you have a tablet no more useful than the original Windows tablets that are generally recognized as being abysmal failures.
Yes, I also used those tablets. Going back to Windows 3.11. Different size screens, from 6" to 12", black and white LCD to color. Used mostly with a stylus. Microsoft literature will sometimes call it "pen computer" but it was always a tablet. Battery life was pathetic on most hardware. And they were heavy as notebooks and usually more expensive than a notebook.
There were two major problems with Microsoft's vision for tablets back then:
(1) No reason to buy a tablet. Windows tablets were not defined by capabilities not found in Windows laptops, nor was it defined by a different user experience. It was defined by the ability to run conventional Windows on a tablet. That aspect had no obvious appeal (other than, gee, that's kind of neat). At the time, the thinking was that tablets needed a "killer app" that would finally give consumers a reason to buy tablets over conventional laptops.
(2) Windows tablets were basically modified laptops. Not just conceptually, but literally speaking. Some tablets had swivel screens that allowed you to fold the keyboard behind the screen. They had fans, hard drives, they weighed over 5lbs. and short battery lifes. And the Windows with Pen Extensions was just regular Windows with a virtual keyboard and support for pen input drivers. Most devices had modifier buttons so you could "right-click". It was always more awkward to use over a conventional laptop. Newtons, which were around in 1997, had a better pen input user experience over heavy, pen-enabled conventional Windows tablets.
Given the choice between a Windows tablet and a Windows laptop, for the purpose of running conventional Windows applications (as opposed to some fabled "killer tablet app"), why would anyone choose the tablet?
I suppose by failure you mean years of testing. It's worked out pretty well for them because they've built up more tablet experience than any software company on the planet. Even clunky they made tablets work even when the software wasn't designed to be used that way. Imagine what's going to happen now that the software is actually designed to take advatage of all tablets have to offer.
Let me get this right. MSFT has been working on tablets and touch for over 10 years. They've had a "tablet", all be it "clunky but they made them work"? But guess what? No one bought them! But hey, as you say, they are "the most experienced" in tablets? But "the software wasn't designed to be used that way"? WTF!!!!!! Oh, but now they get it! Even though a therefore seriously less experienced company (Apple) by your logic has fed them their lunch in both mobile and tablets as consumers don't want MSFT's version, even with ALL THAT EXPERIENCE!!!!!! ROFLOL ROFLOL ROFLOL
I understand an Apple site needs to spin this to give Apple a positive look, and in regards to Samsung, this is just getting shameless. But OTOH, having been running this developer preview (admittedly only for a couple hours), I absolutely love it. We'll see after a couple weeks when the new OS smell wears off, but it is faster than Win7 was on the same machine. I've installed iTunes, Flash, Office 2010, Java, Chrome, and Eclipse (Java dev tool), and everything has been running flawlessly. For a "pre-beta", I am absolutely floored. I can't believe I'm saying this, but so far so good Microsoft!
Troll. Battery life? Heat? Since the Metro UI is bolted on to Windows 7, why shouldn't the developer preview work? Did you install it on a non-Windows 7 tablet?
I'm not sure what you mean by a "Metro look and feel." There's vastly more to a touch interface than biggish chrome. You have to rethink everything about how the app works, the UI, etc.
Here is IE in the in Windows 7 and the "classic desktop" of Windows 8. The changes are subtle, analogous to what Apple did between Snow Leopard and Lion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox
If Apple put an OS X app on an iPad it would be next to useless because OS X isn't built for touch.
Exactly. Most people would never load the OSX app whilst using the iPad as a tablet, just as most people will never launch the "classic desktop" app in Windows 8 whilst using it as a tablet.
However there are other use cases that become apparent when this functionality is available.
For example you could have an iPad-like device with an 11" screen that docks into a Mac Book Air chassis and can be used as an iPad/Mac Book Air hybrid.
You could also dock your iPad into a keyboard/mouse/screen docking station.
Another option that I haven't touched on previously is the ability to have your smart phone dock with a keyboard/mouse/screen to give you a full PC.
This is something that I believe will be very important in emerging markets and might have something to do with the Nokia/Microsoft deal (i.e. Nokia phones are very popular in emerging markets).
Here is IE in the in Windows 7 and the "classic desktop" of Windows 8. The changes are subtle, analogous to what Apple did between Snow Leopard and Lion.
Windows 8 looks like Chrome itself and what Chrome does to OS X.
That is, makes it look hideous by ignoring the OS' design and making up its own.
Windows 8 looks like Chrome itself and what Chrome does to OS X. That is, makes it look hideous by ignoring the OS' design and making up its own.
You came in mid-conversation so you understandably don't understand what we were talking about.
There are two UI's in Windows 8. They don't have names so I'm calling them the "classic desktop" and the "start screen".
Above I showed screen caps from the "classic desktop".
The "start screen" is like the image shown in the article.
I'll quote myself to explain how these work...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Firefly7475
The "classic" desktop UI elements have been given a metro "look and feel" overhaul (just like Lion updated UI elements in OSX) and applications written for the "classic" Windows desktop will automatically have this style applied. However classic desktop apps do not run in the start screen UI.
Imagine if Apple made a "OSX App" on iOS that when you opened it displayed a full OSX desktop. When you click on the iPad home button that app was minimized just like your iPad Mail or Safari app would be.
Now imagine if Apple put this version of iOS on all iMacs and MacBooks as well as the iPad.
One thing that's really being missed in all of this is what apps developers are going to bring to the platform. I would think of the start screen as less to do with your normal windows apps and more to do with what you currently have on your smartphone.
Who has an app for stuff like recipes? Do you have on one your pc to? Probably not as you just go to a website instead. With this simple look and feel, and a tile on your start screen for a recipe of the day you might. I can see people really starting to get pc versions of there phone apps on this.
As an app developer the best bit of news in all of this is, in around 2/3 years there's going to be 450,000,000 machines running Windows 8 that I can easily sell to.
One thing that's really being missed in all of this is what apps developers are going to bring to the platform. I would think of the start screen as less to do with your normal windows apps and more to do with what you currently have on your smartphone.
Who has an app for stuff like recipes? Do you have on one your pc to? Probably not as you just go to a website instead. With this simple look and feel, and a tile on your start screen for a recipe of the day you might. I can see people really starting to get pc versions of there phone apps on this.
As an app developer the best bit of news in all of this is, in around 2/3 years there's going to be 450,000,000 machines running Windows 8 that I can easily sell to.
Definitely. The gold rush on the Windows app store is going to be unprecedented.
Even without the fan (pauses to keep face straight) is anyone going to buy this POS ?
There must be some smart people at Microsoft and at Samsung. So why is it all they can come up with is junk like this ? They can't even make a product that gives the iPad a run for its money, let alone bring something new and innovative to the tablet form. By the time this hits the market Apple will have moved on, and MS won't even have reached the point where the puck had been.
This must be an all time low for Microsoft and Samsung: it should never have been revealed to the public.
Can anyone explain why MS completely fail to understand design aesthetics on every level ?
Just to add to my comments: read Dan Dilger on the matter
Comments
/agree
... with one caveat. The ability to use native Windows applications on the tablet will greatly increase it's appeal. Need to see a Word document? Open word and read it or sync it to your SkyDrive and use Office online (or 365). This IMO is where Apple has failed to captialize so far. If Lion would have ushered in a seamless iOS / OS X experience Microsoft would have less of an advantage.
As it stands right now there is no such things as Pages online and I can't run an iOS app on my Mac (natively).
See, that's just it: you've been able to buy and run Windows tablets since the days of Windows 3.11. You can buy a Windows tablet TODAY and open your Word docs and sync it with SkyDrive, etc. All the stuff in your example. So, what are you trying to say? IF ONLY Apple would do the same, then...what? The iPad would finally outsell Windows tablets? Am I missing something here with all these pro-Windows tablet comments??? What are you guys trying to say?
So if Windows tablets are so awesome, why haven't you owned one since 1997? They've been around forever. What's stopping you?
I see that you know tablet computers been around since 1997. Honestly, I did not know its existence and I did not need one as I was busy outgoings and working. I have now come to a stage where I read newspapers and online articles alot at my free time. I wanted Samsung GT 10.1 but my wife fell in love with Ipad2's aluminum case and slick design.
Window tablets mean that I can do much with it, that is appealing to me. Sure it is not user friendely to kids and elderlies. But between them, I am sure most of them would want it if they have Window computers.
See, that's just it: you've been able to buy and run Windows tablets since the days of Windows 3.11. You can buy a Windows tablet TODAY and open your Word docs and sync it with SkyDrive, etc. All the stuff in your example. So, what are you trying to say? IF ONLY Apple would do the same, then...what? The iPad would finally outsell Windows tablets? Am I missing something here with all these pro-Windows tablet comments??? What are you guys trying to say?
I'm saying the first person to make it extremely user friendly and portable wins the war. Right now it's advantage Microsoft on the PC side and advantage Apple on the tablet side. The Metro UI has the possibility of giving Apple a run for its money. Add to it the ability to provide a seamless experience between a workstation and tablet then businesses may latch on to it as well since the tablet is running the same OS as the desktop and can be attached to the domain.
Metro UI on a phone creates a compelling user experience that feels MUCH more live, organic and engaging than Ios.
Windows 8 w/ Metro stands expand on that theme.
.
If you've used Windows phone 7 device, the first thing you notice besides the buttery fluidity of the kinetic movement, scrolling etc., is the game changing significance of the live tiles.
.
I've heard lots of good things about WinPhone7. Unfortunately, the software comes from only a single vendor. Because of that, I wouldn't even consider buying one.
I see that you know tablet computers been around since 1997. Honestly, I did not know its existence and I did not need one as I was busy outgoings and working. I have now come to a stage where I read newspapers and online articles alot at my free time. I wanted Samsung GT 10.1 but my wife fell in love with Ipad2's aluminum case and slick design.
Window tablets mean that I can do much with it, that is appealing to me. Sure it is not user friendely to kids and elderlies. But between them, I am sure most of them would want it if they have Window computers.
Yes, I also used those tablets. Going back to Windows 3.11. Different size screens, from 6" to 12", black and white LCD to color. Used mostly with a stylus. Microsoft literature will sometimes call it "pen computer" but it was always a tablet. Battery life was pathetic on most hardware. And they were heavy as notebooks and usually more expensive than a notebook.
There were two major problems with Microsoft's vision for tablets back then:
(1) No reason to buy a tablet. Windows tablets were not defined by capabilities not found in Windows laptops, nor was it defined by a different user experience. It was defined by the ability to run conventional Windows on a tablet. That aspect had no obvious appeal (other than, gee, that's kind of neat). At the time, the thinking was that tablets needed a "killer app" that would finally give consumers a reason to buy tablets over conventional laptops.
(2) Windows tablets were basically modified laptops. Not just conceptually, but literally speaking. Some tablets had swivel screens that allowed you to fold the keyboard behind the screen. They had fans, hard drives, they weighed over 5lbs. and short battery lifes. And the Windows with Pen Extensions was just regular Windows with a virtual keyboard and support for pen input drivers. Most devices had modifier buttons so you could "right-click". It was always more awkward to use over a conventional laptop. Newtons, which were around in 1997, had a better pen input user experience over heavy, pen-enabled conventional Windows tablets.
Given the choice between a Windows tablet and a Windows laptop, for the purpose of running conventional Windows applications (as opposed to some fabled "killer tablet app"), why would anyone choose the tablet?
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?
No. I think we are getting our terminology mixed up.
The "classic" desktop UI elements have been given a metro "look and feel" overhaul (just like Lion updated UI elements in OSX) and applications written for the "classic" Windows desktop will automatically have this style applied. However classic desktop apps do not run in the start screen UI.
Imagine if Apple made a "OSX App" on iOS that when you opened it displayed a full OSX desktop. When you click on the iPad home button that app was minimized just like your iPad Mail or Safari app would be.
Now imagine if Apple put this version of iOS on all iMacs and MacBooks as well as the iPad.
That is what Microsoft are doing with Windows 8.
If Apple put iOS on an iMac most "mainstream" consumers would never venture outside of that UI (i.e. they would never launch the "OSX App"). Windows 8 will be the same.
No. I think we are getting our terminology mixed up.
The "classic" desktop UI elements have been given a metro "look and feel" overhaul (just like Lion updated UI elements in OSX) and applications written for the "classic" Windows desktop will automatically have this style applied. However classic desktop apps do not run in the start screen UI.
Imagine if Apple made a "OSX App" on iOS that when you opened it displayed a full OSX desktop. When you click on the iPad home button that app was minimized just like your iPad Mail or Safari app would be.
Now imagine if Apple put this version of iOS on all iMacs and MacBooks as well as the iPad.
That is what Microsoft are doing with Windows 8.
If Apple put iOS on an iMac most "mainstream" consumers would never venture outside of that UI (i.e. they would never launch the "OSX App"). Windows 8 will be the same.
A stellar explanation.
Then they will relegate themselves to simple little applets, instead of full-featured programs. Problem solved!
indeed. and they will buy easy to use iPad's or maybe Android tablets that do that without all the complications of Windows 8.
No. I think we are getting our terminology mixed up.
The "classic" desktop UI elements have been given a metro "look and feel" overhaul (just like Lion updated UI elements in OSX) and applications written for the "classic" Windows desktop will automatically have this style applied. However classic desktop apps do not run in the start screen UI.
Imagine if Apple made a "OSX App" on iOS that when you opened it displayed a full OSX desktop. When you click on the iPad home button that app was minimized just like your iPad Mail or Safari app would be.
Now imagine if Apple put this version of iOS on all iMacs and MacBooks as well as the iPad.
That is what Microsoft are doing with Windows 8.
If Apple put iOS on an iMac most "mainstream" consumers would never venture outside of that UI (i.e. they would never launch the "OSX App"). Windows 8 will be the same.
If Apple put an OS X app on an iPad it would be next to useless because OS X isn't built for touch. That's what iOS is for. Sure, you could dock your iPad and do stuff, but a sub 10" screen isn't much of a desktop experience even if you make it work with a mouse.
I'm not sure what you mean by a "Metro look and feel." There's vastly more to a touch interface than biggish chrome. You have to rethink everything about how the app works, the UI, etc.
Having "Windows" as an app on a tablet is all well and good, but when running that app it means you have a tablet no more useful than the original Windows tablets that are generally recognized as being abysmal failures.
Yes, I also used those tablets. Going back to Windows 3.11. Different size screens, from 6" to 12", black and white LCD to color. Used mostly with a stylus. Microsoft literature will sometimes call it "pen computer" but it was always a tablet. Battery life was pathetic on most hardware. And they were heavy as notebooks and usually more expensive than a notebook.
There were two major problems with Microsoft's vision for tablets back then:
(1) No reason to buy a tablet. Windows tablets were not defined by capabilities not found in Windows laptops, nor was it defined by a different user experience. It was defined by the ability to run conventional Windows on a tablet. That aspect had no obvious appeal (other than, gee, that's kind of neat). At the time, the thinking was that tablets needed a "killer app" that would finally give consumers a reason to buy tablets over conventional laptops.
(2) Windows tablets were basically modified laptops. Not just conceptually, but literally speaking. Some tablets had swivel screens that allowed you to fold the keyboard behind the screen. They had fans, hard drives, they weighed over 5lbs. and short battery lifes. And the Windows with Pen Extensions was just regular Windows with a virtual keyboard and support for pen input drivers. Most devices had modifier buttons so you could "right-click". It was always more awkward to use over a conventional laptop. Newtons, which were around in 1997, had a better pen input user experience over heavy, pen-enabled conventional Windows tablets.
Given the choice between a Windows tablet and a Windows laptop, for the purpose of running conventional Windows applications (as opposed to some fabled "killer tablet app"), why would anyone choose the tablet?
Thanks for the info.
I suppose by failure you mean years of testing. It's worked out pretty well for them because they've built up more tablet experience than any software company on the planet. Even clunky they made tablets work even when the software wasn't designed to be used that way. Imagine what's going to happen now that the software is actually designed to take advatage of all tablets have to offer.
Let me get this right. MSFT has been working on tablets and touch for over 10 years. They've had a "tablet", all be it "clunky but they made them work"? But guess what? No one bought them! But hey, as you say, they are "the most experienced" in tablets? But "the software wasn't designed to be used that way"? WTF!!!!!! Oh, but now they get it! Even though a therefore seriously less experienced company (Apple) by your logic has fed them their lunch in both mobile and tablets as consumers don't want MSFT's version, even with ALL THAT EXPERIENCE!!!!!! ROFLOL ROFLOL ROFLOL
I understand an Apple site needs to spin this to give Apple a positive look, and in regards to Samsung, this is just getting shameless. But OTOH, having been running this developer preview (admittedly only for a couple hours), I absolutely love it. We'll see after a couple weeks when the new OS smell wears off, but it is faster than Win7 was on the same machine. I've installed iTunes, Flash, Office 2010, Java, Chrome, and Eclipse (Java dev tool), and everything has been running flawlessly. For a "pre-beta", I am absolutely floored. I can't believe I'm saying this, but so far so good Microsoft!
Troll. Battery life? Heat? Since the Metro UI is bolted on to Windows 7, why shouldn't the developer preview work? Did you install it on a non-Windows 7 tablet?
I'm not sure what you mean by a "Metro look and feel." There's vastly more to a touch interface than biggish chrome. You have to rethink everything about how the app works, the UI, etc.
Here is IE in the in Windows 7 and the "classic desktop" of Windows 8. The changes are subtle, analogous to what Apple did between Snow Leopard and Lion.
If Apple put an OS X app on an iPad it would be next to useless because OS X isn't built for touch.
Exactly. Most people would never load the OSX app whilst using the iPad as a tablet, just as most people will never launch the "classic desktop" app in Windows 8 whilst using it as a tablet.
However there are other use cases that become apparent when this functionality is available.
For example you could have an iPad-like device with an 11" screen that docks into a Mac Book Air chassis and can be used as an iPad/Mac Book Air hybrid.
You could also dock your iPad into a keyboard/mouse/screen docking station.
Another option that I haven't touched on previously is the ability to have your smart phone dock with a keyboard/mouse/screen to give you a full PC.
This is something that I believe will be very important in emerging markets and might have something to do with the Nokia/Microsoft deal (i.e. Nokia phones are very popular in emerging markets).
Here is IE in the in Windows 7 and the "classic desktop" of Windows 8. The changes are subtle, analogous to what Apple did between Snow Leopard and Lion.
Windows 8 looks like Chrome itself and what Chrome does to OS X.
That is, makes it look hideous by ignoring the OS' design and making up its own.
Windows 8 looks like Chrome itself and what Chrome does to OS X. That is, makes it look hideous by ignoring the OS' design and making up its own.
You came in mid-conversation so you understandably don't understand what we were talking about.
There are two UI's in Windows 8. They don't have names so I'm calling them the "classic desktop" and the "start screen".
Above I showed screen caps from the "classic desktop".
The "start screen" is like the image shown in the article.
I'll quote myself to explain how these work...
The "classic" desktop UI elements have been given a metro "look and feel" overhaul (just like Lion updated UI elements in OSX) and applications written for the "classic" Windows desktop will automatically have this style applied. However classic desktop apps do not run in the start screen UI.
Imagine if Apple made a "OSX App" on iOS that when you opened it displayed a full OSX desktop. When you click on the iPad home button that app was minimized just like your iPad Mail or Safari app would be.
Now imagine if Apple put this version of iOS on all iMacs and MacBooks as well as the iPad.
That is what Microsoft are doing with Windows 8.
Who has an app for stuff like recipes? Do you have on one your pc to? Probably not as you just go to a website instead. With this simple look and feel, and a tile on your start screen for a recipe of the day you might. I can see people really starting to get pc versions of there phone apps on this.
As an app developer the best bit of news in all of this is, in around 2/3 years there's going to be 450,000,000 machines running Windows 8 that I can easily sell to.
One thing that's really being missed in all of this is what apps developers are going to bring to the platform. I would think of the start screen as less to do with your normal windows apps and more to do with what you currently have on your smartphone.
Who has an app for stuff like recipes? Do you have on one your pc to? Probably not as you just go to a website instead. With this simple look and feel, and a tile on your start screen for a recipe of the day you might. I can see people really starting to get pc versions of there phone apps on this.
As an app developer the best bit of news in all of this is, in around 2/3 years there's going to be 450,000,000 machines running Windows 8 that I can easily sell to.
Definitely. The gold rush on the Windows app store is going to be unprecedented.
Even without the fan (pauses to keep face straight) is anyone going to buy this POS ?
There must be some smart people at Microsoft and at Samsung. So why is it all they can come up with is junk like this ? They can't even make a product that gives the iPad a run for its money, let alone bring something new and innovative to the tablet form. By the time this hits the market Apple will have moved on, and MS won't even have reached the point where the puck had been.
This must be an all time low for Microsoft and Samsung: it should never have been revealed to the public.
Can anyone explain why MS completely fail to understand design aesthetics on every level ?
Just to add to my comments: read Dan Dilger on the matter
http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2011/0...-taste-of-bob/
As perceptive an analysis as to why Windows 8 will fail as you will find.