Windows Weekly 312 features a spirited debate between Leo and Mary Jo (mostly) against guest Peter Bright, who defended Windows 8, the removal of the Start Button, and Metro apps.
The fun starts quietly at 57:30 with a factual report by Mary Jo and then the fireworks begin about 58:35. And about a minute after that, Leo brings up the idea of an OS that can tell what kind of hardware it's on, and select Desktop or Metro accordingly.
Peter states that bringing back the Start Button is a mistake "if" Metro apps are the future, as people need to start getting used to that interface. Whereupon Leo uncorks the best line of the whole discussion:
LL: Yeah, but are Metro apps the future? That's a terrifying future! I don't want everything to be full-screen -- that's a step backwards, that's called DOS with GUI, with graphics.
We call him Peter not so
Bright because of things like this.
In Peter's mind, Microsoft sets the rules and we must obey. Where he got this notion is beyond me, but he is one of the primary reasons Ars Technica has been in the toilet with respect to Windows and Microsoft. They're okay for pure scientific if a bit tabloid, but on Windows they are nipping at the heels of The Verge and NeoWin.
Anywho, think about his hypothesis that Windows 8
should be forced into the public consciousness. We are talking about non-Microsoft hardware here ( save for the handful of Surface units out there ). Microsoft has no more expectation of "owning" OEM hardware than XYZ Incorporated from Timbuktu. The truth is that Microsoft is the 3rd party in this case. They just happen to be a very lucky 3rd party that maneuvered their way into this position during the aftermath of the IBM epic fail and the death of DOS as a pure operating system. What is stupendously ignorant is the way Peter and all MetroTards forget with ease how Microsoft violated antitrust and is a convicted monopolist and but for a technicality would have been busted up for old crimes that are dwarfed by new worse crimes that he is cheerleading for. Microsoft was beat up for inserting a browser into a operating system that
still is preinstalled to the exclusion of all others.
This time around, in addition to the browser they also have a funnel called the Microsoft Store that leads to ... wait for it ... Microsoft. And the operating system itself is the textbook definition of planned obsolescence, specifically the Metro
portion that is a walled garden curated by the aforementioned convicted monopolist Microsoft, and they skim a third from those apps in a Sopranos sized cut. Can anyone imagine John Rockefeller getting away with a second bite at the apple like Microsoft is trying to do?
The worse part of all is the fact that the Metro
side is a non-x86 architecture, that is to say that even though the underlying CPU and chipset is x86, the operating system on the Metro
side is designed
to reject the millions of x86 applications developed by scab authors who have not paid their 30% cut to the MicroMonopolists. Oh yeah, like a good MicroBot they'll say "Well the desktop is still there
", but it will only remain there until they feel they can get away with killing it forever. Then, the kidnapping of these computers and their users is complete. That's the plan in a nutshell. And either Peter not so
Bright doesn't understand it or he does and supports it. Either case explains his nickname.
I still can't believe that Intel isn't making more noise about this, because Metro
is a threat to them also as it can be visualized as an extra abstraction above the traditional x86 kernel, a new layer that locks out native apps for the physical architecture they invented. Hopefully they have something up their sleeves.