11 comments

  • usermac9 minutes ago
    A bit off-topic but I super enjoyed the UI on the Windows Phones at the time. Only topped by the WebOS from Palm even before it I recall.
  • mr_toad5 minutes ago
    I read somewhere that the visual design of Windows 8 was based on the works of Mondrian, because they wanted a design that didn’t just look like the Swiss School that Apple had adopted.<p>I don’t know if the idea of calling Windows 8 modern stemmed from that, or if they decided to pick Mondrian having already decided to go with modern.
  • arethuza17 minutes ago
    My name for the Windows 11 experience is &quot;Linux Mint&quot;... ;-)
  • ux2664785 minutes ago
    Hot take: I liked Windows 8. It used less memory than Windows 7, increased battery life, the file manager and task manager were much improved, I could mount ISOs without third party software, among other things. In truth, I didn&#x27;t even mind the start screen. And I certainly liked Metro as a UI paradigm much more than Aero.<p>Of course it was still Windows at the end of the day, but 8.1 was my last Windows. The laptop I ran it on is slowly bitrotting in a storage locker somewhere on the other end of the country. I didn&#x27;t like the look of Windows 10, several aspects of it were hard dealbreakers, so I never swapped to it. Eventually I just changed over to using Linux as my primary OS and haven&#x27;t really looked back.
  • sixothree1 minute ago
    I thought Metro was appropriate. As in, the name fit the design style.
  • LarryDarrell38 minutes ago
    They were so busy trying to create modern that they forgot what made things classic.
    • akikoo23 minutes ago
      The solution to Windows 8 UI issues was aptly named, Classic Shell
  • nailer7 minutes ago
    The final name was also called Modern. I know this person worked on Windows 8, but as a member of the public we definitely knew the Windows 8 UI was called &#x27;Modern&#x27;.
  • excalibur33 minutes ago
    When you put &quot;modern&quot; or &quot;new&quot; into the name of a thing, you&#x27;re basically announcing to the world that it was designed for the short term, and when it is no longer new it will no longer be relevant.
    • embedding-shape12 minutes ago
      Adding &quot;fast&quot; is similarly fun, it&#x27;s probably true when you came up with it, probably won&#x27;t be true in the future anymore.
    • NopIdoN4 minutes ago
      It doesn&#x27;t fit now and it won&#x27;t work later.
    • nailer6 minutes ago
      No. Modern like 1950&#x27;s modern. Unadorned, functional.
  • kgwxd35 minutes ago
    &quot;Modern&quot; = something that ruins perfectly good stuff in the never ending pursuit of &quot;progress&quot;. UI doesn&#x27;t need to change every few years. It should have stopped changing almost 30 years ago.
    • jan_Sate22 minutes ago
      This. I don&#x27;t see the point of constantly changing UI as an end-user. The old one just work. It works perfectly. Now that you changed it and thing breaks. :|
  • NooneAtAll344 minutes ago
    <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;xkcd.com&#x2F;3089&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;xkcd.com&#x2F;3089&#x2F;</a>
    • bee_rider2 minutes ago
      I sort of like the term “early Modern” in history. Putting the “early modern” period 250 years ago causes us to reflect on how much life has changed over that time, which is useful because it’s so tempting to imagine what life was like during the Renaissance or Middle Ages. Of course, every period has massive change, so the experiences of people on either end of a period are as different as somebody in the early modern and… actual modern… eras!
  • mx7zysuj4xew10 minutes ago
    I wish violence on every one of the people involved for the pain they caused