Metro • Hacker News Board

Re: Metro

#71

Post by ssp » Thu, Sep 15, 2011, 1:56 AM UTC

cooldeal wrote: post #30

Gruber's wrong on this. The ARM version will include the regular Windows desktop, Office etc. Microsoft has shown this multiple times. They have demoed even ARM desktops with a mouse and a keyboard! Video back from January: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rvzJmRBS84w (watch from 2 mins in).

I'm not sure the interesting split is ARM vs x86. There is clearly a lot of interest in putting ARM chips in laptops and desktops, so why shouldn't the desktop version of Windows 8 support ARM?

At the same time Intel is trying to make mobile chips, so it might just be that the mobile version of Windows 8 will be Metro-only, regardless of whether it's running on x86 or ARM.

Re: Metro

#72

Post by redthrowaway » Thu, Sep 15, 2011, 1:57 AM UTC

alex_c wrote: post #48

eykanal wrote: post #44

If I'm reading this right, Gruber's effectively saying, "Metro, and Metro alone (i.e., no desktop), is a good competitor to the iPad." That's wonderful; a real iPad competitor. But what about all the rest of the computers? You know, those big things on your desktop? We all know just how smart most users are when it comes to figuring out how to use stuff on a computer. Its taken years to get to the point where your ty…

I suspect we'll be seeing a more and more pronounced split in computing and, therefore, interfaces. On one side (the majority) will be "consumers": web, email, Facebook, maybe some light photo editing. On the other side will be the "producers": people who use Photoshop, or Matlab, or AutoCAD. Office falls somewhere in the middle... Office itself may eventually be divided along those lines, with a lightweight, tablet-…

>Office itself may eventually be divided along those lines, with a lightweight, tablet-friendly spinoff

It'd be interesting to see how such a thing would differ from Google Docs, and if it would justify the kind of prices MS likes to charge for Office. An Office app for lightly-spec'd computers makes sense, but you'd have to charge app prices for it and I don't see MS sacrificing their second biggest cash cow any time soon.

Re: Metro

#73

Post by DavidSJ » Thu, Sep 15, 2011, 1:57 AM UTC

cooldeal wrote: post #30

Gruber's wrong on this. The ARM version will include the regular Windows desktop, Office etc. Microsoft has shown this multiple times. They have demoed even ARM desktops with a mouse and a keyboard! Video back from January: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rvzJmRBS84w (watch from 2 mins in).

Just because they demoed it that way doesn't mean they'll ship it that way.

Re: Metro

#74

Post by kijinbear » Thu, Sep 15, 2011, 2:05 AM UTC

DaveMebs wrote: post #49

jonpaul wrote: post #35

I feel like one of the few who sees the emperor with no clothes. Let me first start by stating that I do believe that touchscreen devices will continue to revolutionize industries, as they already have. But, why in God's name are Microsoft and Apple trying to shoehorn the touch-screen onto the desktop? Mac OS X Lion is probably the last OS X version that we'll see. With each version it's gotten closer and closer to b…

Have you actually used a touch screen on a Desktop? I'm not being snarky here; I genuinely believe that you should actively try to use a touch screen with a Win8 desktop before deciding one way or the other. I do it every day, and while it is not great for everything, there are some places where it is really nice. For example, I love having a touch monitor when I'm reading a long Word document. Why hold a mouse and u…

That would make sense on laptops and other small devices, but not so much if you're sitting 2-3 ft away from 2-3 large screens. Which is not uncommon for programmers and designers these days.

Right now, from where I'm sitting, I can't touch my desktop monitor without leaning forward uncomfortably. Even if large touchscreens become cheaper over the next few years, my arms aren't going to get any longer, and my field of vision isn't going to get any wider (larger monitor = sit further away). In this situation, touch isn't simply imperfect, it's physiologically impossible. It'll be even more impossible if your "screen" is a 50" plasma TV on the opposite wall.

So it seems that @jonpaul does have a point.

Re: Metro

#75

Post by mtthwdrt » Thu, Sep 15, 2011, 2:13 AM UTC

eykanal wrote: post #67

crenshaw wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's right, photoshop isn't going to be going Metro anytime soon, and neither is Matlab, or Autocad, or Excel, or video editing software, or any "Pro" program (for lack of a better word). I'd actually be surprised if there isn't a fully staffed team working on a Metro version of the Office suite.

But what would it look like? Consider Powerpoint. There needs to be a way to switch slide layout, add elements to the slide, work with animations & transitions, reorder slides, etc. And that's just some of the things that users will want to do all the time, on almost every slide. There's just no way to have that sort of rich interface in Metro. Heck, there's not even a menubar . Remember, we're talking about regular…

Oh, it's definitely possible - Keynote for iPad (http://www.apple.com/ipad/from-the-app-store/keynote.html). No a menu bar in sight (at least, not in the traditional sense).

Re: Metro

#76

Post by zmonkeyz » Thu, Sep 15, 2011, 2:27 AM UTC

ashr wrote: post #28

toddmorey wrote: post #20

I think metro is very minimal and very clean. But it's also... cold. A bit too austere. The goal for an interface isn't to impress--it's to connect. Somehow, I've never felt a sense of connection with the Metro interfaces. It feels like design borrowed from the annual report of a faceless international corporation. All design; no personality. I like simple and clean. And I like minimalism. But I also think you have t…

As compared to what? A traditional desktop like interface with application icons scattered over the background? As in... iOS? One would think that the live tiles with continuously updated information show more "connection" with the user.

Amen. This is probably coming from people who think that a computer which basically resembles a thin slab of aluminum is not too "cold". It's basically minimalist which is what Apple strives for these days and does a good job with. The really interesting design choices in Metro (to me) will be apps with a lot of text ala Outlook.

Re: Metro

#77

Post by _sh » Thu, Sep 15, 2011, 2:33 AM UTC

krevis wrote: post #50

zizee wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I recall a story (maybe an urban myth) about Steve Jobs visiting Xerox's labs and seeing their UI in action and thinking "we've got to have that". He went back to tell Woz all about it, telling him that Xerox's UI supported overlapping windows and that Apple needed to do the same. Woz was amazed that it was possible to have overlapping windows on such a resource constrained machine. But if Xerox engineers could do it…

Not Woz, Bill Atkinson. http://folklore.org/StoryView.py?project=Macintosh&story... "Smalltalk didn't even have self-repairing windows - you had to click in them to get them to repaint, and programs couldn't draw into partially obscured windows. Bill Atkinson did not know this, so he invented regions as the basis of QuickDraw and the Window Manager so that he could quickly draw in covered windows and repaint portions…

The 'regions' used in QuickDraw are an amazing (for their time) data structure, a testament to the genius of Bill Atkinson. I strongly recommend reading the patent to see how cool and useful they were to the original Mac windowing system (http://patentdetails.patenttools.com/patent/04622545?searchi... click on the 'download pdf' link in the top left).

Steve Jobs know how important regions were: http://www.folklore.org/StoryView.py?project=Macintosh&s...

Re: Metro

#78

Post by xpaulbettsx » Thu, Sep 15, 2011, 2:35 AM UTC

crenshaw wrote: post #16

xpaulbettsx wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe it's already confirmed that Win8 ARM devices will indeed be Metro-only - no legacy Desktop whatsoever.

I don't think that's true. Can you point to a source? I've heard and seen only the opposite.

http://seekingalpha.com/news-article/1823690-windows-8-metro...

"Furthermore, applications for the ARM version of Windows 8 will only be available through the "Windows Store" - and only apps compiled to use its "Metro" touch interface will appear there."

Re: Metro

#79

Post by technoslut » Thu, Sep 15, 2011, 2:42 AM UTC

alex_c wrote: post #48

eykanal wrote: post #44

If I'm reading this right, Gruber's effectively saying, "Metro, and Metro alone (i.e., no desktop), is a good competitor to the iPad." That's wonderful; a real iPad competitor. But what about all the rest of the computers? You know, those big things on your desktop? We all know just how smart most users are when it comes to figuring out how to use stuff on a computer. Its taken years to get to the point where your ty…

I suspect we'll be seeing a more and more pronounced split in computing and, therefore, interfaces. On one side (the majority) will be "consumers": web, email, Facebook, maybe some light photo editing. On the other side will be the "producers": people who use Photoshop, or Matlab, or AutoCAD. Office falls somewhere in the middle... Office itself may eventually be divided along those lines, with a lightweight, tablet-…

I'm not power productivity suite user but I would have to believe close to all of Office's features can be implemented with the proper UI with the advanced features of the apps hidden away from the eyes of the average user.

If it's a question of specs or software maturity then it really is just a matter of time.

Re: Metro

#80

Post by zmmmmm » Thu, Sep 15, 2011, 2:54 AM UTC

> Tradeoffs. Mutually exclusive tradeoffs. Separate devices are required. ... And you can’t give iOS apps even the option to run continuously in the background without sacrificing battery life and foreground app performance

This is a typical Gruberism of false logic. He starts with the notion that all Apple's decisions are holy and right. He then derives conclusions by extrapolating from that.

There is no reason that tablets cannot achieve fantastic battery life while running background processes. They certainly need to be designed to achieve it. Existing Android tablets support background processes and multitasking and get comparable battery life to the iPad - typically we're talking a sacrifice of in the background even when it is in sleep state.