85 replies to this topic

[blaquee]

It has been established that the article you referenced is out of date. You are also confusing two aspects of Windows 8. There is Windows RT, which is designed to run on ARM devices, primarily phones and tablets. This is not designed to be anyone's primary device! Some tablets, and laptops / desktops running x86 hardware will have full desktop access and not everything will have to go through the store or certification process. Why isn't everyone up in arms that you cannot install steam games on iOS or Android? This is the exact same thing except for the fact that Microsoft also has support for the "mobile" (metro / modern) apps to run on desktop machines. That means you can pretty much write it once (depending on the features you leverage), and run it on the phones, the tablets and the desktop. However to paranoid fanboys, Microsoft is just a large company which must be doing evil stuff, so clearly they are going to act against their best interest just to inconvenience people.

It's probably worth noting that I've been running Windows 8 on my Macbook Pro for months, both in bootcamp and in Parallels. I have not purchased a single application through the store yet. I can run everything on Windows 8 that I can on Windows 7, and for the most part it runs better.

I was hoping this point would be made, the idea of the Store is really just so that the WinRT version can gain attraction. Windows 8 Pro will just be Metro and a Windows 7 subsystem..All your programs can run on it, and the Store is only a means of getting "other" apps.. Microsoft is just trying to create their own ecosystem here, I think all the concerns and worries are misplaced. I too have been running Windows 8 on a desktop and none of these fears have risen mainly due to the fact that I can run desktop applications..that includes GAMES!

It's crazy how the gaming paradigm has shifted, there never used to be this notion that in order for your game to gain attention, you'd need to use a "Store"..It seems its only an excuse to not think about marketing, since the stores rating system will do that for you..pity..I still play games that didnt require a store for me to know it was popular.

[Servant of the Lord]

<br />my games will eventually have to be released to Metro or else not be on Windows at all<br />

The desktop isn't going anywhere.

Currently! But we're one more step closer to Windows becoming completely a walled garden. Windows RT is completely, and who knows how vast a market share that will get if it's on all the netbooks? Windows 8 currently is a mix, but will Windows 9 be? We don't know, but it seems likely.

Do you really think Visual Studio will become Metro only? Do you think any programmer inside of Microsoft that works day in and out using Visual Studio thinks that is the future of all applications?

The free version was Metro only, until people vocally complained. But I don't care if Visual Studio is or is not, I use MinGW anyway. What I care about is whether the entire OS goes Metro-only sometime down the road. Windows RT already is. Windows 9 might be - we just don't know yet. It's not fantasy thinking, it's a high probability that this is the route Microsoft intends to go. It's not a route *I* want Microsoft to go. It's not a guarantee, but it is very likely. Hence my concern.

If you look closely at the new WinRT API you'll see it supports multiple Window objects in a single application. While you currently have no way to create a second window... that obviously won't be true forever. WinRT is "Metro" style apps only right now... within a year I expect the next WinRT revision will allow desktop applications as well.

For the upteenth time.... Windows 8 runs Win32 apps. WE KNOW. But Windows RT will not run anything that hasn't been sold through the Windows Store. It's not Metro vs Non-metro, not an interface debate, it's Microsoft-authorized only vs multiple choices of distributors keeping costs and service competitive. No indies marketting through their own website. Windows Store or nothing. No alternative stores like Steam offering huge sales with steep discounts and constant innovation. Just Windows Store or nothing. This fear isn't here yet, but it's closer and that is what we are complaining about.

How much market share will Windows RT (shipped on cheap laptops) get? What will Windows 9 do? These are valid concerns.

People seem to think WinRT and Metro is about killing the desktop and open distribution of apps... it is not. The real goal is replacing the 20 years of legacy APIs that keep Windows from being secure and performant on lower end devices.

It has plenty of benefits - secure software is a primary one. However, it also is killing open distribution on some Windows releases (Windows RT), and might do so on all future Windows releases (Windows 9). That's our concern.

Non-'Windows Store' software WILL NOT WORK on some versions of Windows 8 (the Windows RT versions). Already a piece of the Windows market is blocked. How large, we won't know until we find out the Windows RT market share (which will be shipped on cheap netbooks and will likely be a substantial but not dominant portion). Windows 9 may take it all the way away from non-'Windows Store'.

If Microsoft Surface becomes successful, too bad for any software not sold through Microsoft and giving Microsoft a 30% fee. The non-RT version of Surface won't ship until January. Every Surface sold for launch and for the Christmas season will not support any software except the ones that Microsoft sells for you. Not fantasy, this is fact.

[Dwarf King]

I love win 7 ultimate with its bit locker option. I also do not like this tablet look of win 8. I mean as an developer environment I would like to keep win 7 desktop look. I have seen some people around on the web saying that that could be fixed. However never seen any option like that in the many presentation videos on win 8.

Also upgrading from a win 7 ultimate edition seems like downgrading for me. Perhaps I need to do some more research on that one

The win 8 app store should not be a huge issue as people should still be able to download games and install them just like on win 7 as far as I have read. In fact I see the app store as a competition element to Steam and nothing more. In other words yet another option for buying and downloading games.

I do expect it to be buggy and I shall await the brave Torque pioneers who dare install win 8 and test it out

In fact I would like to give it a chance but I do not wanna get rid of my bit locker option so for now until I know more and actually feel a need to do a more profound research on the matter I shall not invest time in win 8.

[shadowomf]

Anyway, this seems like one of the versions you better skip as a customer.

What sells me is Windows To Go. If I can run Windows off a USB stick as I can with Linux and PC-BSD, that's great. I feel like that won't be enough for some really important tasks, but that's one feature that grabs me.

I'm not a fan of the whole AppStore concept. No matter who is offering it. I don't use Apple's (or any other of Apple's overpriced product), Steam or similar software.

Thing is, you have this on *nix too. I use apt-get/"Software Center" on Ubuntu. FreeBSD has ports. What's the difference between Ubuntu's Software Center and an app store? One is the other; you can buy Braid on Ubuntu Software Center, and you can buy Braid on Windows Store (I'm guessing).

And that's just an organized way to install software, so I usually prefer it.

Okay, I should have been more precise. I shouldn't have used "a customer" for my personal opinion. However I don't feel like I will have a huge advantage when switching to Windows 8. There isn't any feature that make me want it. And as far as I know Microsofts pattern, all the new features (that I don't really need) will feel unpolished and only get better after the first or second service pack or if we're unlucky we will have to wait for Windows 9.


Now the other issue. Sure Linux/BSD do have package repositories. But there different, you can have multiple repositories provided by different people and you can always install stuff without using any repository at all. I don't know how Ubuntu's Software Center works, but if it's the sinlge vendor controlled place to get software for Ubuntu, there isn't any difference to Apples or Microsofts AppStore.

It's also quite different if the provider of an AppStore is also distributing Software over it's own AppStore. As a developer you can't be sure that your product get's the same attention and advertisement as a competeting product made by the store owner.

And one more, as customer you have to trust the store owner that he makes sure software that is being sold in his store isn't crap. As far as I can tell, this doesn't work so well. Apple seems to allow any crappy piece of software in their store, as long as it's not malware.

[samoth]

In my opinion, Windows XP and Windows 7 were huge steps forward, while Vista and Windows 8 were huge steps backward. Though Vista was only a really crappy implementation, Windows 8 is a step backwards by design.

My general dislike of hammering a tablet-computer look on a desktop left aside, the single most important reason not to support Metro is that Windows 8 is an attempt to close the open PC platform, as Mr. Persson (the "Minecraft guy") has put it. This is not only about censoring what kind of applications you may (may? what the f...?) write and publish, it is also about what APIs, operating system features and languages you can use.

Insofar you are doing yourself and every other developer a great disservice by supporting Windows 8. Of course I'm aware that it will come. Either way, it will come, and either way it will be successful. But that doesn't mean I have to actively support it coming.

[kseh]

Putting games aside, does anybody have any links to reactions from large IT companies? It seems to me that companies that make their money creating specialized applications for businesses would be dramatically affected as well if they have to go through MS to get their software to run.

[L. Spiro]

Just as my New iPad can be nothing more than a small side part of my life, Windows Metro will, in all of the foreseeable future, be nothing but an on-the-side toy if it has any part in my life at all.

Here I think is the problem. You happily hand over hundreds of dollars to get every New Device from Apple, despite it only being a small part of your life. But for something that offers much more for you, you don't want to pay the $30 upgrade, just because of some of the policies that Apple are far worse on anyway. And you post to forums arguing for others to do the same. Quite frankly, if MS have decided that they should take on some of the profiteering tactics from Apple, it's people like you who are to blame

I think you misunderstood.

• I never “happily” paid for it. I paid for it double-begrudgingly since they didn’t have the cheap model I wanted (which alone would have been single-begrudging) and had to spend an extra $150 or so.
• I said in my post it is nothing but a side. I use it for development, listening to music on the way to and from work, and sharing pictures on dates. Nothing more. I have never even purchased a single app for it.
• Every new Apple device? After 5 years I finally got a single iOS device (New iPad) and to develop for it I got a used MacBook Pro.
• So people such as myself are quite clearly not to blame for Microsoft’s shift in policies. People such as myself have proved very unprofitable for Apple directly as I have never used the App Store and have only ever in my life purchased 1 Apple product new.

This is the mentality a lot of people seem to have. People will likely get more and more comfortable with the idea of the Windows machine being just a side as some other platform grows to the forefront of their minds.

Well hang on, if a Windows machine is just a side thing, and your New Ipad is your life, surely by the above reasoning, you now need to criticise Apple, whilst excusing MS for doing the same thing?

As I said, my New iPad can never be more than a side thing. Here:

Just as my New iPad can be nothing more than a small side part of my life

I don’t like Windows Metro because mobile policies don’t belong on a desktop, at least not strictly. Windows RT is no problem for me. It is just a mobile device and so by definition could never be more than a side.
Why does that make me a Linux/Apple fanboy according to tstrimple or one of those kiddies who buys every new Apple product (or at least the iOS ones)?
I don’t see how these assumptions get made when I am the exact opposite.


L. Spiro

[Alpha_ProgDes]

So I will say this. I don't think the Desktop app will last much longer on Microsoft OSes, especially if Windows 8 becomes successful. So the concern over a Metro-only world is a valid concern. But honestly, I don't see how or why Microsoft would close off the system like that. I don't think the MacOS has done such a thing yet. And Android is certainly not going to go in that direction.

[tstrimple]

The free version was Metro only, until people vocally complained.

Wrong. The free version only allowed you to build Metro apps. There is no Metro version of Visual Studio.

For the upteenth time.... Windows 8 runs Win32 apps. WE KNOW. But Windows RT will not run anything that hasn't been sold through the Windows Store.

Who cares?! Windows RT is not designed to be your primary environment! Windows RT is the equivalent of iOS and Android. Windows 8 is the new (better) operating system which also happens to be able to run applications targeting mobile devices.

No indies marketting through their own website. Windows Store or nothing. No alternative stores like Steam offering huge sales with steep discounts and constant innovation. Just Windows Store or nothing. This fear isn't here yet, but it's closer and that is what we are complaining about.

How much market share will Windows RT (shipped on cheap laptops) get? What will Windows 9 do? These are valid concerns.

Except they are not valid concerns. I'll repeat, anyone who thinks Microsoft is going to jettison their 95% grip on the desktop / laptop market is an idiot. There are over 1.2 billion Windows desktop installs across the world right now. Compare that to the 150+ million iOS devices, and the 250 million android devices. It makes no business sense to screw your 1.2 billion customers in order to try to take over a hundred million or so mobile devices. The only reliable upgrade path for those billion customers is to ensure that their applications continue to work on the new operating systems.

Non-'Windows Store' software WILL NOT WORK on some versions of Windows 8 (the Windows RT versions).

Once again, who cares? OSX apps won't work on iOS. EVERYBODY PANIC!

If Microsoft Surface becomes successful, too bad for any software not sold through Microsoft and giving Microsoft a 30% fee. The non-RT version of Surface won't ship until January. Every Surface sold for launch and for the Christmas season will not support any software except the ones that Microsoft sells for you. Not fantasy, this is fact.

So what? Microsoft isn't the only one making Windows 8 devices. Most of the devices available as of last Friday are full blown Windows 8 devices. Not Windows RT. Lets not pretend like only Windows RT is available until January.

[tstrimple]

Putting games aside, does anybody have any links to reactions from large IT companies? It seems to me that companies that make their money creating specialized applications for businesses would be dramatically affected as well if they have to go through MS to get their software to run.

Except you don't have to go through the MS store.

Managing "BYO" PCs in the enterprise (including WOA)

As mentioned, the Metro style self-service portal app, or SSP, is the day-to-day interface for the corporate user to access their management infrastructure. Here they can browse to discover LOB apps that have been made available to them by the IT admin. There are actually four different types of apps that IT can publish for users in the SSP:

• Internally-developed Metro style apps that are not published in the Windows Store
• Apps produced by independent software vendors that are licensed to the organization for internal distribution
• Web links that launch websites and web-based apps directly in the browser
• Links to app listings in the Windows Store. This is a convenient way for IT to make users aware of useful business apps that are publicly available.

Since the user specified his or her corporate credentials as part of the initial connection with the management infrastructure, the IT admin can then specify which apps are published to each user individually, based on the user’s AD domain user account, or as a member of AD user groups. As a result, the user only sees those apps that are applicable to them in the SSP.

[Arthur Souza]

I believe people are making too much of a deal out of windows 8.

[Servant of the Lord]

The free version was Metro only, until people vocally complained.

Wrong. The free version only allowed you to build Metro apps. There is no Metro version of Visual Studio.

That's what I said. Perhaps I should've phrased it better, but the context was selling apps, not developing. "The free version was for developing Metro apps only". So what I said was exactly correct. You read it as "The free version was able to run on Metro only". Sorry for the confusion in wording. My statement still stands: "The free version of Visual Studio made software for Metro only, until people vocally complained."

For the upteenth time.... Windows 8 runs Win32 apps. WE KNOW. But Windows RT will not run anything that hasn't been sold through the Windows Store.

Who cares?! Windows RT is not designed to be your primary environment!

It's designed to be the primary environment for consumers! We're talking about the open garden becoming a walled garden. Developers always have options, but here we are talking about the ways to put your software before consumers becoming limited. Thus, every developer should care.

Windows RT is the equivalent of iOS and Android.

Except it also eats into netbook market share, not just tablet and smartphone shares, and tablet and smartphone shares also eat into netbook shares, so the end result is less market share for open systems. I don't care what you compare it to, or what you liken it to.

(Excluding Servers and Kiosks, because they are not particularly relevant to our discussion)
1990s:
Desktops (Open distribution)
Consoles (Closed distribution)

Late 1970s, Early 1980s:

• Desktops (Open distribution)
• Consoles (Open distribution) (led to video game crash of 1983, thought it worth mentioning)

1990s:

• Desktops (Open distribution)
• Consoles (Closed distribution)

Early 2000s:

• Laptops (Open distribution, takes some Desktop share but most consumers have both)
• Desktops (Open distribution)
• Consoles (Closed distribution)

Mid 2000s:

• Netbooks (Open distribution, takes alot of Laptop share)
• Laptops (Open distribution, takes more Desktop share)
• Desktops (Open distribution)
• Consoles (Closed distribution)

Late 2000s and Early 2010s:

• Smartphones (Closed distribution, most consumers use in conjunction with other machines)
• Tablets (Closed distribution, takes some Laptop/Netbook share)
• Netbooks (Open distribution)
• Laptops (Open distribution)
• Desktops (Open distribution)
• Consoles (Closed distribution)

Mid 2010s (After Windows RT and Windows 8 launch): (Likely predictions)

• Smartphones (Closed distribution)
• Tablets (Closed distribution (mostly))
• Netbooks (Half closed, half open)
• Laptops (Open distribution)
• Desktops (Open distribution)
• Consoles (Closed distribution)

Late 2010s, Early 2020s: (Unlikely but still possible predictions)

• Smartphones (Closed distribution)
• Tablets (Closed distribution)
• Netbooks (Closed distribution)
• Laptops (Half closed, half open)
• Desktops (Partly closed, mostly open distribution, but greatly reduced market share)
• Consoles (Closed distribution)

Developers and businesses will always have more flexible machines than consumers. The average consumer, unknowingly, will continue to opt into closed systems because they have very clear short-term benefits (better security, cheaper short-term, more intuitive, better integration with other devices), not realizing the long-term costs (higher software prices, poorer quality service, greater corporate control, more consumer lock-in, less privacy protection).

More and more software releases will probably head to the clouds and to websites (with also tie-in apps in the marketplaces), since the internet is still open distribution even on most closed distribution devices. Unfortunately, that is also displeasing to me for similar reasons that I won't get into here.

This is not a doomsday "Oh no the sky is falling!" nor is it a "Microsoft is teh evil!", nor is it, "Video games are dead! Flash is dead! Microsoft will go bankrupt!".

This is merely, me saying, hey, this is clearly happening, here are the likely results, and here are further possible results, how should I best adapt to the changing environment? I want to be prepared for the changes before they come, not when they so up at my door.

Windows 8 is the new (better) operating system which also happens to be able to run applications targeting mobile devices.

And has no guarantee that it won't only run such applications with a later version. Whether Microsoft will go that route or not, I don't know, but they are now much closer to such a transition if they decided to take it, and I prefer not to be shocked when the move is actually made, but to consider the ramifications (and what options I have, or what steps I should take to either take advantage of, or minimize the loss of) such a step way in advance of it actually being taken.

How much market share will Windows RT (shipped on cheap laptops) get? What will Windows 9 do? These are valid concerns.

Except they are not valid concerns. I'll repeat, anyone who thinks Microsoft is going to jettison their 95% grip on the desktop / laptop market is an idiot. There are over 1.2 billion Windows desktop installs across the world right now.

Any move Microsoft makes won't effect 1.2 billion instantly. It'll take 10 years or more before those 1.2 billion are entirely replaced with new hardware and software, whether it be Microsoft or not. Further, most consumers just go out and "buy a computer" not knowing what an OS is. Microsoft's lead comes from the fact that, because Microsoft lets the OEM make the products, their software is cheaper than competitors and more prevalent. Walk into Best Buy and see a hundred Windows laptops and, maybe, 5 Apple laptops. Also walk into a Best Buy and see iPhones and iPads and iPods because of popular demand.

Most consumers don't even know that what software is on one device can be moved to another device. They're happy to rebuy it for every computer they own, as long as they get some tech guy at Best Buy to transfer their pictures over. They'll even happily rebuy their music all over again, not understanding they could save that.

Compare that to the 150+ million iOS devices, and the 250 million android devices. It makes no business sense to screw your 1.2 billion customers in order to try to take over a hundred million or so mobile devices. The only reliable upgrade path for those billion customers is to ensure that their applications continue to work on the new operating systems.

1.1 billion of those customers don't understand that they even can take their software with them. I'm talking about young people that have grown up with computers. The other 0.1 billion are businesses, and Microsoft ofcourse will provide alternatives for them. You, I, and everyone on these forums fall into the minority that's so small, we don't make much of an impact.

Non-'Windows Store' software WILL NOT WORK on some versions of Windows 8 (the Windows RT versions).

Once again, who cares? OSX apps won't work on iOS. EVERYBODY PANIC!

Obviously people on this forum care, and elsewhere on the internet. Why do we care? Because the consumer won't care, and will buy whatever is A) coolest, or B) cheapest. If the coolest and cheapest options are both walled gardens, it's harder for us to get our software in front of the consumer, without paying upfront costs or percentages of revenue. Previously we could. Increasingly we cannot.
It's because we're not idiots, that we stop and consider ahead of time, what our options are, and how to best move forward as developers.
Nobody is saying panic. At least, nobody on this forum. We're saying, "How much do you plan to support Windows 8/Metro?" (read the thread title). More accurately, the thread is about, "Why will you or won't you port your software to Metro, and what effects might Metro have on releasing your software?".

You think we are children crying wolf, and flaming Microsoft as anti-Microsoft zealots. Wrong. We are developers who develop software for Microsoft, and we run Windows ourselves, and we are thinking aloud with other similarly minded developers in an intelligent way about where our industry might be headed, and what steps we should consider taking to best place ourselves for that change.

If you can't understand that, fine! Go start a thread, "Why I love Windows 8 as a consumer", meanwhile, we'll keep discussing, "What changes does Windows 8 bring to me as a developer".

If Microsoft Surface becomes successful, too bad for any software not sold through Microsoft and giving Microsoft a 30% fee. The non-RT version of Surface won't ship until January. Every Surface sold for launch and for the Christmas season will not support any software except the ones that Microsoft sells for you. Not fantasy, this is fact.

So what? Microsoft isn't the only one making Windows 8 devices. Most of the devices available as of last Friday are full blown Windows 8 devices. Not Windows RT. Lets not pretend like only Windows RT is available until January.

"The non-RT version ofSurface won't ship until January."

[tstrimple]

"The free version of Visual Studio made software for Metro only, until people vocally complained."

Regardless. Microsoft listened to it's users and updated their software to support it. This shouldn't be a surprise. Microsoft, while a large company, does not simply ignore it's customers as you would have people believe. If you do any work with IIS or ASP.NET you should know this. Microsoft's community involvement is amazing.

Windows RT is the equivalent of iOS and Android.

Except it also eats into netbook market share, not just tablet and smartphone shares, and tablet and smartphone shares also eat into netbook shares, so the end result is less market share for open systems. I don't care what you compare it to, or what you liken it to.

It eats into netbook shares the same way Android and iOS do in that netbooks are not very compelling and are typically not primary systems for people either. Windows RT is not a full replacement device, even for "consumers". It does a better job of it than Android or iOS does, but it doesn't stand alone.

Windows 8 is the new (better) operating system which also happens to be able to run applications targeting mobile devices.

And has no guarantee that it won't only run such applications with a later version. Whether Microsoft will go that route or not, I don't know, but they are now much closer to such a transition if they decided to take it, and I prefer not to be shocked when the move is actually made, but to consider the ramifications (and what options I have, or what steps I should take to either take advantage of, or minimize the loss of) such a step way in advance of it actually being taken.

We'll have to agree to disagree here. It would be an incredibly stupid move, and I believe the only thing consumers care about is if they can use their favorite applications on the new system. Why do you think it's so important for companies to get top tier games and apps on their systems? x% of users won't switch to Windows phone because it won't run y iOS app/game. x% of Windows users won't switch to an OSX laptop because they can't get application y on it. This happens all the time, and is a game Microsoft knows well. That's one of the reasons they invest so much in the development community.

If you can't understand that, fine! Go start a thread, "Why I love Windows 8 as a consumer", meanwhile, we'll keep discussing, "What changes does Windows 8 bring to me as a developer".

I'm looking at it from both sides. I am a developer and a consumer, just like pretty much everyone on these forums. Pretending that two are mutually exclusive is silly. On most platforms centralized distribution and app certification are good things from both the developer and consumer perspective! Windows has gotten a bad rap for security due to the garbage people are willing to install on their computers. App certification goes a long way towards mitigating the risks of malware infection. Also, as an independent developer of apps, centralized distribution is very important! Suddenly your new app will be available to not just your family and friends you send the link to, but it also shows up under the new app list for the millions of users who use those app portals! I spent a couple weeks working on a WP7 game, and there is no way it would have received even a fraction of the downloads that I did without it having appeared on a new app list in the store.

Edited by tstrimple, 29 October 2012 - 04:14 PM.

[ddn3]

Not anytime soon. I'm not in a rush to join the "Win 8" crowd. Win 7 serves my needs just fine.. besides i work on OSX 1/2 the time these days. Maybe in a year or so if the buzz is still good about Win 8 and the app economy is doing well..

[tstrimple]

Not anytime soon. I'm not in a rush to join the "Win 8" crowd. Win 7 serves my needs just fine.. besides i work on OSX 1/2 the time these days. Maybe in a year or so if the buzz is still good about Win 8 and the app economy is doing well..

I think this is the real shame about Windows 8. There is so much hype and fud surrounding the metro mode that it completely overshadows the actual operating system improvements. Scott Hanselman has a decent rundown of some of the improvements. The new task manager and explorer are great. Was it worth upgrading? For me yes, because I'm working on converting my WP7 app to Windows 8 Metro. I don't miss anything from Windows 7. It helps that I use the start menu the same way in Windows 8 as I did in Windows 7. It's an application launcher, not a menu of applications. Just press Win and start typing the app you want to run. If you're the type who likes to dig through carefully organized folder hierarchies to launch applications, I can see where the new start menu would be annoying.

[L. Spiro]

Just press Win and start typing the app you want to run. If you're the type who likes to dig through carefully organized folder hierarchies to launch applications, I can see where the new start menu would be annoying.

It would be better to have both options.
Many of the applications that come with Windows (any version) have Japanese names, since I live in Japan.
Kanji and Hiragana are no problem. I can easily and correctly spell any Kanji or Hiragana.
明晰夢, ありがとうございます, 何でも大丈夫です。
But all of those applications are in Katakana.

The reason Katakana is difficult is because it is a phonetic spelling of foreign words, including elongations of some sounds, thus you really just have to guess how the first Japanese person to hear the word thought it sounded from the person speaking it, who may not have been American etc. Until you memorize them all via brute force, you just have to guess where all those elongated sounds ago plus the accent of whoever introduced the word to Japanese.
Try to spell “button” without checking online

Spoiler

ボタン (botan)

So in my menu I have a “Start Up” folder. Except it is in Katakana.
So, スタトアプ?
No, remember to elongate (postfix a character with ー) where appropriate.
スタートアープ?
Wait the P sound in Up sounds a little strong (put ッ before it), so maybe it’s:
スタートアーップ?
Is Up really elongated?
スタートアップ?
There it is! “suta-toappu”.


This isn’t supposed to be a lesson in Japanese, just a demonstration that there are more reasons to have that list of applications than you may really know/appreciate.
I use it when seeking Japanese folders/applications, otherwise I type the application name. It doesn’t mean I like browsing through hierarchies of folders.


L. Spiro

[Servant of the Lord]

"The free version of Visual Studio made software for Metro only, until people vocally complained."

Regardless. Microsoft listened to it's users and updated their software to support it. This shouldn't be a surprise. Microsoft, while a large company, does not simply ignore it's customers as you would have people believe.

I never said Microsoft ignored it's customers, nor did I imply that. I certainly would not "have people believe" that, nor did I try to make them believe that.

It was originally in response to pingz's comment: "Do you really think Visual Studio will become Metro only?" (which I misread to mean. "Do you really think Visual Studio will only allow creation of Metro apps?")

My only point in it was that Microsoft was trying to encourage Metro apps over Win32 software - which is perfectly understandable! Microsoft would love for every one of it's users to only ever buy software from the Windows Store which is also perfectly understandable, and I would want the same thing if I had a business. Except, it's not good for developers or consumers long-term, though it benefits both developers and consumers short-term.

As a heavy user of Windows, and as someone who dislike's Apple's walled-garden approach with alot of their services and products, I want Microsoft to remain strong (though I'd like to see OSX gain some extra ground) to keep a competitive market. However, the same reason I dislike iTunes and iPhones is what leads me to dislike the Windows Store and the future potential of a Windows RT-like "must buy everything from Microsoft" Windows. I don't like single-gatekeepers controlling a majority of any market (bah, AT&T). I'm not anti-business, I just recognize the need for heavy competition, and I would also rue the loss of the long-standing openness of a platform I use and love, if it ever occurred.

Is Windows 8 a upgrade over Windows 7? Yes, and I never said otherwise. Though I'm not particularly fond of the interface changes (being a mouse + keyboard user and not a touch user), I would adapt to it quick enough. I think the Windows Store and the new WinRT api is bringing Windows closer to a walled garden, though it's not there yet. I did say, and will repeat, that I think walled gardens are bad in the long term for both developers and consumers. That is the totality of my opinion, and I'm not on some anti-Windows FUD campaign, or just spouting nonsense and flinging insults at Microsoft as you seem to infer from my posts

[mdwh]

Whilst I disagree with a lot of the scaremongering and FUD about Windows 8, I do share Servant of the Lord's concerns about Windows RT being restricted so you can only release through MS[*].

Note, this is not the same as the advantages of "centralised distribution" - you can have that without it being a locked down platform. You have it on Android, as well as Nokia platforms, Linux distributions. And 15 years ago on the Amiga. Nor is this the way things are done on mobile platforms, as the two most popular platforms (Symbian and then Android) were not locked down.

Furthermore, those centralised distribution sites aren't necessarily better. tstrimple says:

Suddenly your new app will be available to not just your family and friends you send the link to, but it also shows up under the new app list for the millions of users who use those app portals!

But this isn't really an advantage, as there have always been places to advertise your application, not just "sending a link to family and friends". The "official" distribution site is yet another download site, perhaps better, perhaps not, than others. E.g., for me of one hand, Nokia Store is great, giving me hundreds to thousands of downloads per day with zero effort. On the other hand, Google Play does less well than the various download sites (e.g., Freecode) I use for Windows. I suspect MS's site will be great for early adopters, but then there'll be too much competition for it to really be any better. Indeed, here's another problem with a locked down platform, as it means there's no ability to have more specialised sites. E.g., open source developers can put their games on places like Freecode and Sourceforge, and attract people more interested in those games; similarly Android has F-Droid. But if there's only one site, you're lost in the noise, having to compete with commercial games heavily promoted and backed with loads of marketing.

But as I say, we should be including Apple alongside MS in these criticisms, not giving them an excuse for being different (after all, that argument works for Windows RT too).

But, whilst this does mean I have no plans to buy a Windows RT device, I plan to happily upgrade to Windows 8[**], and look forward to the increased portability of full PCs in the form of hybrids like the Surface Pro.

Regarding netbooks, there are plenty of x86 Windows 8 netbook/tablet hybrids announced. It's unclear whether netbooks as we know them (low cost x86 devices, or perhaps with touchscreens, but not full hybrids) will continue to exist - there's no reason why not, though the lack of a "Windows 8 starter" could push the price up, or perhap encourage a switch to Windows RT devices.

[*] Unless this isn't true(?), in which case great.
[**] Take advantage of the upgrade offer until Jan 2013. I mean, I just spent more on the takeaway - even if the differences aren't huge, it seems silly to quibble on such a low price.

[3Ddreamer]

Happy with Windows 7 for years to come I will be!

When Windows 9 is available then I will try it.    


Clinton

[tstrimple]

I never said Microsoft ignored it's customers, nor did I imply that. I certainly would not "have people believe" that, nor did I try to make them believe that.

You, I, and everyone on these forums fall into the minority that's so small, we don't make much of an impact.

That was the statement I was referencing because the attitude bothers me. Microsoft needs developers to build applications for their operating systems and so Microsoft listens to the developer community. It's also worth pointing out that while Windows 8 is the most "consumer" friendly version of Windows yet, it's also the most power user friendly. The keyboard shortcuts are great, and the advanced menus are much easier to access than in any other version of Windows.