Hmm, I actually really like the "Metro as an add-on" idea: If you're buying a touch based device the add-on would just be pre-installed on the device for you (since it actually makes sense on those devices), but you'd still have the option of getting the plain old Windows 8 without it being mangled with UI features that aren't relevant to a keyboard + mouse setup. Windows RT could have then simply been the most minimal core components of regular Windows to get the Metro add-on running.<p>In fact, with the exception of the Start menu mess up, most of the Metro UI features already do look and behave like add-ons when in desktop mode. Also, if I recall correctly, all the Windows Runtime libraries are pretty standalone and layered on top of Win32 as is.<p>It's unfortunate for Microsoft that they did not take this approach, it would have probably prevented most of the negative reception their new OS has gotten thus far. I understand that they wanted to force the Windows Store into every device possible, but they seem to have overlooked the obvious fact that if people don't like Metro on the PC then they wont buy Metro apps on the PC.
My vote? Option 1, where the Win 8 UI looked like this:<p><a href="http://www.theverge.com/2012/2/24/2822891/windows-desktop-ui-concept" rel="nofollow">http://www.theverge.com/2012/2/24/2822891/windows-desktop-ui...</a><p>I would buy that, not the current abomination. It's Metro without stupid colored tiles. It's real design, not programmers implementing a spec.