The good and bad Windows 8 thus far

Windows 8, Microsoft's latest (and greatest?) incarnation of their iconic operating system has been out for a few weeks, and I've been using the official release for as long as its been available. It's certainly a step towards the future of technology. "Technology and its innovations are the way of the future. Adapt or be left behind" is a saying I've come to find very true, especially with Windows 8. There have been points about how Microsoft and its new design suit mimic a lot of what Apple's been doing with its image and the image of their products. That's Microsoft adapting. Apple's Macs and iOS devices are so widely loved, and their ease of use is always contrasted with Microsoft products. So, Microsoft simplified their OS. Big, minimalistic tiles on a solid-color background with a little decal screams simplicity, or certainly more so than the Start menu. It's great to see Windows taking steps toward a more user-friendly experience, but there's still all that pre-Windows 8 OS to deal with.
Several apps come installed with a new copy of Windows 8. There's standard ones like Photos, Videos, and Music. They're very useful features of a proper OS (watching videos, playing music, viewing pictures), so it makes sense to have them if you disregard the desktop and everything from Windows' past. That's essentially what Windows RT does. Windows RT is a build of Windows 8 that only includes the Start screen and metro apps. No dekstop or anything old. RT is for tablets, like Microsoft's Surface. So, when the desktop and all the "legacy" programs are missing, you need standard apps, like Photos. However, I have a netbook that already had Windows Media Player and Windows Photo Viewer on it. What the heck are these new (laggier) blow-up "apps" for? And why does Chrome open in a full-screen "touch-friendly" mode?  This post on iFans.com addresses the issue this creates: fragmentation. It's confusing to users whether they should open their photos in the Photos app or the Photo Viewer (or whether they should play videos in the Videos app or the Photos app. WTF?). Pro users won't have a problem (right-click apps, uninstall) but the less tech-savvy probably will be overwhelmed.
All that said, I still see much value in the new Metro UI. The Start screen is basically a much larger Start menu. I have plenty of shortcuts to programs, file locations, and even new apps. I use the app tiles (shortcuts on the Start screen) mostly to display live info as opposed to actually clicking and opening them (my netbook's native screen isn't large enough to support apps, and when I use an external display, they lag). For example, I have 5 pinned shortcuts from the Finance app that each show one company's stock info, and I have WeatherBug installed so I can quickly glance at its tile to see the current weather conditions.

Sure, Metro is new and different, but that doesn't make it bad or useless. There's a good balance for everyone between legacy Windows and Metro Windows. Instead of disowning Microsoft, just try to find it. And c'mon, $14.99 for an upgrade isn't bad at all.