[vjvjvjvjghv]

UI unification strategies for different platforms seem to be very temping but usually make things worse. MS tried it with Windows 8 but it turns out that it made all platforms worse. Not a good tablet and worse desktop experience.

On the other hand, Apple optimized iOS for a phone without unifying with MacOS and was very successful.

Optimizing phones for VR seems a really bad idea.

[munificent]

Of course it makes things worse.

The whole point of having different platforms in the first place is to cater to different needs, contexts, and user experiences. If they could be unified, they wouldn't be different platforms in the first place.

[cma]

A big part of Vision pro is unifying other platforms into it, but I doubt the desktop streaming stuff is sending over a layered refractive index buffer and normals for it to be anything but worse in VR if it already made the desktop worse in 2d. You would almost need something more like an x11 client server approach.

[thmsths]

I am not sure if I agree with the conclusion about the Windows 8 UI unification, I still believe it could have made sense. It's just that as is often the case with MS, they let a good idea go to waste by doing a half assed implementation, then backtracking...

[kmeisthax]

The problem is that they bought into the iPad hype.

The correct way to build a tablet OS is to start with a desktop environment and optimize it - including third-party software - for fingers. We see this with iPadOS, which keeps getting hand-me-down features from macOS, implemented almost exactly the same as they are on macOS but with bigger tap targets.

In contrast, Windows 8 saw Microsoft taking the contemporary state of the iPad - single window, everything full screen, etc - and treating this as the future. Hell, I'm surprised they even shipped split-screen on it. They even locked down the app runtime to signed Store apps only[0]. My guess is that management saw dollar signs from how much Apple made from the iOS App Store and thought turning Windows into an "iPad Killer"[1] would replicate the same success.

Ironically, Windows 7 was already built to be a touch-friendly desktop, they just didn't actually finish making it touch-friendly.

[0] Which created a fun bifurcation between widget toolkits in the Microsoft ecosystem that persists to this day.

[1] Any time a company describes a product as a "killer" product, i.e. something intended to outcompete another product, they've already lost.

[goosedragons]

Strongly disagree. Windows 11 is EXACTLY what you describe and it's not a great tablet experience. IMO it's worse than 8, 8.1 or 10. I probably accidentally close a web browser about 5 times a day on my Surface from my palm brushing the X on the window controls while trying to enter something in the URL box or search bar or swapping tabs. Switching apps sucks. The gesture controls of 8/8.1 were really good and thought out for tablets (not desktops) and full screening apps made maximal use of space while making it hard to unintentionally quit something. Meanwhile on Windows 11 they have made gestures literally near useless and something I never want to trigger ever. Yeah, MS I want easy access to garbage tabloid news and some junk AI feature. Thanks.

What MS SHOULD have done is just left desktop Windows 8 be a lightly reskinned Windows 7 and only trigger the tablet UI in tablet mode on supported devices. But no, they had to make a bad mouse experience which soured everyone on 8's UI forcing them to backpedal.

Had the Surface RT launched at the same price with pen support I think it could have had serious legs as a device for students even with all the limitations. But no, another missed opportunity.

[vjvjvjvjghv]

I remember when Windows 8 came out, I was curious how complex apps would work with the Metro interface. I thought MS would convert their own apps to it but that never happened.