I don't like it.

http://www.engadget.com/2011/09/13/windows-8-developer-preview-when-and-where-to-download/
I take it you've downloaded and played with it a bit.

I was tempted, but I'm afraid the newest machine I have is a bit too old and specific to attempt OS installs without a good list of drivers.
It's a Samsung Q1-U and actually runs Win7 pretty well once you get the Vista drivers from Samsung on board.

I think a lot of developers are upset that MS's official line so far is that all Windows 8 apps must be developed in CSS,HTML5 and Javascript. Are you kididng me?

I'm willing to try it, see how it goes and form my opinion about it then. But then, I'm only a user, not a developer.

The metro interface looks completely different from what we're used to, but that's not necessarily a bad thing. It is definitely the biggest interface change since the move from win 3.11 to win95. I only hope it's not created specifically for social media and live services, because I have very little interest in those.

... and I thought I was the only one in the world

Except it isn't true. You can use c#, c++ etc as well. You can rebuild SilverLight apps as Win8 Metro apps with small changes.

I don't know why Microsoft let this FUD on the subject go unchallenged all these months.

(inserting gratuitous joke here) :
You aren't. Maybe we should befriend one another.

Probably a good idea to avoid that hardware. I installed it on my old trusty Dell Inspiron 6000, and can't get a video driver to load at all. This is making it very hard to play with. Win 7 works great once you get the drivers from the MS update catalog.

I'm definitely not liking the start menu/metro. For a desktop experience it is too clunky. So many extra motions/clicks to do simple things that shouldn't require them. Right now if I want to run cmd.exe I'll hit the windows key, type in cmd and hit enter. Now it's move the mouse to the bottom corner, select search, then I can type in cmd. But if I want to run it as admin... too many clicks.

I'm hoping that although they haven't said it, that this build is much more aimed at tablets, and getting developers writing Metro (or tablet/phone) applications. Hopefully in a few months we'll see a full public beta that will show us how they plan to manage devices using a keyboard/mouse interface.

Why on earth would the shortcut to the metro UI be placed on the START button?

I can' wrap my head around that. How do you access everything that would normally live under the start menu with your mouse?

Yep. I installed it on my laptop yesterday. I understand that it's a developer preview, so it's going to be quite rough around the edges. That's fair. I just don't like the new metro UI.

I haven't been following this, but I know it's been the big worry- are we still able to use WPF?

Yes.

I've installed it last night on a Lenovo Edge laptop. So no touch screen.
I was lost because of the Metro UI staring at the push of the Start Button, like Bruno said, but other than that I am just loving the experience. I really like where Windows is going.

I've tried it today in VirtualBox. Wasn't all that impressed. The Metro UI is NOT a good way to use a desktop OS. I'm sure it has its merits for touch screen interfaces, but let's be honest here: how many desktop users use a touch screen interface? I really didn't like how the mouse was degraded to some sort of second grade interface. This could all change with the final release of course...

That said, I really think Microsoft has gotten it the wrong way round. They want to push Metro onto every user, and the 'old' comfortable desktop is now part of Metro. They should have left the old comfortable desktop, and integrated Metro as app of some sort. A bit like media center is also present in Windows, but its interface does not take over unless you want it to.

Desktop users have different needs from their interface than tablet/touch screen users. In that regard, Apple got it right IMO: MacOS for the desktop, iOS for the touch screen interfaces. Microsoft should learn from their success and not try to re-invent the wheel, because I doubt they will succeed. I'm pretty sure that, if they don't change the way the Metro UI works, and they stubbornly degrade the regular desktop, it will hurt their sales because most users, not in the least the power users, will most likely hate it and will probably stick with Win7.

Yes, what they should have done is follow the format of the only successful touch OS transition in history, Apple's (the iOS move). In poker terms, they should have gone "all-in."

Microsoft should have split Metro into its own product, without the legacy Windows garbage holding it down.

Then they could have continued on with the traditional Windows as Windows 8 for desktops and non-touch devices.

Legacy Windows 8 = meh, we've already got Windows 7.

Metro = something original and somewhat exciting from Microsoft for the first time since 1994.

Actually, that precisely what I am loving. I've been using Windows 8 for a couple of hours now (I am typing this from the Dev Preview) and never once I HAD to go to Metro. And, I've just been waiting for this kind of non-intrusive integration between the tabled paradigm and the PC one. I do want to use a tabledt instead of a laptop because of its size and the advantages of a touch GUI, and turn it in my main office PC by just docking (implying real monitor, mouse, keyboard). I don't want two machines and two OSs, I want one machine powerful enough and one OS that transforms as I need it.

I agree that Metro is not good for mouse and keyboard. In fact, it seems to me that's exactly the point with Windows 8. I am just loving this.

The percentage of people in this world that know how to use a desktop OS like WIndows XP (for illustrative purposes) is very small when compared to the number of people that use consumer electronics. A tablet like the iPad, is firmly in consumer electronics territory and that's why it's selling so well. Microsoft won't likely be able to achieve this kind of success with their double-sided product.

In other words, this dual functionality is very much a geek feature, however it isn't geeks that are buying up tablet computers by the millions.

It's not a stretch to envision a near future where iOS usage eclipses the (active) Windows install base.

I haven't played with it yet, but I would assume the integration is smooth enough that tablet users won't even be aware of the desktop OS. Is that not the case? If it is, then can't MS take advantage of both kinds of consumers?

They might be able to take advantage of both, but most likely it's going to be split by architecture. The people wanting the more iPad like hardware will likely end up on the ARM side, and are the ones who are less likely to step into the desktop OS side. I'm questioning why Microsoft is even bothering bringing "real" desktop Windows to ARM, when they won't be bringing a way to run x86 apps. Who is going to write ARM specific desktop apps for the consumer market, when they still need to also write x86 apps for the existing desktop market, and tablet style ARM apps for Windows, iOS and Android?

I can also see the x86 tablet side confusing the issue for many customers. They may see a friend with the bulkier x86 hardware running older apps in the desktop OS side, and not understand why the same can't run on their lighter ARM tablet.

I will applaud Microsoft for trying to be innovative here and bringing their Metro UI into the tablet space. I think it was pretty good on a phone, but question their future merger plans with it. Even the XBox is changing UI, again, to line up with Metro.

I think that's exactly the case. Of course, some paradigm changes will be there, but if they add a strong enough "cool" factor, many consumers will embrace it, I guess.

Not only that. The advanyage of having a tablet with you and turn it into a desktop with literally a click of a mouse (or less, if it shoudl recognize the dock), is there for non-geeks as well. And hardware power will be there to support this new paradigm. Even from the business pnt of view, I think MS got the right timing here, and the right technology. Indeed, mine could be a nerdy/geeky perspective. Who knows. Still, I honestly can't wait to get a touch-based device of PC-class computing power (yet, nothing crazy in that regard), and turn it into my new work machine (currently a Lanovo laptop + docking station in the office).

More on my daily usage of Win 8: I installed Office, other apps, and I am trying to actually use the new METRO as a replacement for the START BUTTON. I haven't formed an opinion on this yet, but one thing I can say is that so far it "just works". So, I am now in the middle of a choice. Do I prefer never to bother with metro when working in desktop mode, or do I actually like to pop it up to do things I once did with the start button? The fact is, just pinning programs to the taskbar a bit more than what I do with 7, makes my traditional usage of the start button almost useless... Mmmh...