Lord Squishy
Active member
That wasn't my point. My point was that the Metro UI isn't hard to learn or difficult to use. It's different, but it's also fairly trivial. If you've ever picked up a mobile device in the last 4-5 years, you'll be fairly adept with it in no time. (Especially the Playbook, in a lot of ways it feels like a cross between the Playbook and Windows Phone 7).An apt comparision, yet neither of those are nor are they meant to be desktop UIs. This is an example of "innovating" in the wrong direction.
Are there some parts that could use a tutorial? Yes, absolutely. For one thing, hiding the "Windows" spot on the desktop- I can understand why they did it, and once you understand how it works it becomes a non-issue, but for someone who just sits down in front of it it can be a hassle.
This is actually especially true for some of the gesture controls; if you're using Windows 8 on a tablet, how do you bring up the multi-tasking menu? (It's a slight jog in from the left and out again, but that sure as hell isn't obvious). Same with the "Close Window" gesture, dropping the window. They're not complicated, they just need a bit of explanation.
However, if I was on the Windows product team, the first thing I would ensure happened was that Windows 8 shipped with a 30-second tutorial that goes "Here are some of the features of Windows 8's New Interface" and shows you just what all the basic elements are.
Beyond that, though, there's nothing wrong with Metro as a desktop interface. People scream about how it's fisher price- which I suppose is a matter of personal aesthetic opinion- but from a usability standpoint, there's really no substantial downside. You're not locked into Metro apps on the desktop if you don't want them: on the desktop, Metro is basically just an expanded start menu. And it performs that task admirably.