I apologise if "dumbed down" seems bias, but so is "voting with their wallet" and "Welcome to the real world kid". Both of us have points of view here. I don't think it's unreasonable to view a a general purpose computer that is locked down and oriented towards purposes like posting to Facebook (the example I gave) as simpler to a general purpose computer that can be used as a general purpose computer. Nothing meant against phones/tablets - they're very useful devices, and I was talking about how people might have both kinds of devices. Similarly the way that consoles are really general purpose computers, but locked down to be used for a specific set of purposes - and many people have both consoles and general purpose computers.
The language bias in this thread is very telling; the usage of the term "dumbed down" being the key one.
Metro is a result of The Consumer voting with their wallet and their wallet has very firmly voted for tablet devices.
The 'single full screen window' is also The Consumer thing; most people when using a computer do one task full screen at a time.
As for voting, it depends what you mean. Of course there's money in tablets and phones, as phone companies have shown for over 10 years, and which MS have been struggling for years to get into. I think they may finally succeed, and good luck to them on that.
The complaints here aren't about them adding tablet support, or building a unified cross-platform experience down to phones. Those are good things! The worry is that these are leading us down a road to deprecate the traditional windowed UI, even if you're not on a phone or tablet; that more generally this is a road to locked down computing.
If those fears are wrong, then I'm happy
True, it's wrong to dismiss Windows 8 simply based on fears. But equally, I don't think it's wrong to discuss these issues. It's still unclear to me - if the "desktop" UI isn't ever going away, does this mean there'll be forever more two APIs in Windows? Is Metro meant to supersede Win32, or isn't it? Or is it that actually WinRT can be used to build traditional "desktop"/windowed apps, as well as the tablet-oriented full screen ones?
People have also discussed the other aspects - the control that MS is exerting over Metro software (and sure, I know MS is doing that to make pots of money - that doesn't mean we have to think it's a good thing!) The idea of locked down computing isn't just about the idea of simpler devices, but also the plans that we know MS have for Metro software (i.e., you have to distribute through MS).
(As an aside, I wonder why people didn't realise the full screen thing decades ago when Windows 1.0 and DOS could only do that, and people were hyping overlapping windows...)
Edit: The Consumer is also voting for the Walled Garden as well - complain all you like about companies at the end of the day they will follow the money.[/quote]Well by that logic, we shouldn't complain about anything. :/
iOS would be nothing without apps, Apple knows this, Google knows this and MS know this which is why the last player on that list is trying to push you in that direction.[/quote]Indeed, software is important, MS has always known the importance of software, and has always pushed and kept us in that direction (indeed, what does the "S" in "MS" stand for - MS are a software company). It's why they've always strived for backwards compatibility, and it's why other platforms have struggled to compete on non-phone devices, because people and companies want compatibility with Windows. But yes, it makes sense for them to try to leverage this advantage into more mobile devices too.
No one cares on dumbed down devices for posting to the Internet or making phone calls, just as they didn't care on Samsung and Nokia smartphones, or feature phones, or games consoles. Apple have yet to do this on their Macs however.
If it turns out that MS can sell a product which they can lock down to the majority of people then you better bet they will... Apple have already proven you can do this and no body cares.
Also even if many people don't care, that doesn't make it something that one shouldn't critisice.
If the world and his wife, developers included, thought that open and none locked down software was important then iOS would have spirialed into nothing-ness as soon as the more open Android hit the market and, as much as I dislike Apple I have to admit that hasn't happened.[/quote]Well, which sells more, and had massive growth when it hit the market, and which has never been the number one platform...
Not that I think that's down to openness - after all, I note that locked down "feature" phones like S40 are more popular still. But I think you are conflating things here - for Apple to spiral to *nothing*, it would have to mean that *everyone* cares about openness.
On the flipside, you first claimed "no body cares". So Apple not spiralling to nothing does not support a claim that's actually at the other extreme.
In practice neither extreme is true. Some people care, to varying degrees.
So, if MS can sustain a platform and keep apps coming out to sell to Average User who only cares about such things then that's what they'll do - hell, that's what they have always done, tried to appeal to the market which got them the money.[/quote]I agree, sure.
On the flipside Apple have seen people flock to making iOS games and not care how locked down/controlled the final system is, hell people moan about MS charging $99 to get your Metro app on the Windows Store when this is the same line Apple have taken and everyone is OK with it... or at least everyone who cares namely people making things.[/quote]Again, you're going one extreme to the other - clearly not everyone is okay with it.
I do agree that part of the problem is the media hype Apple for doing these things, which now makes it easy for MS to get away with it. I don't think that's a good thing though.
So, based on the market;
- 'App' developers get a free tool to make apps for MS (just like iOS developers do)
- 'Classic' developers get to carry on using the existing tools or buy the Pro version.
The 'hobbiest sitting in their bedroom trying to write the next *insert popular game here*' is of no intrest to them because they can't make money from it.[/quote]Well no, only Metro app developers get a free tool - and that windowed/"desktop" is relegated to "classic" is the fear that people are criticising. So which is it, is it FUD, or is it correct after all?
And the hobbiest thing is exactly the kind of thing that people are fearing - that computers no longer cater for people who want to do something with their computer, and all that matters is what makes money for MS or Apple? Yes, that is what people are criticising, and what others are complaining is scaremongering. So which is it? Is it completely untrue scaremongering? Or is it that it's true, but people are still wrong to complain?
Also Microsoft has been threatening to kill off the Win32 API for a long time now, so this particular eminent death of Win32 is a little hard to take seriously.Well hang on, which is it? phantom says we shouldn't worry because they're not going to kill off the desktop, but you say we shouldn't worry, because they already told us they'll be killing it off?
No one has a problem with replacing APIs, but it can't both be true that "Metro is only for phablet UI, you can still use Win32 API for non-phablet" and "Metro is the replacement for Win32 API, which is being killed off" - as I say, is Metro meant to be an alternative for tablets, or is it meant to become the only API?
