I don't think so. The desktop API and the "Modern" or "Metro" API are different. I think the desktop model is going to stay if no other reason than to accommodate  the third party business developers. I don't think MS is going to screw over the developers that badly.

I'll believe it when i see it. There are far too many legacy applications that millions of their customers use and will continue to use for decades and beyond that require the desktop UI. If the new OS won't allow them to use their programs, they will not upgrade (just like i would have thrown the w8 out the moment i discovered i can't run any of the applications i'm used to). Doing that MS would shoot themselves in the foot. There's a reason why people haven't embraced alternative OS's like Ubuntu, even tho that one's desktop is almost indistinguishable from a windows UI to an average customer - it does not run their programs.

As for the "It  makes no sense to keep two completely different UI's in one OS" -  it makes perfect sense if the same OS is meant to be used on two devices with completely different control schemes(PC's with mouse&keyboard and tablets with touchscreen).

WinRT is Replacing Win32

One of the confusing bits about WinRT is, well, everything. But after conferring with others and studying Microsoft's documentation, I can make the following general statement: WinRT (the new Windows Run Time) is not a replacement for Silverlight or .NET, it's a replacement for Win32. And that means that it's the new native runtime for Windows, and not a managed code layer that sits higher on the stack. And that means further than the layers that do sit on top of WinRT--XAML/C# (and other languages), HTML/JavaScript, and DirectX--are far less abstracted from native code than was previously thought. 

http://winsupersite.com/blog/supersite-blog-39/windows8/winrt-replacing-win32-140605

Say bye bye to win 32. Not today, not tomorrow. But it will be gone. 100% sure. Enjoy it while you can.

That would be corporate suicide on MS' part... totally!!! Too many business and home users depend on it for their day to day business and activities for Win32 to disappear.  Besides, Microsoft would lose ALL its 'legacy' partners, who have invested billions in software development... and while MS is the 'core' business, it is nothing without its partners.  I mean, who is going to shell out hundreds of dollars for an operating system that is... well just that and nothing more.  It'd be like that Meatloaf song... 'All Revved Up And No Place To Go'

While I quite like the Metro/ModernUI for phone and tablet use, I certainly wouldn't want it as the only method of interacting with my desktop PC.  I do things that require legacy applications on a multi-tasking desktop, so if MS were ever to release a ModernUI only OS I would simply refuse to purchase it... period.  And I am only one of billions with this mindset.

Simply put, MS would have so few customers who'd view the 'ModernUI' as a viable alternative, it would have no option but to revert to 'legacy' a desktop purely to remain alive.  But frankly, I don't see it ever getting to that.... because MS' partners, as a combined force, would not let it.  They have far too much to lose... as does MS.  For example, Adobe's content creation suites are far too complex a piece of software to place in an app or 6, or 10, they need a more powerful legacy desktop in which to function, and Adobe, along with scores of other 'legacy' developers, will fight MS tooth and nail to ensure their products have viable futures.

As for the 'Cloud', while it may be a viable delivery platform to some multi-billion dollar corporations, it would be an enormous undertaking to place entire content creation/editing suites in the Cloud, and many of the smaller, yet still powerful, companies would not be able to afford to mount such a mammoth operation.  For a start, the costs of servicing billions of customers worldwide with entire cloud-based software suites would be so enormous it would preclude many developers, that's if they could afford the initial setup costs to begin with...

Yes, some developers, such as Adobe, have made use of the Cloud as a distribution point, but that is more an alternative sales point to those who prefer it, rather than a complete shift in that direction.  I mean, seriously, which company could, realistically, service [say] 5 - 6 - 7 - 8 even 10 - 12 billion 'Cloud' customers, all using very powerful and complex content creation suites all at the same time?  No, companies like Adobe, Corel, Nero will still distribute their software via download or hardcopy because it is more cost effective for them... because the majority of consumers want what they pay for physically on their machines, not off in some intangible 'cloud'.

The other reason we may be saying bye, bye to legacy Win32... legacy Win64, which is faster and more responsive, is taking its place.

We are not talking a year or 2 here. It's a long term vision. But it's 100% certain because it makes perfect sense. That is how a well designed cashcow should work. Apple became very rich by it. This open system is not in MS's interest now that the desktop monopoly is caving in. 

Ms is in it for the money, not to be nice and give everyone an OS practically free of charge. So if it can't come in one way it has to be another way. Simple business sense. And the only way they can approximate the staggering profits they made by monopoly abuse, is by monopolizing the applications. 

In order to do that you need a subsystem that only runs stuff you allow it to run, and with this OS as is that's impossible. So either this subsystem goes, or MS goes. Broke.

That may be so, but Apple's greed has been its downfall.  It may not be immediately noticeable, but so many of Apple's loyal customers are jumping ship because they no longer like the locked-in feeling of Apple's 'walled garden'.  Yeah, those customers tolerated it for a time, because all their 'in' friends were doing it, but the novelty is wearing off fast and these people want more control over their purchases... to be able to shift them from one device to another without having to pay again and again... and [with Apple] again and again. 

People will only follow like sheep for so long before someone brighter in the herd says; "Hey look, something better over here."  Like I said in my previous post... at its own peril if MS takes this 'walled in' route.

And how much money will MS be making when they remove the only reason why their customers were so loyal to them all these years?

Windows is not the most widespread OS because it's good, it's so widespread because people are used to it. They know when they want to upgrade their OS, they have to reach for windows again because otherwise their legacy desktop programs that they use every day will not run. MS would have to be immensely dumb from a 'business sense' standpoint to remove the biggest reason why people would buy their product again.

Removing the support for legacy desktop equals removing their customers' need for windows to keep their software running, and people might start asking why they should pay for an OS at all when they can for free download Ubuntu which also happens to resemble classic windows desktop environment more than Metro does?

No. This would be a business suicide, and will never happen. It is quite possible that MS will indeed remove win32 and replace it with winRT under the hood, but legacy functionality will be kept intact, same way i can now open 'run program' dialog on windows 8, type in 'cmd' and get what's basically a legacy DOS command line interface, 30 years after DOS officially died.

You just don't get it. Let's say Windows 9 comes out and the OS is Metro only - no desktop. Simple. You go to that app store, install Photoshop. It occupies a tile on the Metro UI. You click on it, it opens, you use it. After you are done it goes back to the Metro UI. No desktop. Metro replaces the desktop. The resources and code the Photoshop needs are still there for Photoshop to run only you can't see them or tweak them.

That is where it is heading.

Exactly. Well said.

Microsoft will still make money. By nickel and dimeing users for stuff life solitaire or notepad. 3rd party companies will just change their apps to run with the new OS. It's that simple. Use and pay for the new stuff or fall back and use Windows 7 forever and a day. Change is a constant thing.

Yet Apple made record profits last year. I doubt Apple is going anywhere but up and the company is on solid ground.

Very good point. Top that point with the fact that every PC manufacturer has been stuffing Windows down customers throats all these years. No one knows there are alternatives.

Funny you say that when the professionals use Apple computers to do that kind of work.

Ah, kona, you snuck one in while I was writing....

A suite of programs such as Photoshop is simply too complex and large to occupy something as simple and mall as a Metro app.  So while many smaller programs may take that route, there will always be a need the power and versatility of the legacy desktop.  And Metro does not lend itself to multi-tasking and having multiple programs open.  For example, when I edit and convert video, I can have up to 5 or 6 programs open on the desktop all at once, not to mention WMP, an email client and browser as well, and they're all easily accessible via the taskbar or by clicking and bringing the desired one to the fore... not so in Metro, and people won't be willing to give that up

That nickel and dime stuff is not going to keep MS afloat and developers can only adapt as far as is possible.  A 100% Metro OS is not going to be anywhere near adequate or suitable for many developers projects, so a legacy desktop must be retained or that OS will be a non-starter.  Apps are a novel and convenient way to access things, but it will be like when widgets and the like were all the rage.  Yeah, widgets were going to take over and replace this, that and the other... but they never did.  They became an 'as well as' and people ran them alongside their regular programs, and it will be the same with apps... an 'as well as'

That may be true, that Apple's profits last year exceeded all expectations, but Apple has suffered several punches in the gut, losing Steve jobs being one of them, and it will not recover.  Believe you me, success on such a scale is finite, and Apple's dream run at the top is almost at an end because too many things are not going its way.  For example, the market disappointment with the iPhone 5 and mini iPad; the fact that people are calling IOS stale and lagging behind Android...even portable Windows devices; the fact Apple's China operations have not improved significantly enough in any fair minded person's thinking for those workers; the fact that more and more ordinary people [present and potential customers] are becoming increasingly disenchanted with Apple over its greed and incessant pursuit of legal challenges to snuff out its competition. 

That's right, Apple is THE company to hate right now, and a lot of people do. In a year or two that will reflect on its sales/profits because its market share will have dramatically shrunk. You'll see, in 2 to 3 years, Samsung will be the premier electrical/phone/tablet manufacturer across the globe, and Apple will be a mere minnow following in its wake, hoping to pick up some of the scraps. And Remember, you read it here first.

What you describe above, sounds exactly like a game console.

Netmarketshare's December numbers just came out. Have a look.

http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=10&qptimeframe=M&qpsp=167

And its appeal is so huge... like 10% - 12% of the personal computer market?  While it may be a convenience to Mac owners, it's not likely to ever threaten MS' 'top-dog' status on the market share.  Nah, people are reading more into this 'new direction' MS has embarked upon, and while some decisions may be unpopular with some users, MS know what side its bread is buttered on and will retain 'legacy' support.