FTFY

Who are "they" and what did "they" study and how did "they" study it? Not to be crude, but links or gtfo. Seriously, nobody cares what you think "they" said or did unless you can prove it.

GMO means a lot of different things to different people. It could mean chemically modified DNA sequences or clever breeding techniques or even simply hybridizing plants using low tech means.

Language exists to express ideas. If you don't provide clarity and context, you're wasting everyone's time.

It would be more accurate to say that c++ apps can access the Metro APIs, but will still have to be compiled separately for each architecture. HTML5/JS apps will be running on their proprietary engine, and I'll bet they tie it in nicely with the .Net runtime.

I guess I'm just annoyed that my ARM hardware won't be fully compatible, despite their implications otherwise. The annoying part isn't that it's not happening, it's that it could, and that it should.

It won't because Intel is creating an arbitrary delineation that doesn't need to exist. Once you're a certain level of abstraction above the hardware, the OS can transparently handle everything you'd expect it to, and there's no reasons desktop apps written in an x86 environment can't perform just as well on an ARM environment. The only difference is that x86 chips are power hogs and will reduce battery life. By restricting compatibility, Intel and Microsoft are obfuscating that fact and buying Intel time to release their more power efficient chips.

The consumer should be given the option of power-use and running their battery down by running desktop style apps, or running ultra-efficient Metro style apps, depending on preference.

On an x86 system, those options will be available. On ARM, you're stuck with Metro, unless the developer jumps through the hoops and can target ARM successfully (which is iffy.) I guess I'm not surprised that Intel is getting preferential treatment.

Pretty much. The appeal of using Windows would have been seamless utility across all devices, and not worrying about a gajillion different issues when developing for multiple OSes. Microsoft really missed the ball on this one. They're kow-towing to Intel and simply trying to establish market share in the mobile device market without actually bringing any value to the consumer. SORRY MICROSOFT. WE SEE WHAT YOU DID THERE.

I, for one, am now looking for an alternative to all this garbage. I want the same apps I run on my phone available on my pc and tablet and whatever other devices. I want them to intelligently configure their GUIs to adapt to touch or mouse scenarios. I dont want 5 different operating systems for 5 devices, each with unique applications that I have to purchase, maintain, install, and configure on my own.

iOS established a market for mobile computing when people discovered the utility of their smartpohones. Android has been trying to copy their success, and has made a good show of it. Windows for ARM is now distinctly new and unique, and the only compatibility it will have with desktop windows is incidental. MeeGo and other Linux variants have failed horribly.

We have at least 5 distinct operating systems, with cross compatibility occurring only when the developer uses a system that compiles to native code on each platform, or use Java. I'd love to have a single OS to install on all my devices.

iOS and Android have decided that the desktop paradigm isn't relevant to mobile computing. They fail to recognize that GUI design for applications that utilize a flat screen tend to migrate to particular solutions. The desktop environment is one of the most efficient methods of task and view management. Using "windows" gives you options in easily navigating between applications and management functions that are not available to the "ALL FULL SCREEN ALL THE TIME!" idiocy that iOS foisted off on the market.

The big appeal for lots of us was universal utility. Install the OS on all your devices, develop a single app without having to wrestle with arcane cross compatibility voodoo. With this news, however, Windows 8 for ARM proves to be just another competing OS in a bloated market, with a .NET VM. There's nothing special about Metro .Net apps - they will run on Mono on other systems. I'm not willing to limit myself to the .Net ecosystem, nor will I bother with Windows 8. They're making me do work I don't want and shouldn't have to do.

It's all smoke and mirrors. Shame on me for expecting real innovation out of Redmond.

It's not mandatory. It's an option. You turn it on or turn it off. The argument against touch related stuff pretty much crumbles in the face of reality - you don't need to use it, you don't have to use it.

Microsoft is simply expanding the capability of their product to include the reality of touch enabled devices. Get over it.

It's amazing how much people complain about nonexistent problems. Too bad this derp didn't rtfa. (or should that be wtfv?)

Typical OSS-whore, rebel without a clue. GUIs tend to migrate to certain paradigms, and MS isn't entirely comprised of dummies. The touch paradigm needed to pair up with the desktop at some point, and from the looks of it, they've done a swell job.

Means apps like, say, Starcraft 2, which are designed around x86 code and really only use the handle assigned by the OS to put their window in, will have a place in the market. They won't have any metro elements, or any interaction with the new OS features like contracts, etc (unless they patch it in.) These are called "silo" applications.

Junk it and go with HTML/JS. It's going to be automatically portable, debugging will be easier, and you'll see better performance and stability, with steady development. Silverlight is going to be maintained, for sure, but the browser wars ensure a steady rate of progress and bugfixes, whereas M$ can afford to ignore Silverlight and release on it's own timetable.

Bundle the apps for android and iOS and you leverage those markets as well. Silverlight is a toy.

It's the other way around. Having both modes available on all devices means you can develop for phones while on the desktop and have a reasonable idea of how it works. The idea isn't that you'll use the phone mode while on a desktop, but that you'll dock your phone and use it like a desktop in certain situations, and that way developers don't have to wrangle their GUI into some sort of mobile form factor - you can just switch modes and use it like it should be presented.

When they're demoing the mobile interface, but then reveal that you can switch to a real desktop mode, they've gone a step farther than any other mobile OS has so far. I can't tell you how sick I am of Android not having easy task management or windowing. Assuming they maintain their API (which they will) and release an appropriate toolchain (which they will, with free tools too) then recompiling windows programs to target mobile devices will now be possible. Whereas in iOS or Android, almost everything has to be built from scratch, or from Java, or shoehorned in using kludgy hacks or proprietary toolchains. With more than 80% of all computer users everywhere familiar with Windows, having the interface available on devices will give M$ a huge advantage. They're not abandoning the desktop. It's reaffirming the desktop's place as a fundamentally sound method of interfacing with a flat screen. GUI comes down to ease of use, and the desktop paradigm minimizes the number of steps required to switch between tasks and views, or utilizing multiple app views at the same time. Windows Phone 7 was a holdover while they were fixing the codebase for win8 to deploy on all targets. Too bad Android had to be a hackish copy of iOS, instead of being Linux on a phone, with dual phone/desktop interface. They'd have beat M$ to the finish line, but now we're seeing the beginning of a new era of Windows dominance.

If someone bothers with researching where he's located and does a sweep, they can narrow down the potential targets by matching it with his posted profile. I'm pretty sure he's probably got honeypots and a very active defense system set up, but would rather not increase his vulnerability by giving attackers any sort of information whatsoever. Really, it'd be like posting a picture of your house on 4chan. There's no difference in the number of idiots in your immediate vicinity, but if one of them uses the information you let loose, your risk of being annoyed by said idiots increases. Privacy doesn't just happen, you actually have to practice it.

Betty White might have dated one, I guess, but really...

What in the blazes is blood electrolysis?

They apparently can't find the little button on every ribbon that lets them change it back to the old menu bars. God forbid we have any options in our GUIs. Or innovation. Or cross-compatibility between touch and mouse based systems.