Microsoft to kill off the Windows Desktop -- confirmed?

[livingenzyme]

 

And that's the problem with this forum.  Got 1 hater.  Got 2 haters.  Now, there's a hand full of haters patting each others on the back pretending to represent the world at large.

 

I think it's pretty arrogant of you to call people who aren't satisfied with the status quo and want to improve it "haters".

 

That's traditionally a way people who are overly self-satisfied with themselves justify their positions.

 

-Noel

 

I apologize for having used that term.  Having said that, the rest of my points stand. 

 

All my previous desktop apps work just fine in 8, 8.1, and now 10.  Everything is still there.  8.1 was the fastest bootup OS I've ever seen.  I tried to boot it up in an old 90's machine, and it worked fine.

 

And out in the field, the metro UI is a godsend.  My profession requires me to work in both the office and field environments.  And I utilize both UI's with absolutely no problem.

 

I know you 100% office people hate metro.  But try to think of it from some other people's perspective here.  Go ahead and try to work on your feet with the desktop. 

 

The desktop isn't going anywhere.  None of the changes they've made look to me like it's fazing out.  And no, the sky isn't falling either. 

 

I've been reading a lot of your posts.  You have made it abundantly clear that you hate the metro UI.  Kudos to you.  Just don't try to pretend the will of the majority is to kill off the metro UI.  What I want is for you to have the option to strictly use the desktop.  What you want seems to be for me to have no option but the desktop.

[DosProbie]

Yes productivity with today's technology in the field can be very useful especially when working with schedules and a timeline, having been self employed in the construction industry myself for over 40 years but now retired I saw the benefits of using smartphones, laptops and tablets on the job sites. I just recently had to have a home inspection done and the inspector setup a hotspot off his phone to his tablet wrote up everything with photos etc then printed out my report in under 30 minutes, a far cry from the 'good ole days' when everything was drawn up by hand and brought back to the office to write it all up for a second time and then email back (or worse snail mail) to the client. 

~DP

[JorgeA]

I've been reading a lot of your posts.  You have made it abundantly clear that you hate the metro UI.  Kudos to you.  Just don't try to pretend the will of the majority is to kill off the metro UI.  What I want is for you to have the option to strictly use the desktop.  What you want seems to be for me to have no option but the desktop.

 

 

Whatever "a lot of [our] posts" might mean, it's clear to me that you have not read enough of them to understand that what we ask for is UI choice, which is exactly the same thing that you say you want.

 

After reading your unsupported assertions, I asked you to back them up:

 

Kindly link us to evidence, on this forum, of "a lot of people" who "treat Windows 8.1 as if it has no desktop at all." The concern all along has been that Microsoft intends to phase out the Windows Desktop, not that it has done so already.

 

And yet you did not answer this request and instead went on to repeat the same sorts of charges.

 

You keep saying that you are basing what you say about us on your reading around this Forum. Actually, I wonder if you have read (let alone absorbed) even all the posts in this present thread. In your latest post, you state again that --

 

 

 

The desktop isn't going anywhere.

 

-- even though the link to Microsoft's "Future Vision" statement, indicating that this is precisely what they aim to do, has already been given twice in this thread, first in the original post and then again in reply to one of your previous posts.

 

This is how it's explained by one of the most articulate proponents of the Metro/Modern UI over in the Windows 10 Technical Preview forums:

 

The concept was tested and confirmed ~2006 in Windows Vista with the release of the Windows Presentation Foundation (WPF) chrome-less apps and the Windows Media Center (WMC) mouse-less user interface. After working with it for a few years, the first , noted, vision statement/video was released in 2009.

 

The Office Labs team has been in charge of producing and releasing vision statements for all of Microsoft, nearly, since the inception of the Office product line.

 

In 2012, Microsoft released the first example of an entire OS user interface devoid of the 'desktop' metaphor (there was the 'desktop' app to use in transition). During the last two annual developer conferences, 'desktop' applications have been referred to as 'legacy' code. The new CEO's battle cry is "Mobile first, Cloud first" - Notice that everything in the videos assume ubiquitous network connection... 

 

It really seems to have been a rather well planned and publicized path to their stated vision. The stated vision seems to follow the path of advancements in technology needed to accomplish their vision in the 10 years they planned for. The Consumer Electronics Show (CES), this year, confirms the market releases for the last bits required to accomplish what is depicted in the videos.

 

The 10 year goal was set to coincide with the end of life for Windows 7.

 

So, talk about killing off the Windows Desktop is not merely the fretting of worrywarts, but rather a goal which is explicitly stated by Microsoft and proclaimed by supporters of that vision.

 

If you do find the Windows Desktop to be superior for office use than proposed alternatives, then instead of attacking our critique you may want to join it.

 

--JorgeA

Edited February 17, 2015 by JorgeA

[jaclaz]

What you want seems to be for me to have no option but the desktop.

 

Then there has been a misunderstanding.

 

What I would like to have is freedom (for everyone) to choose either the desktop or the NCI (let's call it "modern" since it cannot be called "metro" anymore) AND to be able to customize the one or the other according to personal habits, likes and likes not, whatever.

 

You prefer the "search" paradigm? Good, then you are free to use it on BOTH your office PC and on the tablet you carry with you.

 

I prefer the Start button cascading links? Good, then I am free to use it on BOTH my office PC and on the tablet I carry with me.

 

Someone else wants to use the one on the desktop PC and the other on the tablet (or - maybe better - viceversa)? Good as well.

 

Someone (like myself) cannot really distinguish the scrolling bars? Then he/she is free to change their colour or give them a more visible/contrasting look, different form what someone else in a not-so-far-away galaxy defined as JFYI :

https://social.msdn.microsoft.com:443/Forums/en-US/ed1de1dc-1389-4980-acf2-aefc95947ac1/changing-to-a-theme-with-color-in-office-2013?

Please...PLEASE...someone tell me there is a way to change the Office 2013 RTM themes beyond just a grey-scale look. All I can see is "White", "Light Grey", and "Dark Grey"...which is equivalent to "Stormtrooper White", Stormtrooper Light Grey", and "Stormtrooper Dark Grey".

 

 

 

jaclaz

[livingenzyme]

 

Yes productivity with today's technology in the field can be very useful especially when working with schedules and a timeline, having been self employed in the construction industry myself for over 40 years but now retired I saw the benefits of using smartphones, laptops and tablets on the job sites. I just recently had to have a home inspection done and the inspector setup a hotspot off his phone to his tablet wrote up everything with photos etc then printed out my report in under 30 minutes, a far cry from the 'good ole days' when everything was drawn up by hand and brought back to the office to write it all up for a second time and then email back (or worse snail mail) to the client. 

~DP

 

I work with the department of transportation. I make sure things are done correctly and according to specs by our contractors. It's painful sometimes to see people who wouldn't let go of the "good ole days".

 

For example, a few years back one of our contractors wanted to use lasers and gps instead of string lines. They even proved to us that setup time was cut down from a whole crew of 2 dozen and a whole work day to a crew of half a dozen and 5 hours. To me, it was a simple and logical transition. What I didn't account for were the "good ole days" folks. Who knew something so simple would cause a shitstorm?

 

One older guy very angrily asked what if the laser beam was crooked?

 

Forget frontiers of technology. I think the construction industry is in the back end somewhere, and we continue to struggle as the "good ole days" folks fight any and every change imaginable.

 

The days of desktop computers strictly for office use only is long past. People need to get over it. They need to learn to share the ecosystem with those of us who work on our feet half the time... or all the time.

[livingenzyme]

Ok jorgeJ, I concede to your points.

 

Having said that, if the desktop dies, as long as there is adequate software support, I'm fine with it.

 

Unlike some people, I can be productive regardless of tools I am given. Adapt and survive. Or stick with hammer and chisel.

 

If they do indeed want to kill the desktop, I still don't see what the big fuss is all about?

[NoelC]

Yeah, all I want is for Microsoft to continue to IMPROVE or at least MAINTAIN the good functionality of the desktop while moving forward with their Windows is an App Store Delivery Engine initiative.

At the moment, there are no Metro/Modern Apps I need, nor can use in any of my work.  That probably won't keep.  But it's true now.  Why?  It's been possible to develop Apps for years now.  Wouldn't you think something useful would be developed besides just fun and games?  Bravo to you if you've done it - what's the app?

 

The concept of making the desktop more difficult to use for no other reason than to try to usher people toward something else - and you can't seriously refute that it's less usable without tweaks and 3rd party software that didn't used to be needed - that's just wrong.

 

• Couldn't the Start button have just been left in as a "legacy option"?  By the way, I was already using an alternative since Vista, since Classic Shell is better implemented than any of Microsoft's code.
   
• Why did they delete the GUI for setting up backup?  The capability is still there, but now I have to schedule a wbadmin command.  Previous Versions?  I actually used that feature (and I welcome its apparent return in Win 10).
   
• Why did they remove drop shadows from the Win 8 GUI (not to mention visual styles from buttons, thumbs, etc.)?  Those help visually differentiate windows and controls within windows.
   
• Why make disabling UAC cause the loss of use of Metro/Modern Apps?  That's just arbitrary.  Up through Win 7 it could be completely disabled from the GUI, which is no longer possible with Win 8+.  Did they figure the folks who needed to do it would just die off?
   
• Why did they remove the ability (in Win 10) to control as carefully what gets installed via Windows Update?  Who does that benefit?

 

The 3rd party developers of the world are not stupid.  They came forth with solutions to many of these things because people need them, and research solves most of the rest.  At the moment I'm quite productive with Win 8.1 x64 running my workstation. 

 

But having to bend over backwards to achieve that is a long way from Microsoft providing it out of the box.  Mostly it's just possible because they've left the functionality in the system.  Probably their own developers tweak Windows similarly.

 

The very things I (and I'm sure others) need from a serious OS have to be coaxed out of disabled, deprecated, or outright deleted functionality.

 

I'm supposed to like this?

 

I'm no stick in the mud, I develop high performance graphics software as well as do business and research on my workstation.  I've been an incurable early adopter of Microsoft software since there was a Microsoft (and I still am), and I worked with even better systems before that.  No, my friend, I'm no "hater", except maybe that I "hate" that Microsoft is dumbing down the desktop without providing anywhere near equivalent capability in Metro/Modern land.

 

-Noel

[livingenzyme]

Yeah, all I want is for Microsoft to continue to IMPROVE or at least MAINTAIN the good functionality of the desktop while moving forward with their Windows is an App Store Delivery Engine initiative.

At the moment, there are no Metro/Modern Apps I need, nor can use in any of my work.  That probably won't keep.  But it's true now.  Why?  It's been possible to develop Apps for years now.  Wouldn't you think something useful would be developed besides just fun and games?  Bravo to you if you've done it - what's the app?

On another forum, someone asked me this exact question.  I answered, and before I know it I was banned for spamming. 

 

The concept of making the desktop more difficult to use for no other reason than to try to usher people toward something else - and you can't seriously refute that it's less usable without tweaks and 3rd party software that didn't used to be needed - that's just wrong.

I do dispute this.  I've been using 8 since the beginning and have had absolutely no problem.  Then 8.1 came out and still I have had no problem at all.  The desktop to me has not become less functional at all.

 

As I said before, I consider myself a resourceful person no matter what tools I am given.  The lack of a start menu does not impede my resourcefulness.

 

Years ago, as a joke I wrote a small app that hid the start button/menu.  I then sent it to a friend in the company.  He panicked and ran to my office demanding that I bring back the start menu.  So, I emailed him another app that reversed this.  Well, he sent the app to a whole bunch of people, and before I know it everyone was mad at me.  Just down memory lane...

 

Anyway, what I'm trying to say is I have not modified my desktop at all.  I have noticed that I can run apps/programs a lot faster than before. 

 

I'm sorry, I just don't see how the changes have made things harder to work with.  At worst, it's the same as before.  At best, it's made things more efficient.

[JorgeA]

Ok jorgeJ, I concede to your points.

 

Having said that, if the desktop dies, as long as there is adequate software support, I'm fine with it.

 

Unlike some people, I can be productive regardless of tools I am given. Adapt and survive. Or stick with hammer and chisel.

 

If they do indeed want to kill the desktop, I still don't see what the big fuss is all about?

 

Thank you.

 

Having acknowledged Microsoft's goal to replace the Windows Desktop, it will be helpful to consider our critique of Windows 8/8.1/10 in that context. As you read around the forum here you will see that the critique focuses primarily on certain families of issues:

 

1. Usability

 

We find that the Metro/Modern apps that Microsoft is putting out (both for their own sake and as models for app developers to follow) present, as constructed and offered, a restricted work environment lacking in user controls. Moreover, typically those controls that do exist (for example, in the Metro version of Internet Explorer) are hidden for the sake of increasing the space devoted to content. While this may work to some degree if we simply want to watch a video (although even then it would be a challenge to discover the page controls and a pain in the neck to have to keep bringing them out), it makes things harder if we want to actually do something with what's on the screen (and that is far from always going to be a video). How would you print a newspaper article off Metro IE unless you already knew to hit Ctrl-P? There's nothing in the Metro IE interface to inform you of that, let alone to adjust a multitude of other settings such as for privacy and security, your homepage, saving a webpage, etc. etc. With any luck, you will understand why we tend to view Metro apps as little more than toys -- sad little crippled programs for unserious purposes.

 

We also dislike the by-design wide spacing of text and other elements in Metro apps, relative to the more efficient density of material in regular applications where one can visually take in more (more text, more controls) at a time. To get an idea of what we mean, compare the traditional Calculator applet (recently eliminated from Windows 10 TP) to the new calculator app that they have put in its place.

 

Compare, too, the tightly spaced Vista/7 Start Menu to the new Start Menu in the Windows 10 Technical Preview. In the Vista/7 menu, you can see 22 items at a time, while in the Win10TP menu you can only see 12 items because they are so widely spaced out. Needless additional scrolling. And even that applies only if menu space isn't taken up by those silly letter dividers informing us that this is where the "E" apps begin, etc.

 

I'm sure that others can come up with numerous other examples of limited or space-wasting Metro apps, as well as of regular applications that have been redesigned with Metro in mind.

 

Personally, I tried the Metro Start Screen for several months and found it both harder and more annoying to have to scroll and scan whole screensful of blocks when looking for something, than it was to view compact bunches of links under All Programs in the regular Start Menu tucked in the corner.

 

2. Esthetics

 

The single-color rectangles known as Tiles remind us of nothing more than Playskool blocks. The Start Menu has now taken on this look, what with its being a single color and, in the right panel, featuring large rectangles with small lettering in them. Make them smaller, and the app names get truncated, turning the tiles into unidentifiable stacks of scarcely differentiated blocks. This strikes us as ludicrous from a practical standpoint, but esthetically as a visual horror, suitable for ages 1-3. With the planned elimination of the Desktop, this is what we will ultimately have to look at on a daily basis.

 

To us, Vista and 7 were the high point of Windows beauty, thanks to the marriage of the new Aero Glass transparency to longstanding three-dimensional elements (buttons, scrollbars, progress bars). For many of us who spend up to ten hours a day in front of a computer screen, this makes for a more pleasing experience, making the long hours of work easier to bear. From a practical perspective, we find the Metro-inspired flatness that's spreading throughout the OS to be not only dull and boring, but also harder to use, as the visual distinction between clickable items and items meant only to be read is decreased or erased completely. The dingy gray, flat scrollbars in IE and File Explorer are harder to locate at a glance; even if you make them darker, they're still flat rectangular blobs that are harder to tell apart from the rest of the window contents.

 

3. Choice

 

The concept of choice is applicable on several levels.

 

First, there is the decreased choice of UI. In Vista and 7, if you hated Aero Glass transparency you could choose the Basic theme. If you preferred a more traditional look, you could alternatively select the Classic, Windows 98/2000-type theme. Neither of these is available in Windows 8. In Vista/7, with a little work you could also install a Longhorn theme or any number of other custom visual styles. None of this that I've tried, has worked in Win10TP: after attempting to install a Vista theme that worked fine in Windows 7, my Taskbar is still flat and monochromatic.

 

Just as for Windows 8, there are people working on getting a modicum of Aero Glass transparency for Windows 10, but the very fact that you have to jump through additional and more difficult hoops to get the desired look, itself represents a reduction in user choice of interface.

 

Second, there is the reduced choice in what the user can do within Metro/Modern/Universal apps, compared to what we can traditionally do in regular applications with respect to the files we are working on. (See discussion of IE above for an example.)

 

Third, if and when the Desktop is eliminated and all apps must be obtained via the Windows Store, this will represent another type of reduction in user choice. Gone will be the user's ability to simply download a program from a website and install it. And not only will that choice disappear, but users will be required to open a Microsoft account in order to obtain third-party programs. We oppose being herded into the "walled garden" of the Microsoft Store in order to get anything beyond what comes pre-installed on our PCs.

 

And speaking of the Microsoft account, the company is steering PC buyers into the Microsoft matrix by making it a non-evident, confusing process to set up a local account on their new computers. Not exactly a celebration of user choice.

 

Others on this side of the discussion are welcome to add their own examples to illustrate the concepts I'm describing. Please do.

 

* * * * * * *

 

All that said, I do not doubt, as you have found, that there are situations where a simpler UI is suitable because of the limited scope of the particular work involved; or that there are people whose needs are such that they will be happier with such a simpler environment. (I am about to recommend to an elderly family member who wishes to explore the Web that she might be happier with a tablet than with a PC.)

 

However, bear in mind that what we object to is Microsoft's ongoing attempts to submerge everyone into that kind of UI: witness not only the aforementioned replacement of the Calculator applet with a Metro calc app that takes over almost half the screen, but more importantly the elimination of the Vista/7 Start Menu, now to be reconstituted into a gimped Start Menu where Tiles have supplanted links in the right panel and which is generally lacking in customization options. I'm sure that others can come up with their own examples to add to these.

 

I hope that this will help you to understand where we're coming from.

 

--JorgeA

[bphlpt]

The days of desktop computers strictly for office use only is long past. People need to get over it. They need to learn to share the ecosystem with those of us who work on our feet half the time... or all the time.

 

Adapt and survive. Or stick with hammer and chisel.

 

If they do indeed want to kill the desktop, I still don't see what the big fuss is all about?

 

Hmmm. Sounds familiar.

 

To extend your analogy about the old engineers who wanted to keep using pencils and paper, it's like not only were computers invented, but they also destroyed all pencils and paper and replaced them with thin sheets of bark and pieces of coal.  "The ability to write if you really wanted to is still there, you just need to get with the program and use the new tools!"

 

 

 

... If you don't like touchscreen, god bless you.  God bless all of you.  Don't ever get a touchscreen device.  Just don't try to dictate what you do or don't like to the rest of us. ...

Well, we say something very similar:

 

If you like or need a touchscreen, God bless you.  God bless all of you.  Get the touchscreen device that fits your needs. Just don't try to dictate what you do or don't like to the rest of us.

 

 

 

I'm sorry, I just don't see how the changes have made things harder to work with.  At worst, it's the same as before.  At best, it's made things more efficient.

As JorgeA most eloquently explained. the problems we have with the changes MS has made to the OS are:

 

1. Usability

2. Esthetics

3. Choice

especially CHOICE

 

 

Would there have been a real problem with giving users the option of which interface the user wanted to use? Why did they need to remove what was already working well for desktop users? Were they trying to "force" users to purchase a new PC, such as a "Surface", in order to use the OS most effectively?

Cheers and Regards

[jaclaz]

especially CHOICE

 

... which is what I call - maybe improperly - freedom.

 

jaclaz

[NoelC]

especially CHOICE

 

+1

 

Seems to me that people dictating what to do actually have to be SMARTER than the people being forced NOT to do the things they're good at.  Though I may be gaining wisdom, if anything I'm losing brain cells as I age yet I haven't sensed that OS design has been getting smarter for a long time. 

 

Dumbed-down maybe.  More predatory, definitely.  But not smarter.

 

-Noel

Edited February 18, 2015 by NoelC

[NoelC]

 

The concept of making the desktop more difficult to use for no other reason than to try to usher people toward something else - and you can't seriously refute that it's less usable without tweaks and 3rd party software that didn't used to be needed - that's just wrong.

 

I do dispute this.  I've been using 8 since the beginning and have had absolutely no problem.  Then 8.1 came out and still I have had no problem at all.  The desktop to me has not become less functional at all.

 

Just because *you* don't need it in your world, you claim it's not so?

 

Perhaps you feel your capability to adapt to whatever Microsoft rolls out is why you're not feeling a degradation in user experience.  It doesn't occur to you that you're possibly speaking with people who use and understand Windows at a level higher than you do.  Or maybe just need it to do DIFFERENT things.

 

That same kind of thinking would question why virtuoso musicians have more expensive instruments than high school band members.

 

I don't understand how people think that somehow if it's okay for them then it's okay to restrict others' options.  Maybe it's a jealousy thing.

 

-Noel

[JorgeA]

 

That same kind of thinking would question why virtuoso musicians have more expensive instruments than high school band members.

 

That's a great point.

 

Although, maybe the "vision" envisioned by Microsoft is for a few elite High Tech Priests to have real computers, while the hoi polloi are limited to toy devices that they can't tinker with; only those deemed worthy of joining the Tech Order would be allowed access to the system's mysteries inner workings.

 

--JorgeA

Edited February 18, 2015 by JorgeA

[NoelC]

So, long term, Microsoft builds an internal version of Windows that's much more capable than it delivers as an App Store Engine?  They can develop great things, but we have to buy them.  The thought has crossed my mind.

 

Once you abandon the "build a better mousetrap" model, things get topsy turvy in a hurry.

 

-Noel