In reference to the very first post here, my answer is that they do. It's probably the version you're using right now if you are not on a Tablet or ARM based device.
There's the Windows 8 RT version, and the general Windows 8 (Pro/Non-Pro), which is based on Intel processors. Windows 8 works just fine though. You don't have to have your monitor touch-based to make use of it, and after you realize how some of the things work, it doesn't give you really any disadvantage for not being able to make use of the touchscreen features.
The only downside for me is on the development side of things. I don't have a tablet to fool around with and test the touch features for my Windows apps. I've actually made more desktop apps than any of the Store apps, so it doesn't affect my main line of work anyways. If I choose to go that way, then it would though.
There's lots of little things in Windows 8 though, such that, as you start figuring them out, Windows 8 becomes much easier to use.
I have nothing against the "Modern Design Style" though, I actually enjoy it better or just as much as aero personally. I think it has to have something to do with my knowledge in programming. Metro should be less of a resource hog in terms of memory and CPU in the long run, but it's hard to judge accurately because of all the new stuff they've added into explorer. Even TaskManager has many new features, among a few other binaries that come with the Windows default instlalation.
Just looks simple and clean to me otherwise. Windows 7 was nice, Vista was a bit ugly, XP was the ugliest in my opinion. I'd prefer the 2000 view over XP anyday.
I've already noticed significant performance increases in the functionality of Windows 8 as a whole though, in comparison to Windows 7. Better filesystem search functionality, and a few others. I'm waiting for the day that Windows 8 source code is available to me, so I can see what the most important changes were in comparison to older build versions of NT.