[WIN8] Windows 8 Thread

[G-PhresH]

Originally Posted by PabloEscobar

My mistake.

To many people don't take in the TCO when they investigate new software. Instead, they will just look at the purchase price or the licensing deal the Vendor can get them.

Exactly.

Although it also depends on how much time will be wasted with that person on the UAT.
If the person is 20% less effecient then it would only cost 20% of the persons wage to do the UAT.

If you where going to do a UAT, doing it with a free preview software (which is, honestly, pretty much the final product) is the best way to do it.

[millsy_c]

Originally Posted by G-PhresH

If you where going to do a UAT, doing it with a free preview software (which is, honestly, pretty much the final product) is the best way to do it.

It's also free to do it on a 30 day trial too

I see negative value in doing a UAT on pre release software, even if it's 'pretty much' done.

Worst case you spend a whole 250 + losses incurred through inefficiency. If you get the user(s) to document difficulties you can use them as a basis for training material which ends up being a gain. And if you have >100 seats that's pretty much nothing in the grand scheme of things

[PabloEscobar]

Originally Posted by andyroo54

Also I'm re imaging one of our employees' machines, he currently has a samsung slate 7 as his main PC, but he's a bit of a nerd and likes gadgets etc, plus he uses it both as a laptop/desktop

OK, If you had made yourself clearer in your initial posts regarding business use, we could have probably avoided the last few pages.

To me, "Re-imaging" implies taking an existing machine, and putting a new image on it, And you also mentioned that He currently has a Slate7 as his main machine.

I foolishly thought that this sentence were both referencing the same thing, and you were going to re-image his main machine.

Since that's not the case, the whole discussion is Moot.

What you should have said is

"I'm going to install it on a spare tablet and give it to the marketing guys to have a play with".

I installed it for my 2yo Son to play with. But I didn't feel the need to post about it (although I might, because watching him use it (given he has never used a computer before), is Astonishing.

Originally Posted by G-PhresH

Exactly.

Although it also depends on how much time will be wasted with that person on the UAT.
If the person is 20% less effecient then it would only cost 20% of the persons wage to do the UAT.

If you where going to do a UAT, doing it with a free preview software (which is, honestly, pretty much the final product) is the best way to do it.

This all depends on your internal policies regarding software updates. I've worked in places where a Complete workup was required for every single windows patch, I've also worked in places where everyone was domain admin, and it was Free-for-all.

I'm currently somewhere in the middle. But not far enough towards the second place, that doing UAT on a Beta would pass Muster for doing it on the final.

[PabloEscobar]

My 2 Year old has watched me on the computer pretty much since he was born.

He knows the keyboard and mouse are what makes things happen on the screen.

But I'd left my computer with the Metro start-screen up, I'd got up to go do something, and by the time I get back, He is sitting in my chair, pressing tiles.

I want to get a Tablet of some sort and just leave him to it, as the ultimate test of intuitiveness.

I think much of what we now call intuitive has been trained into us from older versions of windows (like people complaining about how to shutdown, or that there is no right-click context menu).

Microsoft are obviously very keen to get a hefty slice of the 'digital home' market. and they have decided that Touch is the future. Even going as far as releasing their own device. The last time Microsoft made a Foray into the consumer hardware market, we had the Xbox/360. And they seem to have grabbed a decent slice of that pie.

I'm looking forward to the reaction from Microsoft's biggest customers (the OEMs) to having MS enter their market as a direct competitor.

[power]

Originally Posted by PabloEscobar

My 2 Year old has watched me on the computer pretty much since he was born.

He knows the keyboard and mouse are what makes things happen on the screen.

But I'd left my computer with the Metro start-screen up, I'd got up to go do something, and by the time I get back, He is sitting in my chair, pressing tiles.

I want to get a Tablet of some sort and just leave him to it, as the ultimate test of intuitiveness.

I think much of what we now call intuitive has been trained into us from older versions of windows (like people complaining about how to shutdown, or that there is no right-click context menu).

Microsoft are obviously very keen to get a hefty slice of the 'digital home' market. and they have decided that Touch is the future. Even going as far as releasing their own device. The last time Microsoft made a Foray into the consumer hardware market, we had the Xbox/360. And they seem to have grabbed a decent slice of that pie.

I'm looking forward to the reaction from Microsoft's biggest customers (the OEMs) to having MS enter their market as a direct competitor.

Fisher Price my first computer +1 lol!

I guess people are about that smart so it'll be a good thing.

So many users can barely understand anything beyond mash the keys and pray that the machine works, Win8 should fit the bill nicely.

[G-PhresH]

Originally Posted by power

Fisher Price my first computer +1 lol!

I guess people are about that smart so it'll be a good thing.

So you are saying that the simplification of a UI is only done to appeal to dumb people?
I really dont understand why you keep refering to metro as a kids UI. If it was the same damn thing with no bright colours then you might change your tune.

Who gives a big flying fuck it is colourful? Colourful things put people in good moods. Colourful tiles that give me info on programs (like how many emails i have) than have a fuck-tonne of icons and shortcuts on my desktop and i never use.

As long as the UI works as it should and allows people to get on with their work then does it really matter? How often do you just sit and stare at your dekstop? Not often i assume, because you are in a browers, game, or other kind of app.

Ugh.

I am yet to use Metro so ill hold judgement, but i use a handful of apps regularly and the rest i can easily enough find via the UI.

[power]

Originally Posted by G-PhresH

So you are saying that the simplification of a UI is only done to appeal to dumb people?

It works for Apple iPad and iPhone doesn't it?

[G-PhresH]

Originally Posted by power

It works for Apple iPad and iPhone doesn't it?

You seem to have such a negative view of a simplistic UI.
iOS is very streamlined for the tasks it needs to complete, less used things are hidden away but the most commonly used items are very close by (messaging, phone calls, email, etc).

Sure, power users you need 100 applications close at hand might not like Metro but they are in the minority.

Its not going to appeal to everyone, it needs to appeal to the majority.

[power]

Originally Posted by G-PhresH

You seem to have such a negative view of a simplistic UI.
iOS is very streamlined for the tasks it needs to complete, less used things are hidden away but the most commonly used items are very close by (messaging, phone calls, email, etc).

Sure, power users you need 100 applications close at hand might not like Metro but they are in the minority.

Its not going to appeal to everyone, it needs to appeal to the majority.

your point is?

[OldnBold]

Originally Posted by power

your point is?

Agree .. Windows is turning itself into a clone of Apple where you can't change the OS to suit yourself. That is exactly what Apple does and continues to do.

[andyroo54]

Originally Posted by OldnBold

Agree .. Windows is turning itself into a clone of Apple where you can't change the OS to suit yourself. That is exactly what Apple does and continues to do.

Disagree. If you actually used the OS you would find it's almost exactly the same as windows 7. So if you are stating Microsoft is cloning Apple, you had better extend that statement to include Windows 7.

Apple has a ton of customization, as much as windows 7 or any other version of windows. The actual difference is how restricted the core of the OS is, and the development of 'applications' are. And in this regard Microsoft is still the clear leader in terms of mass appeal/development, potentially with the exception of Windows RT, which by the way, pretty much no one in this thread has said a fucking thing about.

[elvis]

Browsing the "Show your desktop 6" thread just now, I've just witnessed over a dozen pages of Windows desktops I'd rather use than Metro.

Some of the "amateur" minimalist Rainmeter skins out there crap all over the default offerings of any Windows release to date. If I'm ever forced to use a Windows desktop again, I know how I'll be customising it.

[andyroo54]

Originally Posted by elvis

Windows desktops I'd rather use than Metro.

Elvis if you had actually used windows in the last year, you would know that metro isn't actually the desktop. The desktop is the desktop. Metro is the start menu

[elvis]

Originally Posted by andyroo54

Elvis if you had actually used windows in the last year, you would know that metro isn't actually the desktop. The desktop is the desktop. Metro is the start menu

Not only am I forced to used Windows daily (and I'd hedge my bets that I'm a more comprehensive user with a deeper understanding of it than 98% of this forum's users), I'm also well aware Metro is yet another launcher shell from Microsoft, ala DOS-Shell and Windows 3.1.

That doesn't change the fact that Metro looks like a 1990's fashion designer vomited on my screen. Nor does it change the fact that a bunch of amateurs on the internet continue to make better interfaces for Microsoft products than Microsoft's best, brightest, and most highly paid designers can.

[andyroo54]

Originally Posted by elvis

Not only am I forced to used Windows daily (and I'd hedge my bets that I'm a more comprehensive user with a deeper understanding of it than 98% of this forum's users), I'm also well aware Metro is yet another launcher shell from Microsoft, ala DOS-Shell and Windows 3.1.

That doesn't change the fact that Metro looks like a 1990's fashion designer vomited on my screen. Nor does it change the fact that a bunch of amateurs on the internet continue to make better interfaces for Microsoft products than Microsoft's best, brightest, and most highly paid designers can.

Yes I agree some of those rainmeter designs are pretty nice, and they appeal highly to a niche, but not to the mainstream.

No one doubts your computer prowess Elvis.. but to be honest I'd be more impressed with your knowledge of linux than windows.. windows is pretty simple at the heart even for me who barely understands visual basic.

Still you totally missed the point of my reply, that is, you seemed to believe that metro was a desktop replacement. It isn't. Maybe for windows RT tablets it is, but for windows desktops/laptops/pro tablets, the desktop is still the desktop, Metro is the start menu, that's all I was saying. Obviously you understand that from your response, but your initial post didn't seem to convey that. Could it be designed better? Most probably. Heck even the xbox 360 dashboard looks better.