Your cover looks fine to me. As far as the OS itself, I'm with deathshadow. The way I feel about the whole situation is that it's one thing to introduce a new interface method for tablets and/or touchscreen devices. It's another thing entirely to also COMPLETELY REMOVE the existing interface that has proven to be effective, efficient, and is now second nature to most despite constant loud outcry from about 90% of all Windows users.
This is just not how you run a good company. I can't understand why Ballmer and the other high ranking board members would possibly try to force this on everybody. Are they trying to lose money? I am sure Bill Gates is facepalming over all of this. Unless they decide to bring back the regular start menu before the Windows 8 launch, or add it again later with a patch, I will absolutely be sticking to Windows 7 as long as possible.
If they really want to focus on this new Metro crap, they should just set it as the default interface but keep the ability to revert to the classic start menu and wait for feedback on it before doing something this drastic. This is going to bomb 10x harder than Vista if they stick to their guns about this.
It's unfortunate that they are doing this, because I have the 64-bit release preview of Windows 8 installed on a spare Pentium 4 box (a 3.06 GHz chip overclocked to a sexy 4.05 GHz) and I am extremely impressed with everything else they've done. The boot time is about 10 to 12 seconds, the memory management is very much improved, and it's simply faster all around. Very noticeable improvements to the kernel.
If it weren't for Metro being forced on me, I would switch to Windows 8 in a heartbeat and I think there are a lot of people who feel exactly the same way after giving it a test drive. Microsoft is going to feel the impact of this decision where it hurts the most; their bank account. They will need to either change their minds or completely fail with this version.
