Google| Subject | Re: Another step towards Windows |
| From | Lloyd Parsons |
| Date | 09/04/2014 14:17 (09/04/2014 07:17) |
| Message-ID | <c6r3jhF3ic8U1@mid.individual.net> |
| Client | |
| Newsgroups | comp.sys.mac.advocacy |
| Follows | Sandman |
| Followups | Sandman (2h & 6m) > Lloyd Parsons |
On 4 Sep 2014 09:34:29 GMT, Sandman wrote:
SandmanIt is really a mixed bag in many ways, but I find it elegant when I have selected which apps to use for what tasks. I tend to use the Metro apps for the things that really don't need all the features of a corresponding desktop app, so that isn't actually a problem for me and my use case.
In article <c6p36rFigeuU1@mid.individual.net>, Lloyd Parsons wrote:SandmanLloyd ParsonsSandmanLloyd ParsonsNashton
You're just blathering. Try reading what I said for comprehension.
I'm stating this from the perspective of having desktop apps and tablet apps on the same device. This is a huge advantage.
It's also a real mess.
Not at all. It is actually quite simple and elegant when you use it a Bit.
I use it daily and my personal opinion is that it's a real mess. Metro apps doesn't get access to the file system, or hasn't implemented the file system, and desktop apps doesn't implement the uniform databases for the Metro apps, like contacts, calendars and whatnot.
Mail, contacts and calendar metro apps are good enough that I use them instead of Outlook desktop, but you are correct the data for them, other than the mail itself is not available for Outlook.
Most other apps do share the data, or at least the ones I've used.
Some apps are better are metro apps, like Sketchbook, but there is only a light version of that available, to get the full version you need to use the desktop version - or an iPad. Well, more or less.If you had said most Metro apps are lite versions, I think you would be correct in that assessment. Or at least the ones I've looked at or used are.
-- Lloyd
08/28/2014-
