Thanks Spencer!!!

Full screen, one at a time... is just nuts.  OK for a phone, nuts for a 27" monitor.  Even home/personal productivity functions require two windows open side-by-side frequently (every time I reconcile my bank statement).  There's a reason we don't do certain things on a 3.5" screen, or even a 10".

There's gonna be a run on Win7 licenses.  If MS forces OEM's to build only Win8 machines, I can see an immediate reformat & clean Win7 install, warranty be damned.

• You DON'T want taskbars on the top of the screen
• AERO is NOT dead
• Start8 Works Just Fine, ty
• Tiles STILL wil not activate... grrrr (this issue is like trying to find the missing 18 minutes of Watergate tape)
• "Short-term Memory" has taken on a whole new connotation with most of the complaints being thrown around...
• To install Stardock Central, go to Windows Features and turn on ".NET Framework 3.5" as well as "Windows Process Activation Service"
• Getting overlapping program windows to behave nicely with each other is A LOT harder than people understand. Windows itself took 2+ years from its first release to even allow program windows to overlap... Think of Quicktime Player windows... they CANNOT play concurrently AND whichever one is topmost forces all the others to stop and wait... WAIT! That's sounds familiar somehow...
• One of the long-term objectives of Windows 8 is kill off the "weakest members of the herd" so to speak - meaning all those pesky 32-bit, single core and Core2 Duo machines that are a complete waste of time... UNFAIR!? Haven't seen any Macs for sale at Apple.com with 32-bit processors since... Sarah Palin played the flute...
• Between February 29th and May 31st - look at how far things advanced with changes to Windows 8 itself. With hundreds of millions of machines using Windows 7, millions of people evaluating Windows 8 and hundreds of thousands of programmers, designers and hackers pushing all sorts of envelopes, there HAS to be a basic set of boundaries to begin with. ALL of the usability issues (specifically having Metro windows locked to a specific size) are going to be reworked over the coming months. Hell, there aren't even ANY decent word processors or imaging apps available yet, so why bother with what Metro cannot do as of YET and focus on what Windows is getting better at doing all the time...

But... check this:  http://www.neowin.net/news/start-menu-apps-still-work-in-windows-8-release-preview  While it works on the RP, it may very well not work on the RTM.

Luckily, there's no expiration date (yet) on Windows 7.

God those shots make me hate Win 8. Like Daiwa said, those windows are fine for a phone, or tablet, but a desktop? It makes me want to vomit.

Barffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

If I can't open Quicken & my browser at the same time, Metro8 is of no use. (I'm with taltamir - I refuse to call something without windows, 'Windows'.)

Absolutely useless, disgusting and offensive.

Thx for the warning Spencer.

'Cuse me.  

I read a MS blog that seems quite proud of this edition, but you are quite right, John, Windows 8 is an abomination and a grievous insult to the desktop users of this world.

It would be alright if the Metro UI could be disabled completely so we could return to a Win 7-like desktop, but it seems MS is fully intent on forcing this mess down consumers throats regardless of the backlash it is receiving throughout the world/across the industry.  I read yesterday that MS is furiously ripping out Legacy Code to disable start button/menu replacements, despite the obvious want, need, desire to have them, to ensure that users are doomed to use Metro.  Not happening on my PC's, though.  Hopefully MS will learn from this diabolical mistake and revert back to a sensible UI for Win 9... though I won't hold my breath.

You know, I've been toying with switching to Linux for years, when Win7 sunsets this just may be what makes me go through the learning curve. Hard to believe they are being this stupid, as others others have said, this would all look great for tablets/phones, but for a desktop?? Un-freafing-believable, it's like they forgot how people who don't just browse the Internet use computers!

I really wonder about Microsoft though. It really takes A LOT of people at MS to be totally ignorant to the 'world outside' to explain this mess of an OS.

I don't know that it's a Lot of "totally ignorant" people at MS, more like MS flexing its 'dominant OS' muscles and telling the PC world what it IS going to get, like it or not.  However, to think that way would require a high level of ignorance... not to mention arrogance.

Says who?  There's still a 32 bit version of the OS and the 64 bit version uses less memory than 7.

Might be a long term objective of MS, might not be.

Also, Core 2 Duo supports 32 and 64 fine.  It's the original Core Duo that was 32 bit only.

I dont think it looks that great, even for phones, pads etc..