As someone who worked for MSFT for so long, this bit really makes me happy - mostly since no one would have given this much odds of happening.<p>"With the introduction of OS X Lion, Apple gave us a glimpse at what a post-PC operating system might look like, and now Microsoft's gone and pushed that idea to the limit. If Cupertino's latest was a tease, than Windows 8 is full frontal. And we have to admit, we like what we see. "
It looks very streamlined and powerful - quite arguably more functional than today's iPad - but it's problematic that I don't see anything that makes anyones' life appreciably better. A Flipboard clone, mobile Internet, Twitter, Photos - nothing revolutionary. Really, really good, but nothing to give an iPad or Xoom owner buyer's remorse unless these are ridiculously cheap (I don't see how they'll have any price advantage over Apple or Googlerolla). Tablets will own this holiday season, which MS is missing out on, and remember that Windows 8 tablets will ship in the shadow of the iPad 3. Which, in turn, means that Android and iPad will remain the lead platform for large form touchscreen apps for the medium term future.<p>So: nice, but this doesn't stop their disruption.
> the desktop that you've grown used to in Windows 7 is still present, albeit as an app<p>Interesting parallel with the introduction of Windows. Windows 3.1 still ran entirely on top of DOS; but DOS was demoted in Windows 95 and replaced entirely in Windows NT, from which point it has run as a VM on top of the OS.
According to TIMN it's running an Intel Core i5. Wow. Seriously? I realize this is just a developer preview device, but if Windows 8 needs that kind of power, then what about ARM tablets that are supposed to compete with iPad? How will it run on them? And how much battery life will it have on those Intel-powered tablets? These questions are all unanswered and Engadget didn't even touch on any of them.<p><i>"All of the above sections should give you a solid look at what Windows 8 is shaping up to be, but what about the hardware? While we got a look at the OS running on a few laptops and all-in-ones during the press preview meeting, we’ve spent most of the time testing the OS on the prototype tablet. Powered by a 1.6GHz Core i5-2467M processor and a 64GB solid state drive, the system is absolutely no slouch on performance — everything from scrolling in the browser to the Start screen is extremely speedy and the system boots incredibly quickly. However, fan noise is very noticeable, as is the heat coming out of the top vent, and a fast boot doesn’t excuse the slow wake-up times compared to ARM-based cellphones and tablets."</i><p><a href="http://thisismynext.com/2011/09/13/windows-8-tablet-photos-video-preview/" rel="nofollow">http://thisismynext.com/2011/09/13/windows-8-tablet-photos-v...</a>
This explains why Engadget never said anything about the hardware it was running on. They were <i>prohibited</i> to say anything about it. I wonder why?<p><i>"Keep this in mind as you read: both the operating system and hardware are developer preview builds. In fact, the [REDACTED]</i> hardware (we're prohibited from even revealing its manufacturer or specs) isn't even going to run Windows 8."*<p><a href="http://gizmodo.com/5839665/windows-8-slate-hands-on-its-fantastic-but-dont-sell-your-ipad" rel="nofollow">http://gizmodo.com/5839665/windows-8-slate-hands-on-its-fant...</a>
Am I the only one who virtually never uses windows desktop? I am either in particular app, or just click "start", type a few letters and run what I need. My desktop is just a background when nothing is running. Windows 8 new desktop might make it useful again.
I have mixed feelings for developing for Windows 8. I got my hands a little on Visual Studio, and it's hands-down the most powerful, stable and complete IDE I ever used.<p>If Microsoft could have something similar for coding with JavaScript,and HTML; along with tools for storage, database, revision control, testing, jquery... integrated inside that IDE. Well, I just can't miss programming with it.
What's really interesting to me is that Windows 8 seems almost entirely focused on the <i>consumer</i> market. What about those of us using our desktop PCs every day to do real work?<p>I mean, do we really have to boot into that fancy-pants Metro UI every time we want to actually get something done?<p>I'm totally fine with swiping this way and that when using a tablet PC (I love my iPad), but when I sit down at a desktop PC, I want a mouse/keyboard driven experience - period.
Very excited to play with this hands-on tonight/tomorrow. My only concerns are as follows:<p>- Multiple monitors. How does this play nicely with them, and how I traditionally lay-out several open applications across them? Can one monitor be Metro UI and the other be the classical desktop? Or, can I have a full-screen app on one monitor that doesn't brick the other screen? (Looking at you, OSX Lion)<p>- App windows that might not necessarily fit into the tile or fullscreen approach. The prime example of this is my chat/social desktop or space. I typically have a contacts list, tabbed chat window, IRC, and twitter feed all on the same monitor arranged around one another. I know they demoed a way to do split-screen apps while still in the Metro UI, but it seemed to be too simple for real use.<p>- How jarring is the switch between Metro and the retro desktop? If I'm going along fine at 90% productivity living completely in the Metro UI on my monitors, and then all of a sudden need to open a small window from a legacy app, is that going to completely monopolize my workspace? If half of my apps work in Metro, and the other half don't while programming, am I going to have to keep switching between the UIs every 30 seconds as I'm working? That would be a pretty big deal-breaker.
Ok, Metro looks nice.
I just hope they do similar to Apple and provide something between "mouse" and "touch"... like all the trackpad gestures Apple uses to make their desktop OS more touch-oriented while avoiding the dreaded gorilla arm <a href="https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Touchscreen#Gorilla_arm" rel="nofollow">https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Touchscreen#G...</a>
I think Windows 8 will be interesting. The one thing I don't like about Windows, since Vista, is the splintering of the client version (basic, home, professional, ultimate). I think MS should just make one client version for a flat $150.00.
The touch-enabled part of this preview and the fact that Microsoft stays close to their excellent Metro UI looks very promising. I also see the point of keeping the traditional windows elements like the desktop or explorer. However I really don't get why the explorer has to stay that traditional. I'm sure there would have been a way to make it usable with mouse AND touch input - maybe by replacing all those ribbon elements by only the most commonly used actions as icon only, preferably in Metro style.<p>Right now this feels like an unnecessary break from the promising and fresh approach that is Metro on a desktop (or tablet).
This is largely an entrepreneurial site, so tell me: if you tried a concept and it failed, then you repackaged and tried again with another failure (redo this step multiple times as necessary), then saw someone else alter your concept and have enormous success would you:<p>a) Learn from them and make a product that competes in that space or<p>b) Try your same multiple-times-failed strategy again?<p>If you're MS it seems option b is the right answer. PC in tablet form, take... what, 5?
This looks pretty nice, its good to see M$ being able to step so far out of their comfort zone vis-a-vis competition between the 'core' windows franchise and the 'other' products. My belief was that the thing that really killed the 'Tablet' version of windows was that they didn't have an 'all in' mode where there was no legacy PC stuff there.