there are some new standard Win+key shortcuts for use inside apps (Win+Z brings up the toolbar that appears when you swipe the top/bottom edge and Win+I brings up the settings bar that appears if when you swipe the right edge, though these can also be invoked by hovering the mouse to the right edge of the screen or right clicking).

After 2 decades, Microsoft finally realises that combining the CTRL and META keys was a horrible idea? Now if only Linux distros would realise this too...

And not break shortcuts either... (I'm still trying to figure out why Alt+Tab broke when I installed Ubuntu 12.04, the shortcut is in fact assigned, for the record)

I find it hilarious how many people say what amounts to "I don't use Metro at all." And they don't see anything wrong with Metro being shipped with their system. If it's just useless bloody cruft, why is it there?

Why is multiple modes a bad thing? Microsoft essentially gave users the same old mode and a mode that lets them not totally destroy their computer by accident. I don't get the tech support cynicism of it. It's a huge step forward from a tech support perspective.

>Whatever happened to people being discerning and conscientious about what gets installed on their systems, instead of swallowing whatever useless tripe Microsoft wants to pump into them? When did useless bloat suddenly become okay?

When were people ever discerning and concientious about what got installed on their systems? That's part of the problem that Metro solves. It's less useful for power users, but it's tremendously useful for the average user, which is nowhere near to anyone on this forum. The average user doesn't care about the control panel; the average user cares about a secure browser, a secure email client, and being able to install programs without fear of the computer becoming disfunctional. Metro delivers that experience without sacrificing the desktop. By most metrics, desktop is the useless bloat and metro is the useful mode. For power users it's the opposite, but don't mistake them(yourself) for the majority of users.

So you're saying that whether you're a power-user or not, either way you're getting useless bloat. And this is somehow magically okay? Interesting...

So you're saying that whether you're a power-user or not, either way you're getting useless bloat.

I was using 'useless bloat' as repetition of your terminology. I don't find it useless at all. I use it less than desktop, but I still find it more useful than a lot of the 'useless bloat' I have on my computer. On my home desktop I will probably use it more than VS or any game in the long run, but they already take up more space on the harddrive than the operating system; I don't consider any of them particularly useless, but if we're going to define 'useless bloat' as 'stuff I'd use infrequently' most of my computer is 'useless bloat'

And this is somehow magically okay?

Why should anyone be upset about getting more with their OS? "I ONLY BOUGHT A CAR! WHY DO YOU THINK GIVING ME HEATED SEATS FOR FREE IS OK?! And my manual comes on an iPad?! If I wanted an iPad wouldn't you think I'd just buy an iPad instead of a car?!" "I just wanted a pizza! Why on earth would I want free garlic fingers too?!" "Why would I want to play Blu-Rays/DVDs on my PS3/360? It's a game console not a video player!"

Why should anyone be upset about getting more with their OS?

It's not about getting more with my OS, it's about getting more than one OS bolted together.

If my new MacBook had arrived with iOS bolted onto the front, I'd have been equally miffed. Instead, Apple took a bunch of awesome UI improvements from iOS, and merged them seamlessly into their desktop operating system...

"I just wanted a pizza! Why on earth would I want free garlic fingers too?!" "Why would I want to play Blu-Rays/DVDs on my PS3/360? It's a game console not a video player!"

A free copy of Microsoft Office is awesome added-value, in exactly the way that a preinstalled copy of McAffee isn't.

Not all features add value (or perhaps more politically correct: they don't add value for everyone).

A free copy of Microsoft Office is awesome added-value, in exactly the way that a preinstalled copy of McAffee isn't.

Not all features add value (or perhaps more politically correct: they don't add value for everyone).

By 'getting more' I am not meaning just getting more than one thing. As I said before, Metro doesn't take away from the desktop experience; it arguably doesn't add to it. I don't see why people get so upset about something that doesn't hurt their experience being included in a product. It has, at worst, a neutral impact on user experience. The negative impression it gets for offerring worst-case neutral benefit seems totally disproportionate to me.

If my new MacBook had arrived with iOS bolted onto the front, I'd have been equally miffed. Instead, Apple took a bunch of awesome UI improvements from iOS, and merged them seamlessly into their desktop operating system...

iOS isn't as different from any desktop OS UI-wise. Standard sized square icons aligned on a grid is nothing exceptionally new. Icons look a little prettier and it has UI optimizations because the screens are <50% the size of a normal monitor and you need buttons the size of a finger not a cursor. You could make a strong case that the UI between iOS and MacOS (and even windows) is more similar than between Metro and WP8.

iOS isn't as different from any desktop OS UI-wise.

I sense that we have very different definitions of either the phrase "desktop", or the phrase "UI".

You don't consider fullscreen one-at-a-time apps to be a different paradigm than multiple user-placeable windows?

iOS isn't as different from any desktop OS UI-wise.

I sense that we have very different definitions of either the phrase "desktop", or the phrase "UI".

You don't consider fullscreen one-at-a-time apps to be a different paradigm than multiple user-placeable windows?

I think it's because I generally run most of my apps in one of the snappable positions most of the time that I take it for granted. I'd consider that a legitimate complaint/difference, but I would consider a problem with a mode distinctly different from a problem with the nature of being multi-modal.

DLNA seems to be downgraded in win 8! :o

It's so bad that I've kept win 7 installed just so I can use it instead. It's just horrible.

I would consider a problem with a mode distinctly different from a problem with the nature of being multi-modal

So, this is my problem: Windows 8 is continuously and inconsistently multi-modal. You have a handful of apps that run in Metro, and a handful that run in Desktop. You can't ever see both on screen at once (unless you have multiple monitors), but have to toggle between them.

On my Mac I also have shiny-new fullscreen tablet-inspired apps. But on my Mac, I can choose whether to put them in fullscreen or not, and pretty much all applications support the new fullscreen mode.

Even worse, if you want to adapt your app to run in the shiny new fullscreen metaphor, you can't ship them without going through Microsoft's approval process. That's a paradigm that may have worked well for Apple in the mobile space, but they didn't really attempt to enforce that on the Desktop - many of my favourite apps aren't even adaptable to the guidelines in a meaningful way.

Looks ok on Phone/Tablet. From mobile indie developer perspective i see it as opportunity.