Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Metro

daringfireball.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 163 posts

Re: Metro

#41

Post by cooldeal »

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…

Metro can have a lot of personality.

Eg.

Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qghf4e2n0Yc&hd=1

http://immersivenick.files.wordpress.com/2011/09/hohm-window...

http://www.mobileguerilla.com/images/windows-phone-7-xbox.jp...

http://www.mobileguerilla.com/images/windows-phone-7-office....

http://www.mobileguerilla.com/images/windows-phone-7-zune.jp...

Can you really say that the app above has no personality?

In-depth Metro analysis from a designer if you're interested:

http://www.riagenic.com/archives/487

http://www.riagenic.com/archives/493

Re: Metro

#42

Post by zizee »

glhaynes wrote: post #6
brianwillis wrote: post #5

Thinking about it, isn’t window an odd word choice for what we call movable, stackable, resizeable content regions in a user interface? Other than being rectangular they’re not like real-world windows at all. I can remember my high school computer studies teacher explaining they're called windows because they're split into panes. Microsoft Windows versions 1 and 2 didn't actually have stackable overlapping windows (y…

Good point - though I believe they were called windows on previous GUI systems. EDIT: Though now that I think about it and, IIRC, Xerox's stuff didn't have overlapping windows either. Apple's Lisa and Mac did. I think Englebart's demo had windows but I'm not sure if they overlapped.

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, he could to dammit! After a Herculean effort he got the overlapping windows to work nicely and they shipped.

It was only later that they found out that Xerox's engineers were blown away by Woz's achievement as they had studied the problem and decided that it wouldn't be possible to do overlapping windows. They never developed that functionality.

Turns out that Jobs had made a mistake in remembering what he had seen and Xerox never did have those overlapping windows :-)

Anyway, this story might be incorrect on some points or a complete fabrication, but I like it.

Re: Metro

#43

Post by cooldeal »

roadnottaken wrote: post #18
technoslut wrote: post #4

>I think Metro will only run alongside the traditional Windows desktop on Intel PCs. On ARM devices, there will only be Metro. It seems there will be a desktop mode for ARM tablets if you look 1:40 into the video here: http://thisismynext.com/2011/09/14/nvidia-kal-el-windows-8-t... The desktop mode doesn't seem to immediately respond to touch like Metro. It will be interesting to see the final product and how well Wi…

Is that really hot off the press, or did Gruber just miss this?

Gruber really missed this and also how well Windows 8 runs on ARM in the article yesterday. Maybe he should stick to Apple stories where he's much more knowledgeable.

And yet his articles on Windows 8 get top billing on HN whereas the actual Windows 8 posts hardly got many votes. That's HN for you I guess.

Re: Metro

#44

Post by eykanal »

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 typical "user" can use a computer without too much difficulty. Part of this is due to the consistency of the Windows UI; folder windows, mouse motions, menubars, etc. Suddenly, we're going to throw something completely new at them, something which:

1) Has been shown to be difficult to do well for everyday use (touchscreen desktops)

2) Has a moderately non-intuitive interface (hidden UI elements until I swipe from a particular side, or maybe tap over here and here and here)

3) Has questionable benefits in a desktop computing environment where a keyboard is a perfectly appropriate device

And, once they learn all that, our user realizes that he still has to use the original UI for many programs! 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). Metro may be wonderful for tablets and other mobile devices, but it sure looks like it's going to be a drag in being forcibly married to the traditional Windows UI.

Re: Metro

#45

Post by buddydvd »

It will only be a matter of time before mobile phones start replacing laptops for desktop-like use cases. People will likely use their phones as if they were laptops with wirelessly-connected keyboard, mouse, and screen. I can totally see businesses start buying Windows-ready phones for their employees than the alternatives.

Re: Metro

#46

Post by pbz »

silverlight wrote: post #37
pbz wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which proves he didn't even bother to watch the keynote. There was even a piece of hardware that showed the power consumption during sleep. They also showed the new task manager and specifically pointed out how the Metro apps have been suspended (using 0% CPU, but still loaded in RAM).

He later goes on to suggest that perhaps there will be no "traditional" Windows on the tablet, only Metro, which he discusses having the same sorts of backgrounding-and-suspending capability iOS enjoys. From the article: It’s worth noting that Metro is more than just a new look, and more than just putting touch first. Metro apps have similar restrictions to iOS apps. According to Jensen Harris, for example, Metro app…

"He later goes on to suggest that perhaps there will be no "traditional" Windows on the tablet, only Metro, which he discusses having the same sorts of backgrounding-and-suspending capability iOS enjoys."

Which, again, proves he didn't watch the keynote. At one point they brought up the scenario of using a tablet on the couch and then, after finding a bug, being able to pull up Visual Studio on the same device. Even the tablet they gave out came with VS installed on the device.

Re: Metro

#47

Post by aik »

>I’m hung up on the question of how any OS that lets you do everything Windows does could compete with the iPad, because the iPad’s appeal and success is largely forged by the advantages that come from not allowing you to do so many of the things Mac OS X can do.

So you're saying the iPad is successful because it can't do stuff OS X can do? Sorry I don't understand -- that sounds a bit silly to me. I thought it was the portability and size and ease of access to apps (the ecosystem around the device) that makes the iPad successful. If we could have the hardware power of a desktop system on an iPad, while keeping the simplicity of use, I'm fairly sure we would all like that.

With every step Apple is moving OS X closer to iOS, and iOS closer to OS X. Will they ever combine the two? I see no reason why they couldn't eventually with the amazingly quick progression of the relevant technologies that we're seeing.

Now whether MS is doing the right thing by combining them now -- I'm OK with saying I have no idea until I actually play with the device. Maybe they can pull it off, maybe not.

Re: Metro

#48

Post by alex_c »

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-friendly spinoff.

So in many cases I think you're actually talking about different users: the majority of people may eventually not need anything beyond a tablet. I also suspect the rest of us will be annoyed and inconvenienced by this trend, since it won't be aimed at us.

Re: Metro

#49

Post by DaveMebs »

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 use the scroll wheel as I read a 35 page spec when I can sit there casually and flip through the document as I read? Or, if I have two hands on they keyboard typing and need to switch to another window, it can be nice to just tap the screen, rather than grab the mouse, navigate to the correct place on the screen and then click the button. Touch isn't perfect for everything, and I use the mouse plenty, but it's nice to have both. The key for me, however, was that I initially had to force myself to use the touch screen - I just wasn't used to it. Once I got in the habit of using it, however, I've found it has it's place and can be nice.

Re: Metro

#50

Post by krevis »

zizee wrote: post #42
glhaynes wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good point - though I believe they were called windows on previous GUI systems. EDIT: Though now that I think about it and, IIRC, Xerox's stuff didn't have overlapping windows either. Apple's Lisa and Mac did. I think Englebart's demo had windows but I'm not sure if they overlapped.

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 of windows brought to the front."

Post reply on HN