No, they say something completely different.

This is just something I remember reading on sites like pcworld and tomshardware, if I'm not mistaken. Supposedly that something would be done on the desktop side to make it look more "complete" or blend better with metro, or that they would eventually transition the metro design over to just the taskbar through an update or something. Same functionality apparently, but more metro like in appearance for consistency sake or whatever. And that the changes wouldn't transition to any open windows or the explorer, something like that.

I sure hope they don't mess with gadgets on the desktop side. I, too, used things like cpu meter, memory and such like that. Come to think of it, I never ended up trying them on 8. Maybe I'll give that a try. I know the release preview isn't final, but if they work in that, then I don't see it changing for the final, at least I hope not. People should still have the choice to use gadgets on their desktop as they always have. I don't think they'd be that stupid. It would render all the work developers have put in to create gadgets pointless.

Come to think of it, it makes sense they'd get rid of that gallery, considering htey have a Windows app store now. They're probably all headed there.

Sure seems like a way designed to inconvenience users of previous OSes in order to get them to upgrade alright.

What Carmack said was pretty fair. He believes there is less that makes you want to go get Windows 8 from Windows 7. For him the reasons aren't there. For me, however, I do feel there are enough reasons to justify the upgrade. Don't get me wrong, if another OS never came out again, I'd be more than beyond satisfied to continue using Windows 7 forever. There are enough changes/improvements in Windows 8 that make me feel it's worth it, especially for a mere $40 asking price. A pretty big deal for me is the improved performance that I've noticed, and the memory usage is quite a bit better, I think.

And then, another aspect of it is that I've been really reading the hell out of their blog, seeing how much thought has gone into various aspects of it. Not everything they've said has convinced me, especially the part about them expecting the majority to spend most of their time in Metro, but they didn't strike me as making changes for changes sake. Some things have been there since Windows 7, and even before, but they are doing a better job of exposing them to users and really bringing certain features to the forefront.

With regards to Metro, it's about more than just liking the idea of the UI for me. I'm genuinely interested in the kind of app potential. For example, I'm working on a Naruto Manga digital databook app :P Probably going to call it Naruto Ninja Handbook or Chroniciles.

Not for everybody, but I've always wanted all the various information about the manga's characters and their techniques and such in a nice, touch based package. Probably will be copyright issues with Viz, but don't really mind. Not really planning on selling it anyway, which I know doesn't matter. I'd upload it onto the app store for free, and whoever is interested it can download it. Just something by a fan for fans.

http://www.joystiq.com/2012/08/08/valve-launching-...

Pretty big news. Steam will be transitioning to also offering non-game software on Steam, beginning this September. The more the merrier I say.


In other news, http://www.pcworld.com/article/260582/windows_8_wh...

Windows 8 no longer allows people to boot directly to desktop, bypassing the Metro UI.

Can't say I'm surprised because you don't invest so much in a new UI like this, only to make it easy for people to up and bypass it, ignoring it altogether. I'm not too mad about this, because all it takes is a simple mouse click, or simply using the start + D keyboard shortcut to jump to the desktop. It takes like one second to do anyway, plus I'm intrigued by Metro.

And they added more customization options to the Metro UI. Non-Metro app icons don't look like crap anymore while in the Metro UI.

http://www.theverge.com/2012/8/3/3217196/windows-8...

Ms did so much right with Win7. Wth happened?

Why would I be mad? I actually like the Start Screen and don't miss the Start Menu one bit, because I feel the Start Screen is better and has far more potential than the Start Menu ever did. I'm not shocked at all to see another overreaction on this, however. Is it really that hard to just use a single keyboard shortcut (Windows button + D), or single click an icon with your mouse, both of which don't even take one second to get to the desktop? So many drama queens.

And while I'm not mad at Valve's decision to start including non-game software on Steam, it confirms precisely what I said was the true reason behind the overly aggressive and hyper negative criticism of Windows 8 all along. Money makes the world go round. Windows 8's Store is competition (serious competition) for Steam no matter what anybody says, and Valve doesn't like it one bit. Nope, not one bit. There's a major financial incentive for Valve to want Windows 8 to die in a fire, but I don't expect you or anyone that believes what you do to acknowledge that fact. This is pretty much the first major step towards the massively successful Xbox Live ecosystem (one truly designed around the PC and obviously tablets as well) coming to the PC for real, which is a goal Microsoft has had forever, but couldn't accomplish due to lack of commitment and follow through. This isn't some short term Microsoft experiment. Every version of Windows from here on out is going to expand on the start screen. It isn't going anywhere anytime soon, so get comfortable with Windows 7 for the long term if you don't like it. You won't exactly suffer. Windows 7 is the best computer OS in the world, at least until Windows 8 comes out that is. Yes, I've used Windows 8 enough. Using it as we speak. It's better than Windows 7. Period.

People always complain that Microsoft doesn't commit enough to any plans they have, but when they do, the old double standard comes out. Reading the internet today has been hilarious. "It's okay for Valve, it isn't for Microsoft." People will realize eventually they can't wait Microsoft out on this thing, because they aren't getting rid of it or abandoning their current direction. This isn't Zune. This is Windows, and by extension, Office as well. Anyone see the new Office yet? Every developer that has complained or offered their version of criticism for Windows 8 will sing a different tune when there's over 200+ million users and growing using Windows 8. Even the widely criticized Windows Vista had 400 million internet users. An insanely high number considering how many classified it a failure. It appears all those who criticized it, for whatever reason, couldn't wait to get their hands on it anyway. Windows 7 has 600 million last I saw. Windows 8, like it or not, will become popular very quickly, most likely at a much faster rate than Windows 7 did. And Surface doesn't even need to be a smash hit for this to end up true.

I'm not referring specifically to you when I say that people will realize they can't wait Microsoft out on this thing. At least, not entirely anyway. I'm referring to developers and OEMs mostly. You sticking with one of the greatest desktop operating systems ever made is not a hard thing for you to do, but developers and OEMs will eventually have to accept where the wind is blowing. Users such as yourself, even if there are a lot of you, won't be nearly enough to prevent Windows 8 from being a success, nor will it be enough to suddenly convince Microsoft that they have to abandon their current path. I get it that you genuinely dislike Windows 8. But I, on the flip side, genuinely like Windows 8. It isn't damage control, I actually like it. I like a lot of things that others don't, so this wouldn't be new territory for me.

This is all very reminiscent of when people thought that because they didn't like the introduction of the ribbon interface in Office, and were very vocal about it, that Microsoft would move away from it. Here we are many years later, and it still hasn't gone anywhere. In fact, it now features very prominently in even Windows Explorer. It's easy to see when Microsoft is committed to something and won't budge. The start screen is one of those instances. It's here to stay. They will just keep expanding and expanding on it in each new iteration. I suspect people will eventually stop caring, but even if they don't, kinda like a lot haven't stopped hating the ribbon, it probably won't matter to Microsoft if they themselves like it and believe it works, and is ultimately for the best. I really don't see what they're doing as all that anti-competition. They just want to push Metro pretty hard, and are being pretty damn aggressive in doing so, which you kinda can't blame them for doing. What would be the point of creating Metro, making as big a push as they made, only to end up allowing people to easily bypass it altogether? If you want things to catch, you kinda have to force it on people. You don't have to hang around in Metro if you don't like it. You really don't. I'm here using Windows 8 Release Preview as we speak, and I literally never have to go into the start screen to use the computer, and do all the same things I've been doing. I just like the appearance and workings of it so much that I just go in there anyway because I want to, not necessarily because I have to.

Microsoft created Metro Apps, they created the Metro user interface, Windows 8 is their next big product, and all they're really saying is that if you want the privilege of building and then distributing/selling Metro Apps to a couple hundred million Windows users, you have to do it on our store. I'm a programmer myself, believe it or not, so I was seriously bummed to learn that you couldn't side load Metro Apps by just uploading them to your very own site, or to another site, and have people enjoy your stuff that way, even if you want to give it away for free. I really don't think programmers will tell you straight up that they aren't excited about Metro apps and the potential for the UI as a whole. They might tell you, however, that they don't like the way Microsoft has chosen to push Metro's adoption in some ways at the expense of desktop side development (although certainly not for people who can easily afford it, but I understand it might be a bad precedent for Microsoft to be seen setting.) and that's where some of the dev animosity is coming in.

I don't believe the user experience has been all that diminished for the end user. In fact, I would go so far as to say it has been improved quite a bit, and it's mostly if you're a programmer that you'll have more genuine complaints about Windows 8, but, again, that's just my opinion. However, from a programmer's perspective, I can see it being a valid argument that there is perhaps more of a barrier to entry into Windows development, specifically Windows 8 desktop side development, being erected by some of Microsoft's actions, and that the end result if things don't work out as Microsoft hopes, is that these actions may end up becoming a serious detriment to the end user experience for your typical desktop user years down the road, and perhaps to a lesser extent, maybe even for Metro UI users as well. The flip side to this is that developers may end creating better apps, leading to better overall software on Microsoft's store, which may end up greatly benefitting users and developers alike in the long run, the same way Apple's app store has. A big part of their calculation is that, at least on the app side of things, they can generate as much quality as what Apple has on their store, or even better. For example, very few developers will say that the success of the app store for the ipad and iphone haven't been tremendously beneficial to all kinds of developers. A lot of people may not like that Microsoft is dabbling in that area too, but in a lot of ways Microsoft would be stupid to not even make an attempt when they have something as powerful and as successful as Windows to help them break into that market.

Still, Microsoft was wise enough to make the software for developing Metro Apps free, but since you absolutely must distribute it on the Windows 8 store, then THAT will surely cost you (the developer) something, and I didn't like the sound of that either, to be honest with you, but for the opportunity to sell to so many people, or to have a far larger number of people get the opportunity to see and try what you worked so hard on, $49 a year seems pretty fair for the potentially huge upside. That price, as small as it might seem, is a price some still don't like, but what can ya do. Microsoft is deadly serious about wanting Metro to succeed, and in some ways, want to have their cake and eat it too. Now the thing that is pissing developers off most amongst my small group of professional and hobbyist developer friends, and that also threw me for a loop, (even though most have already gotten past this fact by now) is the fact that Microsoft is not planning to make the tools to create desktop applications for Windows 8 free. It's totally free for Windows 7 unless you want access to more advanced features, and are willing to pay to upgrade to a professional version of visual Studio. However, Visual C++ 2010 express is something that developers can continue to use if they want to develop desktop applications for Windows 8, or they can go ahead and purchase Visual Studio 2012 Professional for like $400 or $500. The ability to keep using Visual C++ 2010 express to make windows 8 applications still doesn't sit well with some, because there are some seriously amazing improvements in Visual Studio 2012, and developers will want access to those things. The compiler is much better, and there are a range of other amazing additions. So, in some ways, to make the best possible desktop applications for windows 8, $400-500 out of pocket for devs seems like an automatic. However, there are cool open source tools that I've tried, and that others use to make programs. For example, the Codeblocks IDE is pretty popular with a number of people I know personally, and I've given it a test drive here and there, and I'd say it's pretty damn good. http://www.codeblocks.org/home

There are still avenues to develop desktop applications for Windows 8, but if you want the latest and greatest tools to get the job done, then you probably have to come out of pocket to get Visual Studio 2012 Professional, and to be honest, with some of the new stuff Microsoft has added in, I think a lot of people will be willing to go out and pay for it.

I don't see this as all that unreasonable, and many even believe that Microsoft is just going with this for about a year, maybe even 2 if things are going better than expected, and then they'll release tools for free windows 8 desktop side development, but they kinda want to initially tip the scales in favor of metro side development, because it's really at such a huge disadvantage against desktop side development. This doesn't prevent devs from continuing to make traditional desktop software and distributing it however they please, though. And Microsoft doesn't really have all that much competition to begin with. Their biggest competition was themselves. Even now, the biggest threat to Windows 8 is really and truly Windows 7, Microsoft's very own product.

Yea, to a degree you're certainly right. Microsoft is indeed emulating the success of Apple to a strong degree, but that isn't necessarily all that bad. Not everything Apple does is bad, and the key word in what you said was 'success'. What Apple has done has been a success, and a part of what they've done (not everything) can be a success for Microsoft as well, but there's no chance of it ever being a success if Microsoft doesn't go big, and if that means they have a rattle a few cages, then I guess they are willing to do so. There's a reason Microsoft made Windows 8 $40 for so many to upgrade to. They believe that if enough end users are onboard, that the developers will jump onboard as well, and for the most part, they are right. Devs are developing like crazy for Win 8 RT and Windows Phone. Metro development is already a given.

Yea, I know this post is crazy long, but it contains some actual details on what it's like on the dev side of things. But the conclusion to all of this is really that none of the concerns will matter if Microsoft's app store ends up taking off like they hope.