I think that’s true and it is somewhat like Canonical’s long-time Ubuntu-users revolting. No organization should expect to convince millions to use their products and become familiar with them and not experience push-back with radical change. IMHO once a satisfactory experience with the user-interface is achieved, there isn’t any real advantage to changing it. For example, both M$ and Canonical seem to appreciate the need to help users find things but both have insulted users who think they know where certain stuff is. There’s no need for that. Both could just use more advanced search where people are actually searching instead of requiring people to search for everything.

It’s a forest and trees thing. One does not help people navigate a forest by pulling down signs. Then, when you insult people who are multitasking by hiding their other tasks, you are really wasting their time and they notice. I expect both M$ and Canonical will recoil from this failed attempt at revolutionizing the GUI and go back to what works. I think no matter what M$ does will soon matter a lot less judging by how people are loving small cheap computers, where the new approaches work well, but forcing the new technology on hundreds of millions of loyal users will drive hundreds of millions to FLOSS and that’s good for many other reasons. Canonical already has healthy competition in GNU/Linux. I expect a few more OEMs will find another distro if Canonical pushes the new technology on old PCs.

That’s the blog of a certified Linux hater. He also happens to be a very vocal Windows 8 hater although he loves Windows 7. So even Microsoft’s core audience is appalled.

My preference is Linux Mint, but it is based on Ubuntu, albeit a bit more refined and satiating for the users needs. Cinnamon, Gnome3, KDE, XFCE are all different UI’s to choose from.

Windows 8 and its dumbed down METROFAIL tiles are a smack in face on peoples intelligence. M$ thinks so highly of its users, that they removed the “Start” button. Don’t like it? TOUGH.