Windows 9 Technical Preview screenshots leaked

^And probably still eats a butt ton of VRAM despite the simplistic graphics...

 

I have to ask, for any of the shown tiles, why do I need the space of an entire tile just for those items? I mean with those specific tiles and the way they are, who are you trying to attract?

 

What ?

 

He's saying those tiles are huge for no reason. Just look at your Windows 7 Start Menu--same content, takes up 1/10th the space

 

I think those tiles can be resized, just like on Start screen, so there's no loss.

 

Still too big. Does there have to be a thumbnail? A line of text isn't good enough? I'm nitpicking, but M$ continues to make stupid design decisions.

 

You will still be able to fit two thumbnail (maybe even more) in two lines of text space, I think.

 

I'd rather just have text, or text and a small icon. A thumbnail by itself isn't intuitive, and thumbnail together with text takes up too much space.

 

Yup, nobody wants to see that Metro crap. Following Dr. Seuss, repeat after me:

We do not like it in our homes, we do not like it on our phones;
we will not click upon its tiles, we won’t use it to access files;
we wish that it would go and die, we do not like Metro UI.

 

I think, I guess, I am sure, well why not just make it as it was or an improvement of the same? If you want it to replace Windows 7 then you need to make it a better OS and UI than windows 7!

 

**** brown, puke yellow, boring blue, and flamboyant purple. Just great.

 

The color changes automatically with the selected theme/background...and you can choose every color you want.

Its funny how some people think the flat design has something to do with the lacking Windows 8 sales. It certainly has not. Its the UI of 8.0 and the negative media coverage, that affected sales. Not the absence of the ugly Aero design...most users don´t care if the task bar is transparant-glass-glossy or not.

The flat design itself has been a huge success for them.

 

Ok, I'll bite, back that up with any real world data!

 

I think that he means is that when MS started implementing "flat" design in WP 7-onwards, Goog£€ and App£€ started copying them.

 

dude change your avatar it's making my eyes go nuts!

 

First off, this is a Laptop forum not a phone , or even tablet, one. As far as flat design on that premise well Android way back has been a flat design so they are not really introducing anything new on that front. The NEW was active tiles but again this is seeing its limited success in phones/tablets so far.

Funny thing, gadgets had/have the capability to display a lot of live data too. In fact their inherent risk; hooking into the system, gave them even more capabilities. Also that risk was well known before W8 release but the company only highly vocalized this with the release of W8. IMHO this was so they could further push Metro.

I'll state it again, make a better OS and UI than Windows 7 for PC's and we will all be there, till then...

 

Not only did Google, Apple and many others take some cues from the flat design, Microsoft also did implement the flat design for all of their websites. For example, Outlook.com, which is infinitely improved compared to old Hotmail. The point is, the flat design is easier to use, because its simple.

While you may say, thats no real data, maybe, but there is also no real data to proove Aero was a success. And no, Aero wasn´t the reason Windows 7 was successful. It was the right OS at the right time (after the Vista fail). I have no doubt that the same will hold true for Windows 9.

As an IMHO statement: Aero was bad, because it is a bloated interface with to many useless animations. It draws attention away from the important things (the content) and just screams "Look at me!". I have nothing against a little bit of Transparency, but Aero was just too much (also, there is nothing more hideous than rounded Windows corners, but thats really only my opinion)...also, there is also no need for MS to provide a "classic" theme with WIndows 8.1 or Windows 9, the flat design is just like the classic Windows 95 theme but modernized . If someone doesn´t like colors, he is free to choose Black, White or Grey.

 

If w9 is ready around april next year, when will laptops come with it? Would be great to try something else than w8.. and i guess i can wait 6 more months

 

I'm sure I'm at risk of having my head bitten off here; but I rather like the Metro design/ concept.


I think the world is so quickly moving to mobility that the quick-access buttons are a good thing to have. Sure the UI looks a bit dumbed down and one can almost imagine the MS design team thinking "best make it bright and pretty for the stupid customers", and sure, its hardly a worthy operating system alone for the technological wizz-kids.
Having said that, I do really think that there could be a place for the metro design, and those start menu snapshots might just be the ticket. The separate UI for Windows is a bit redundant for nearly all I would think, given the functionality and familiarity of the desktop that we've all used for years.

But at the same time, the live tiles thing with news, stock info, weather, travel etc are all cool ideas and I don't think MS should be beaten up over it, progress comes from innovation and change. Not all change will be liked or even work properly (as is the history with MS) but I think they do have some good ideas.

I'd be happy if that win9 snapshot incorporated metro to the start menu, and possibly something to the login screen perhaps, but the desktop is the winner for me. If they can keep less of the bright colours and kindergarten sized buttons for tablets and have it as a smaller (maybe even optional?) part of the OS, that'd be good. Then, if you're like me and think live tiles are the shizz, you can enable them for the start menu and maybe other selected locations, and if you don't like em, you can turn em off.


My 2c. In closing, I will say this, windows 9 needs to be first and foremost a stable/ functional OS, and a good looking one second. Too often in recent years has this been the wrong way around...

 

You assume all change is good, apparently this is not so. Also while Aero may not have data specifically showing it was good it was not a flop that kept people from buying into the UI. With Windows 7 sales numbers and continued market share there is no need to defend Aero, sorry.

I am not arguing the flat deign works for phones. This can be true of web sites now, more than ever, being accessed by phones and tablets. You have to remember too that web pages are not meant to be multitasking environments. In most cases web sites are not meant to be productivity apps either.

 

FYI, Aero came with Vista. (And yeah, the start menu came with Windows 95 )

Internet web hyperlink: What is Windows Aero?

 

Sorry, but you're wrong: That flat design predates Microsoft's implementations (which first appeared in Windows Phone, I think) by far. For example, Google's Android has always used a flat design, but such designs have come en vogue in the design community before Android as well. So, no, Microsoft has not invented crappy design. See here for some background.

You don't have a point. All you have is an opinion. Others beg to differ. Many people question the wisdom of having thin, light-grey fonts on white backgrounds, and other idiocies along these lines. I also note that Apple, in fact, has introduced transparency into their newest operating systems.

Nobody made the claim you are disputing. Given the fact that, as far as we know, the differences between Windows 9 and the badly tainted Windows 8.x are minimal to non-existent, the question of how successful Windows 9 can be is very much an open one.

Let us note that the issue with Vista was not the appearance and functionality of its UI, which, in contrast, is very much the case with Windows 8. Given that fact, the decision to not change the appearance of the UI from Win8 to Win9 may appear questionable.

You are perfectly free to have this opinion. May I remind you, however, that in stark contrast to the situation in Windows 7, where it was very easy to completely eliminate every single one of the elements you criticize (well, except for those slightly rounded corners, sorry), and in fact make the Windows 7 desktop look and act almost identical to the one of Windows 8, the converse is not true. This, in fact, is the real point of contention here: That Microsoft has frivolously taken away the choice that users had in previous versions of their operating systems.

Out of curiosity, what issues of stability/functionality have you seen with Microsoft operating systems, in "recent years"?

 

While I was beaten to it... I'd like to emphasize:
Windows Aero could be turned off if you didn't like it.
Why can't we turn off Metro and use Windows 8 in desktop mode with a classic interface without buying a 3rd-party application?

Windows XP fluffy look was almost universally turned off. (it was also useless and looked stupid)
Windows Vista and 7 you could turn off elements and make it look as basic as you wanted.
Windows 8 forced metro down people's throats.

Microsoft's customers have spoken loud and clear and voted with their wallets. Metro is staggeringly awful and Windows 8 and 8.1 are glaring failures due to Metro and widespread incompatibility. Fix these two points, or at least fix the bugs and let their power users turn Metro off and we may have a winner.
Anything else will follow Windows 8 in infamy.

 

Windows 7 will always be the best OS and followed by XP but windows 8 and now windows 9 continues to get into the mediocre tablet scene making the OS more painful to navigate as a PC Gamer.

 

Maybe you should start by reading it for yourself. Sure, Microsoft didn´t invent clean, minimalistic design. But they brought it back to modern systems with their Zune Player (2006, before the first Android device came to the market) and the UI they used.

Apple didn´t invent Tablets, But they brought the iPad and started a Tablet-wave. Microsoft didn´t invent flat design. But only after they brought Windows Phone 7 and Windows 8 to the market, flat design began to take over the computing world.

As have you and anyone else here in this thread.

Windows 8.1 doesn´t have thin, light-grey fonts on white backgrounds. If you are interested, this is how my Windows looks like:
http://abload.de/img/windows80unf.png
I guess thats very hard to use, because it lacks the shiny glass effects^^

The issue with Windows 8.1 also was not its appearance (or have you any facts that proove otherwise?) - it the functionality of the base Windows 8 version, which was largly overhauled with 8.1. The issues with 8 weren´t even Metro or the tiles. It were things like hidden UI elements, or ways to do things that were different from before (shutting the PC down in the Settings Tab). As these issues disappeared with 8.1, the only remaining real problem is an image problem. Thats why the didn´t introduce a version 8.2 and just went straight to Windows 9.

As I said before, appearence is a non-issue for most people, as long as it looks not like Windows 95 or something like that (which Windows 8.1 doesn not). There are many users that use Windows 8.1 with Classic Shell and they are very happy.

Giving that MS will return the start menu with Windows 9, its very safe to assume it will be a big sucess. The startscreen is (undeservebly so IMHO) a part of the image problem, so making it optional is a key part in making Windows 9 sucessful.

Choice? Could you select Luna for Windows 7? Or even the Vista Aero (which was slightly different from Windows 7´s implementation)? No, you couldn´t. You had Aero (the modern theme back then), the Aero basic (Aero without tranparency) and the Classic Windows 95 theme. There is no choice needed anymore as I said before, because the flat design replaces all three of these themes. Its not too shiny and glossy (for the people who don´t like Aero), it can look very much like the classic Windows 95 theme (if you set the color for grey) and yet its still a modern theme that allows different colors etc. (like Aero did). Other than people who want a exact Windows 7 clone, most people should be happy with that.

 

OMG, best laugh I've had all year, ZUNE... Just the comparison of its success, LMAO.

Edit; Want to go back to Early Windows and GeoWorks, we could go there as well. Flat design is nothing new just something on a PC to avoid IMHO.

 

w8 made me feel like i was using 2 operating systems at one time, not sure if a program/app was really closed or running in the background. I install windows so i can install the programs i want to use, not to get things that feel like bloatware. High hopes for w9 tho

 

I have never said anything about Zunes success. The device itself clearly wasn´t - but the interface it introduced was.

As I mentioned before, its not about inventing something or being the first - its to be the one who made it mainstream. At the time when Zune was introduced, Aero and Apple Aqua were making shiny, glossy and overloaded themes mainstream. Zune took a different direction, as MS did with Windows Phone in 2011. And they managed to make flat design mainstream again.

Nobody forces you to use the "Modern Apps" - they are optional.

 

Generally, whether the app is closed or running in the background is not a concern for the user. Grandma doesn't really care if the email app she 'closed' is still in RAM or not. Note that the Win8 app behavior is basically 'mobile device' app behavior, as the iPhones and Androids and Winphones of the world work exactly the same way, and people are adjusted to it. And just as those phones do in fact have a way to close these backgrounded apps, Win8.x does as well, just open task manager and nuke away. As well, Alt-F4 in any Win8 app will truly close the app.

Win8.x without OEM cruft is pretty thin on extras. The health app is one of the few "what were they thinking?" apps but hey, the industry clearly knows something we do not.

 

You do understand that statements like this essentially are fodder in modern sitcoms. You are fighting a loosing battle, the consumers have spoken and so far on PC's they do not want a flat interface. They already have tried with mixed success to force this on consumers, so my guess here is you think the next round with the new version will be better.

Right now they need to distance the OS from the Windows 8 name, it is almost akin, if not worse, than the New Coke. The problem will be if they do not fix the UI and make it a real success the branding of Windows 9 will be the same or worse. I say worse for them in that 2 consecutive versions failing to gain significant acceptance could have severe consequences. The primary issue could be having to wait at least 3 years for Windows 10.

So longs as Windows 7 keeps going though we could see Windows 10 in 2017 and then maybe the rescue come in as Windows 11 in 2020. This is all hugely speculative of course. But keeping to the topic, as it stands with the preview, Windows 9 may be a failure.

I say may be as if they keep giving back features on this piece meal basis eventually they may hit the just functional enough mark for the UI. The start button IMHO for the mass market could make all the difference. This is so long as it doesn't go too far at again forcing Metro on the user and of course is a sensible start button and menu.

 

Not only did I read it but, more importantly, I also understood it, and I'll leave it at that. I really have no interest in dealing any further with that kind of childish fanboyism.

Complete nonsense. Windows Phone is used by approximately 16 people on the planet, and Windows 8 failed miserably in the market, running at all of 12.5% or so of PC systems. It is, by far, the greatest disaster in the history of PC operating systems. Vista was a runaway success compared to the abysmal performance of Windows 8. The entire top-level of Microsoft's management that was responsible for this has been fired. Among them were the CEO of the company, as well as the person who had been traded as his successor. I wonder if you have even the faintest idea what this means.

In addition, you have been told before that it is in fact Android (and Google's web interfaces, by the way) that brought this lame design to the masses. You know, the Android that powers roughly 80% of all mobile devices. Otherwise, see above.

Oh, and you may notice that Android is now starting to re-introduce 3D elements like drop shadows, subtle gradients, and probably soon some transparency as well. You know why? Because these things have functionality. Which is why Apple is doing the same thing. Only Microsoft seems to still be stuck in this bland crap.

I do appreciate your adeptness at constructing fantasy worlds without even a hint of evidence. You would not have any such evidence for any of your amazing insights, by happenstance? I note in passing that the onus of providing evidence for his statements is on he who posits the assertion. That's you, my friend. I don't have to "prove" anything.

[Sigh...] Once again, sure, you said that. And? Do you have any evidence for your assertion? If you don't, all you have is your opinion. Which is fine, but it's just that: an opinion.

Another assertion with no evidence whatsoever. Dismissed.

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

Now that one is hilarious. Have you ever thought of becoming a comedian?

Honey, you need to provide evidence. After so many words, you still have not done so at all. We know by now that you feel very strongly that you are presenting a facet of reality with your opinions, yet you steadfastly refuse to provide any evidence. Until you do, all you have is an opinion. That and 99 cents will buy you a Cheeseburger at McDonalds, at participating locations only.

 

We have seen this before, although for slightly different reasons. Windows XP was released in 2001 and hit final end of support earlier this year, for a total of 13 years supported. This mainly happened because Microsoft did not release any new operating systems until Vista until 2007, which of course had serious compatability problems and many systems that could not run it at launch (despite having it pre-installed). Windows 7 was released in 2009 and is scheduled for extended support until 2020, for a total of 11 years supported. While Windows 8 has been a disappointment, Microsoft legitimately has until much closer to the support end date of Windows 7 to come up with something better before they start panicking.

 

Right, as asserted they have longer just so long as the consumer can hold with Windows 7. The problem, IMHO, is if Windows 9 is another failure it could make consumers accept the possibility of a Windows replacement. As it is today you talk to a consumer and say PC instantly they will wonder what Windows version it has. Introduce another failure with Windows 7 no longer officially for sale and this mindset could slowly change.

The second issue is how much abuse will the PC industry take let alone the OEM's?

 

Yes, that is a good question also. For example, in order to sell the turkey that is Windows 8, Microsoft has pushed everybody to try and shove touchscreens in standard laptops on consumers, which just about nobody really wants, resulting in further reductions of PC makers' already slim margins. So now you start seeing them embracing Chromebooks. In other news, Samsung has just announced that they are pulling out of the PC market in Europe.

 

Now this one takes the cake...noboday....really noboday... how and where did you come to that conclusion....did you listen to the Tester and IT and Users on here that test the Preview of W8 before they dumped the Start Menu and Aero features.. I guess not... Even I took the testing to Windows 8 preview and thought it was good but when they released Windows 8 it was like they did a 180' from what the Testers liked and decided to ram-rod it down our throat saying "We were Dumb" and didn't know what we were talking about. How do you think that makes the HardCore PC M$ loving user feel-betrayed....literally....and these are not your everyday regular user these are PC Savvy/Tweekers your average Joe/Jane would have a hecka hard time understanding "Charm" features....if it was hard enough for PC Savvy users just think how harder it is for Joe/Jane users...

 

And windows 9 had best be great, otherwise the slide may continue.

Pricey Macs and cheap Chromebooks squeeze WindowsÂin the middle

 

I don't really know what the actual point of this post is, but "Modern Apps" like the mail app and the news app and all the stuff in the store is actually optional. It can all be unpinned from the start screen and forgotten. As far as I know, most of the shipped tiles are uninstallable (and on the store should they be needed again).

Maybe people are irked about times when Win 8.x starts throwing up Modern UI screens for stuff like wifi and PC settings and that sort of thing. It personally doesn't bother me as I don't have any kind of raging hatred for the Modern UI theme itself, and as well, I rarely access my wifi settings, and don't change my PC settings much. The only Modern screen I see on any kind of regular basis is the Start screen itself, and despite not using any third party Start replacement, I don't see that much either.

I dunno, I use Win8.1 daily on multiple computers and I still get a appreciable amount of work done, a good amount of gaming done, web browsing, whatever.. Works for me.

 

Yes, Chromebooks are a massive, stellar, success that will set the world on f.. Samsung Pulls out of the Laptop and Chromebook Market in Europe

 

Again, only forwarding the news that includes the numbers. No one said the fall from the top of the mountain will be fast just that it could happen. The numbers are just slowly proving us out. Also Samsung lost all markets, Windows and Chromebook so where is your point with that one? Since they are pulling their Windows machines as well that is, oh and they had a lot more variations of windows machines they are pulling than chromebooks too. TBH though I am not sure of their sales numbers but my guess is it all stunk for them to pull out universally.

Edit; The other issue is if there is enough of a shift in OS base developers of higher end applications will be drawn there. As this happens completion could heat up in the UI world. Again, my thoughts are, put a good office and LightRoom ported to Linux and off I go. If no other option as of 2020 I could end up with an Apple or Hackintosh.

 

And I'll be right there behind you...:hi2:

 

I was thinking Vista mainly when making that comment. However I think also Windows 8 proved the same as Vista in some ways, nice shiny UI changes at the cost of functionality (the list can be found here List of features removed in Windows Vista - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia) and the glaringly obvious and oft covered omission of the start menu in Win 8.

However, in hindsight I suppose MS has a sort of legacy for their new OS' not being all they can be until the 2nd or 3rd major service pack, so I guess we should all have high hopes for Windows 9 being to Win 8 as Win 7 was to Vista.

 

The SP issue was true of XP and Vista. This while Vista had some major hurdles to overcome where the former version did not. Windows 7 by the first SP had its issues addressed for the most part. SP2, if it were released, was to be more of a maintenance release to prevent the all day updates to new installations. It still appears they have refused a SP2 there to make Windows 7 more inconvenient then the new OS. They seem to be pulling every possible trick they can other than completely killing all other OS variants (cutting off their nose to spite their face).

M$ has gone through about every marketing ploy they can to force consumers over to the new OS and UI. Now that the numbers are starting to change this, as predicted by many here, is blowing up in their face. Consumers are showing they are tired of the game. While they will not abandon in mass just yet, once developers get some equitable production software out for other OS's there could be a major shift. This has the possibility of being so epic of a failure that it could end up being its own college course in time.

 

Not trying to be a jerk, but I think the phrase is "cutting off your nose to spite your face".

 

Not from the users I heard trying to use W8, W8.1.....so unless we get independent confirmation...this is all grabbing for straws....Gaming on W8...if I recall what games...? Not for Desktop/Tower usage...tablet...maybe but W8 lost all functionality to get any good productivity done in proper manner and time for the masses.

 

The question of "what if Windows 9 fails?" is a very valid one.

While I believe Microsoft will work very hard to make sure that doesn't happen, I am not so sure they won't just airbrush and slightly revamp 8, put a placeholder start menu on it, and spend the vast majority of their "development" funds on marketing.
Who really doubts that one of the possible plans really was Windows 8.2 renamed with a big marketing push?

Also, they need to break this "every other Windows release is just us trolling you", or they might want to not bother with Windows 10, 12, or 14.
Sadly... 98, Milennium, XP, Vista, 7, and 8 just massively highlight it. Win 8 is the biggest troll yet.

If 9 is another troll release... it will hurt the PC market even further and may create an opportunity of epic proportions for Apple and *nix.

As for 8 and productivity... it really hurts to start with... worse than switching a hardened pc user to a mac. After a while they get used to it, but still complain about it being clunky. Most of that goes away with adding a 3rd party start menu. Let's face it... Win 9 will probably fix this.

What really hurts is the stuff that doesn't run and will never run. Shortly thereafter, you get called back to downgrade them so the software will actually work.
As I mentioned before; if the application runs a local database of any kind (even older versions of SQL) or has even the slightest thing to do with Cisco, you are usually better off just downgrading to Win 7 to start with. I have no idea if Win9 will fix that.

 

You are right, spell check got me when the space key skipped between to and spite. I am not a typist, as should be obvious. Corrected the mistake, thanks.

 

It most certainly is.

At this point I see no real evidence one way or another which, given the proportions of the disaster that has been Windows 8, is reason for concern by itself. All we know for now is that the Start Menu will come back, and the universally hated Charms thing is gone. But, no, this isn't all that was wrong with Windows 8. If that's all they do, then they're indeed just putting the proverbial lipstick on a pig. Whoever wants to kiss that one, feel free...

In fairness, of course, we really don't know much beyond that, so we'll have to wait and see.

 

Not sure if serious...

 

Since there is nothing for use to test your conclusions is all hear say.....and considering the sales and how Corporation and Institutions already says they are going Windows 7 SP1 that is more evidence Windows 8 is a flopping on the floors..already.