Linked by snydeq on Mon 3rd Dec 2012 14:57 UTC
Windows Desktop users deserve a significant rethink of the Windows 8 gaffes and omissions for the next version of Windows, writes InfoWorld's Woody Leonhard, offering 10 must-have features for Windows 9. From a "Get out of hell" modal dialog to prevent unwanted jumping to Metro, to a Control Panel that actually controls the kinds of things you would want a Control Panel to control, it's 'due time we diehards speak out.' What's your feedback for the Windows dev team as it puts together its Windows 9 (or "Windows Blue"?) specs.
Order by: Score:
Put the desktop back
by jefro on Mon 3rd Dec 2012 17:17 UTC
jefro
Member since:
2007-04-13

I have tried to use windows 8 but find it too fricking silly and too much time to find any useful things.

They can keep it. The only real good part of windows 7 is WMC and they don't even offer it free in W8.

Reply Score: 4

RE: Put the desktop back
by helf on Mon 3rd Dec 2012 18:58 UTC in reply to "Put the desktop back"
helf Member since:
2005-07-06

The desktop is still there. WTF is with all you people bitching? Don't like the UI formally known as Metro? THEN DON'T USE IT. I haven't even installed a replacement start button app and I've barely had any interaction with it.

As far as I have seen, most whiners about it wont take the time to either learn it or just disable it. The under the hood changes in Windows 8 are fantastic and the UI changes, other than Metro (if you dislike it), are generally fantastic.

I'll get voted down because "everyone has an opinion", but anyone that voices the same complaints that have been beat to death will get up voted. This is bloody ridiculous.

Reply Score: 10

RE[2]: Put the desktop back
by WorknMan on Mon 3rd Dec 2012 19:56 UTC in reply to "RE: Put the desktop back"
WorknMan Member since:
2005-11-13

This. I agree that Metro is a big ass burger with a side of fries, but Windows 8 on the desktop is hands down better than Windows 7, and that's where I stay. Most of the time, I forget that Metro is even there. It's useful in some cases (for me, getting Facebook notifications and syncing with Google calendar), but completely optional if you don't want to use it.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Put the desktop back
by rebus on Mon 3rd Dec 2012 20:03 UTC in reply to "RE: Put the desktop back"
rebus Member since:
2009-10-25

Fully agreed. I've installed it a week ago, using it on 24" screen and it is basically improved Windows 7. Only time I see Metro is when starting an app - hit Windows key, hello Metro, start typing, hit enter, goodbye Metro. Time to adjust from Windows 7 to Windows 8 is 10 seconds.

Whatever is the real reason people are bitching about it so much, it escapes me.

Reply Score: 3

v RE[3]: Put the desktop back
by lucas_maximus on Mon 3rd Dec 2012 20:26 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Put the desktop back"
RE[4]: Put the desktop back
by Lorin on Mon 3rd Dec 2012 22:18 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Put the desktop back"
Lorin Member since:
2010-04-06

It is because they hate Microsoft for any reason they can make up.


Unlike you Shillus Maximus, who loves Microsoft to the level of a fatal attraction, does Microsoft pay you overtime?

Reply Score: 4

RE[5]: Put the desktop back
by UltraZelda64 on Tue 4th Dec 2012 05:04 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Put the desktop back"
UltraZelda64 Member since:
2006-12-05

LMAO... too bad I already posted, I would have modded that one funny. (and yet seemingly true...)

Reply Score: 2

RE[6]: Put the desktop back
by lucas_maximus on Tue 4th Dec 2012 18:45 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Put the desktop back"
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

Why is that then?

*Because I like Microsoft Products?
*Because I point out a lot of times when you guys are just either mis-informed or talking total shit.

Calling me a shill is usually done by those that don't actually have any real arguments.

I like a lot of Open source software ... quite a lot of it doesn't come from Microsoft ... most of it albeit is for building websites.

Unfortunately people like you are Lorin will hate on Microsoft no matter what they do, say.

Even if Microsoft released a piece of software that actually gave your promises of eternal life, bliss and gave you a Jesus's personal email ... I am sure you guys would find a way to complain.

Reply Score: 1

RE[5]: Put the desktop back
by lucas_maximus on Tue 4th Dec 2012 07:10 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Put the desktop back"
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

I always find it funny, when the last resort is calling someone a shill.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Put the desktop back
by Dave_K on Mon 3rd Dec 2012 21:50 UTC in reply to "RE: Put the desktop back"
Dave_K Member since:
2005-11-16

The desktop is still there. WTF is with all you people bitching? Don't like the UI formally known as Metro? THEN DON'T USE IT.


That's reasonable advice right now. It'll stop being so reasonable if/when software starts to be released that's Metro/Modern only.

My problem with Windows 8 is that it treats the desktop as a compatibility layer, with Metro crippleware the primary interface. While you can work around that right now, I think that Microsoft are making it pretty clear that they see Metro as the future of Windows, and the desktop as a niche/legacy component. I can see Metro becoming much harder to completely avoid as time goes on.

Reply Score: 9

RE[2]: Put the desktop back
by WereCatf on Mon 3rd Dec 2012 23:49 UTC in reply to "RE: Put the desktop back"
WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

The desktop is still there. WTF is with all you people bitching? Don't like the UI formally known as Metro? THEN DON'T USE IT. I haven't even installed a replacement start button app and I've barely had any interaction with it.


As I've stated in some other story recently, I installed Windows 8 on my laptop, then I proceeded to install Start8, disabled Metro Start screen, disabled all the hot corners and set my PC to boot to desktop; this way Windows 8 isn't really much different from Windows 7, it's just got a different-looking theme. I do not see any real disadvantages to Windows 8 if used that way, but then again, I see no advantages, either.

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: Put the desktop back
by UltraZelda64 on Tue 4th Dec 2012 05:10 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Put the desktop back"
UltraZelda64 Member since:
2006-12-05

It's truly pathetic when you are forced to go as far as installing third-party applications just to obtain the adequately-functioning desktop that you have come to expect from Microsoft themselves.

Reply Score: 5

RE[4]: Put the desktop back
by helf on Tue 4th Dec 2012 05:26 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Put the desktop back"
helf Member since:
2005-07-06

...aaaaaand at this point I realize I'm just feeding a troll which I constantly ask people to not do so I guess I'll stop responding. I kinda wish OSN had a "block user" option like Ars recently implemented...

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Put the desktop back
by helf on Tue 4th Dec 2012 05:30 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Put the desktop back"
helf Member since:
2005-07-06

well, you still get all the nice little under-the-hood changes and security enhancements which are a good thing. I really like the new taskmanager and changes to explorer's UI. But other than that, even without changing anything from default, it's mostly windows 7 2.0.. I am totally OK with that since Windows 7 is the first version of Windows I've actually *liked* in a long while ;)

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Put the desktop back
by UltraZelda64 on Tue 4th Dec 2012 04:57 UTC in reply to "RE: Put the desktop back"
UltraZelda64 Member since:
2006-12-05

The desktop is still there. WTF is with all you people bitching? Don't like the UI formally known as Metro? THEN DON'T USE IT. I haven't even installed a replacement start button app and I've barely had any interaction with it.

As far as I have seen, most whiners about it wont take the time to either learn it or just disable it. The under the hood changes in Windows 8 are fantastic and the UI changes, other than Metro (if you dislike it), are generally fantastic.

That's kind of hard to do when, you know... you're dumped right into the "Start screen" which--make no mistake--is a part of Metro. Want to run a desktop application without touching Metro? Tough--unless you litter your desktop and taskbar with icons, you have to deal with the Metro-ized Start menu replacement for that, too. Oh, and that annoying thing that always needlessly pops up on the right side of the screen when you simply want to access an icon in the system tray or close a window that's on the right side of the screen? Well, that's part of Metro too, and you'll need to deal with it eventually if you ever plan on rebooting or shutting down your machine without reaching for the power button or the power cable.

The simple fact is, Microsoft has hardwired Metro into Windows 8 in such a way that it is impossible to completely disable or bypass it.

Edited 2012-12-04 05:01 UTC

Reply Score: 5

RE[3]: Put the desktop back
by Nelson on Tue 4th Dec 2012 05:19 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Put the desktop back"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

Your Metro complaints are summed up as follows:

- Sometimes I need to see the Start Screen for a second or two
- Sometimes I need to see charms for a second or two.

Am I getting that right? Seriously? Stop the concern trolling.

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Put the desktop back
by UltraZelda64 on Tue 4th Dec 2012 06:11 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Put the desktop back"
UltraZelda64 Member since:
2006-12-05

My point simply was that, no matter what you do, you cannot avoid encounters with Metro. Desktop user or not, you just can't. Despite the original poster claiming, "oh, just disable it!"

And by the way, no--your second summary is way off; it's more like: "I almost never need the damn charms, yet they insist on popping up all the damn time anyway." And yes, the charms bar is a part of Metro, which you cannot avoid using just to reboot the damn machine. Even if it's only every once in a while it's just an example of my point that you cannot escape Metro. That is my point.

And as for the start menu thing... well, the traditional one only took a tiny fraction of the screen; Metro's "Start screen" literally takes up the whole damn screen (and plenty of scrolling if you've got it nicely populated with programs).

Reply Score: 3

RE[5]: Put the desktop back
by WereCatf on Tue 4th Dec 2012 06:23 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Put the desktop back"
WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

And yes, the charms bar is a part of Metro, which you cannot avoid using just to reboot the damn machine.


If you stubbornly insist on not installing a Start menu - replacement.

Reply Score: 2

RE[6]: Put the desktop back
by UltraZelda64 on Tue 4th Dec 2012 06:50 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Put the desktop back"
UltraZelda64 Member since:
2006-12-05

Just like Microsoft stubbornly insisted on and ultimately decided to leave out basic, expected functionality for desktop users? It goes both ways.

I'm not a fan of installing third-party programs for such incredibly basic things at the end of 2012 when Microsoft provided and fully-supported it natively for the last 15+ years. As crazy as it may sound, I would trust Microsoft's implementations of such basic system functionality to be much more reliable and stable than what third-party developers may provide, and I'd rather not risk losing such basic functionality because a third party program crashed or had to be forced to terminate. After all--Microsoft's original implementation has been proven with obscene amounts of both time and real-world use, so that part of Windows was relatively rock-solid at least.

I did, in fact, install a program at the beginning of my evaluation--but I uninstalled it both to see what that "Start screen" was all about and also for the above-mentioned lack of trust toward third-party solutions to such major system functionality.

Reply Score: 2

RE[7]: Put the desktop back
by lucas_maximus on Tue 4th Dec 2012 19:01 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Put the desktop back"
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

Just like Microsoft stubbornly insisted on and ultimately decided to leave out basic, expected functionality for desktop users? It goes both ways.


Sorry MacOSX doesn't have a start menu and mac users just do fine.

The start menu really isn't expected functionality. Lets ignore the start screen works exactly the same via keyboard as the old start menu just for arguments sake.

OSX does not have a "Start Menu" and manages just fine ... in fact Windows 8 I would argue is more like MacOSX than Win 7 (even with the Dock/Taskbar hybrid).

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: Put the desktop back
by Undomiel on Tue 4th Dec 2012 08:59 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Put the desktop back"
Undomiel Member since:
2007-11-23

And yes, the charms bar is a part of Metro, which you cannot avoid using just to reboot the damn machine.


Windows Key + R, shutdown /r /t 0 /f

Reply Score: 2

RE[6]: Put the desktop back
by ricegf on Tue 4th Dec 2012 13:07 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Put the desktop back"
ricegf Member since:
2007-04-25

Wait, now the command line is a FEATURE?! After 12 years of hate and ridicule by the Microsoft faithful against us Linux users? Oh, the irony of it all... ;-)

Reply Score: 3

RE[7]: Put the desktop back
by kenji on Tue 4th Dec 2012 16:41 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Put the desktop back"
kenji Member since:
2009-04-08

I needed a good chuckle. +1

Reply Score: 2

RE[7]: Put the desktop back
by Undomiel on Tue 4th Dec 2012 17:55 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Put the desktop back"
Undomiel Member since:
2007-11-23

A great feature too! Microsoft's actually done some good stuff with the cli in PowerShell. When working on Linux systems I sometimes wish I could just pipe an object into another command rather than having to fight with awk and sed to get only the data that I want into the other command.

Reply Score: 1

RE[7]: Put the desktop back
by lucas_maximus on Tue 4th Dec 2012 18:50 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Put the desktop back"
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

I am pretty sure that is in the XP cmd as well.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Put the desktop back
by helf on Tue 4th Dec 2012 05:25 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Put the desktop back"
helf Member since:
2005-07-06

Yeah, you are. And guess what? There is a big, default tile that says "Desktop". *BAM*, you are in your desktop until you wish to shutdown fully or completely log off.

Don't like it? Install on of the replacement startmenu apps that have a handy little "boot to desktop" check box in their options. Oh, WOW! Windows 7 style start menu and instant booting to desktop! Guess what? They ALSO let you shutdown/reboot/whatever your machine like usual from there!

I'll give you the side menu when you mouse over to that portion of the screen. Where the clock is. Seriously, the only thing there, in the space that activates it, is the bloody time. Man oh man, that is annoying! God, the 500 times a day I change my clock and have to see that damn side menu pop up!

If you move your taskbar elsewhere, like I do (left side of the screen), then you can accidentally activate the menu doing other things. So that complaint *is* mostly valid.

Shutting down the machine is now 3 clicks instead of just two. So they regressed back to Vista on that aspect, by default. But I sleep my laptops and my PC stays on 24/7, so that isn't a big deal to me, but I will give you that it might annoy people stuck in 1999 and constantly shutting down their machines instead of just sleeping/hibernating them.

... and I realize I probably sound like a foamy MS fanboy right now, but I'm hardly that. I just cant stand it when people come up with ridiculous criticism of something just because they don't like it. For the record, I have #! on my laptop, Win 8 on my main desktop, Haiku on a secondary box, etc.

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: Put the desktop back
by UltraZelda64 on Tue 4th Dec 2012 06:35 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Put the desktop back"
UltraZelda64 Member since:
2006-12-05

Yeah, you are. And guess what? There is a big, default tile that says "Desktop". *BAM*, you are in your desktop until you wish to shutdown fully or completely log off.

Actually, it's even simpler than that to get to the desktop. Windows Key + D = Desktop. No pointing and clicking necessary. You're welcome. ;)

But of course you're all too busy getting in hissy fits, missing my point, that you just cannot escape Metro. It's there, and it's forced upon you whether you like it or not; I don't care how minimal it is. That's it.

Don't like it? Install on of the replacement startmenu apps that have a handy little "boot to desktop" check box in their options. Oh, WOW! Windows 7 style start menu and instant booting to desktop! Guess what? They ALSO let you shutdown/reboot/whatever your machine like usual from there!

Guess what! That's basic desktop functionality that Windows users have come to expect from Microsoft to begin with, only now you have to go get a third-party application to do it! WOW! Reverse progress!

Shutting down the machine is now 3 clicks instead of just two. So they regressed back to Vista on that aspect, by default. But I sleep my laptops and my PC stays on 24/7, so that isn't a big deal to me, but I will give you that it might annoy people stuck in 1999 and constantly shutting down their machines instead of just sleeping/hibernating them.

Wow... seriously, you're counting the clicks to shut down? Just... wow. My problem is that I need to move the mouse all the way to the opposite corner of the screen most of the time because it's usually not over there to begin with; usually it's somewhere in the bottom left side of the screen. And yet, when I want absolutely nothing to do with that damn bar (100% of the time while actually using the machine; ie., not planning on shutting down or rebooting), the bar is always popping up. Annoying as hell.

Reply Score: 4

RE[5]: Put the desktop back
by lucas_maximus on Tue 4th Dec 2012 18:52 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Put the desktop back"
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

METRO IT WILL GET YOU.

Oh comon, the amount of effort you spend bitching about Metro .. it is almost like you are trolling.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Put the desktop back
by AnythingButVista on Wed 5th Dec 2012 13:58 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Put the desktop back"
AnythingButVista Member since:
2008-08-27

Oh, and that annoying thing that always needlessly pops up on the right side of the screen when you simply want to access an icon in the system tray or close a window that's on the right side of the screen? Well, that's part of Metro too, and you'll need to deal with it eventually if you ever plan on rebooting or shutting down your machine without reaching for the power button or the power cable.

Not necessarily.
1. Click once on the desktop wallpaper (not on any desktop icon).
2. Press ALT+F4.

Voilà! Windows 2000-style Shutdown dialog! Choose Shut Down, Restart, Log Off, etc and click OK or press Enter. DONE.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Put the desktop back
by phoenix on Mon 3rd Dec 2012 19:08 UTC in reply to "Put the desktop back"
phoenix Member since:
2005-07-11

If you mean Windows Media Center, it's a free download for Windows 8 until January 2013. There's an MS website you go to to get a product key for free, which can be used anytime in the future to install WMC on Win8.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Put the desktop back
by helf on Mon 3rd Dec 2012 20:05 UTC in reply to "RE: Put the desktop back"
helf Member since:
2005-07-06

oh thanks, I didn't know about this! ;)

Reply Score: 2

RE: Put the desktop back
by lucas_maximus on Mon 3rd Dec 2012 20:24 UTC in reply to "Put the desktop back"
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

This again, really.

WMC is free at the moment.

Edited 2012-12-03 20:25 UTC

Reply Score: 2

Worst Move!
by mmrezaie on Mon 3rd Dec 2012 17:39 UTC
mmrezaie
Member since:
2006-05-09

Two days ago I installed W8 on my Thinkpad. I was kinda excited about the tiles.
I saw redundancy between control-panel, apps like IE, and eventually the interface (I have a pc and mouse not a tablet).
The next thing was finding apps to launch took a lot of work that was not necessary.
Lastly and intrestingly I see lots of bad rendering gadgets. IE is extremely not usable. Even Lenovo's support page is not rendered correctly.
Linux users hear me out: This thing is much worst that gnome3 and unity. Much Much Much Worst.
Its a shame, because at-least on interface Microsoft never screwed up this badly. Win Phone 8 that I saw was actually usable but this is not.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Worst Move!
by silviucc on Mon 3rd Dec 2012 17:44 UTC in reply to "Worst Move!"
silviucc Member since:
2009-12-05

Compared to Metro, Unity is a slice of heaven. Luckily, I can ,rather effortlessly, install and run any DE I like. LXDE in my case.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Worst Move!
by lucas_maximus on Mon 3rd Dec 2012 20:29 UTC in reply to "Worst Move!"
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

Two days ago I installed W8 on my Thinkpad. I was kinda excited about the tiles.
I saw redundancy between control-panel, apps like IE, and eventually the interface (I have a pc and mouse not a tablet).


What are you talking about?

The next thing was finding apps to launch took a lot of work that was not necessary.


Apparently typing the application name is difficult, the start page has the same functionality of that of the start menu in 7 ... it is just displayed differently.

Lastly and intrestingly I see lots of bad rendering gadgets. IE is extremely not usable. Even Lenovo's support page is not rendered correctly.


Lenovo's website probably isn't built properly if it can't render in IE 10 properly.

Reply Score: 0

RE: Worst Move!
by Lorin on Mon 3rd Dec 2012 22:09 UTC in reply to "Worst Move!"
Lorin Member since:
2010-04-06

Gnome however has finally decided it was best to listen to its users and is going to return the classic elements we want back. Will Microsoft?

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Worst Move!
by Nelson on Tue 4th Dec 2012 05:20 UTC in reply to "RE: Worst Move!"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

No. Because unlike Gnome, the overwhelming majority of Windows users aren't pedantic smart asses. Microsoft really serves no master, and isn't bound by the incessant nagging of the vocal minority.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Worst Move!
by UltraZelda64 on Tue 4th Dec 2012 07:08 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Worst Move!"
UltraZelda64 Member since:
2006-12-05

Microsoft as a corporation wouldn't even exist without people to buy their software, people to buy hardware that runs their operating systems, and people to use their products. A corporation with no users or pissed off users would dissolve eventually if they didn't do something to make their customers and users happy. Hell, just look at Vista -> Win7 for the most recent example. Guess what would have happened if Microsoft didn't act fast and do something about their product and, therefore, their image?

That said, as far as I'm concerned the people of the GNOME project can go screw themselves while they're at it for all I care; they tried hard to kill off their traditional desktop for long enough that other people have stepped up and provided it since they wouldn't in the form of MATE and Cinnamon, and I have left as a result long ago. Now, they will have to compete with the rest; if their version of the desktop turns out to be the best, then maybe I'll consider it... as it is though, MATE or Cinnamon it is. Plus... the GNOME project has a lot to do if they want to regain their trust.

But I'm currently running KDE and will more likely switch to Xfce or Openbox before a GNOME (2 or 3) based desktop...

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Worst Move!
by lucas_maximus on Tue 4th Dec 2012 18:55 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Worst Move!"
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

Microsoft as a corporation wouldn't even exist without people to buy their software, people to buy hardware that runs their operating systems, and people to use their products. A corporation with no users or pissed off users would dissolve eventually if they didn't do something to make their customers and users happy. Hell, just look at Vista -> Win7 for the most recent example. Guess what would have happened if Microsoft didn't act fast and do something about their product and, therefore, their image?


Actually Vista sales were pretty decent, just not stellar like 7.

There was very little wrong with the operating system ... there were plenty of Windows version that was a resource Hogs at the time ... Windows NT 3.5, 4.0 and XP.

Try again.

Reply Score: 2

...
by Hiev on Mon 3rd Dec 2012 18:10 UTC
Hiev
Member since:
2005-09-27

All I want is virtual desktops support.

Reply Score: 2

RE: ...
by lucas_maximus on Tue 4th Dec 2012 09:51 UTC in reply to "..."
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

http://dexpot.de/

Might want to check this out.

Reply Score: 2

8 ui = blech!
by benali72 on Mon 3rd Dec 2012 18:15 UTC
benali72
Member since:
2008-05-03

What a crappy interface. For laptops & desktops, a five-year old could design a better one

It's a tribute to MS' monopoly power that its users are left standing around arguing about this stuff. Unless you have to use it at work, why would you?

Reply Score: 2

RE: 8 ui = blech!
by tidux on Mon 3rd Dec 2012 19:39 UTC in reply to "8 ui = blech!"
tidux Member since:
2011-08-13

Most Windows users are completely unaware of the existence of alternate PC operating systems.

Reply Score: 4

RE[2]: 8 ui = blech!
by AnythingButVista on Wed 5th Dec 2012 14:02 UTC in reply to "RE: 8 ui = blech!"
AnythingButVista Member since:
2008-08-27

Most Windows users are completely unaware of the existence of alternate PC operating systems.

Most Windows users would rather spend more time using their computers than hacking them.

Reply Score: 2

RE: 8 ui = blech!
by lucas_maximus on Mon 3rd Dec 2012 20:36 UTC in reply to "8 ui = blech!"
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

Actually most people in the office think it is pretty cool, and we work in an office of 100+ people and only 4 are developers.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: 8 ui = blech!
by kenji on Tue 4th Dec 2012 16:28 UTC in reply to "RE: 8 ui = blech!"
kenji Member since:
2009-04-08

Of course cool does not equal usable and/or good. Remember that there are many people in the world who think that the Kardashians are 'cool'. Those who flock to 'cool' are the fanboys and the idiots of the world.

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: 8 ui = blech!
by lucas_maximus on Tue 4th Dec 2012 17:55 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: 8 ui = blech!"
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

No maybe it doesn't, but it shows that any opinions on here are quite niche.

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: 8 ui = blech!
by kenji on Tue 4th Dec 2012 21:46 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: 8 ui = blech!"
kenji Member since:
2009-04-08

No maybe it doesn't, but it shows that any opinions on here are quite niche.

I don't disagree with that. Opinions on OSN are ... unique to put it mildly.

Reply Score: 2

Something I just thought about
by earksiinni on Mon 3rd Dec 2012 19:03 UTC
earksiinni
Member since:
2009-03-27

Will the new direction of Windows eventually push unsatisfied hardcore users who are attached to the desktop paradigm toward OS X? Apple has traditionally poached less savvy users, but now their OS seems conservative even with Lion/Mountain Lion and the trend toward iOSification.

Have any Windows users here thought about moving to OS X?

Reply Score: 4

Bobthearch Member since:
2006-01-27

I've considered MacOS 9. ;)

Reply Score: 2

RE: Something I just thought about
by helf on Mon 3rd Dec 2012 19:57 UTC in reply to "Something I just thought about"
helf Member since:
2005-07-06

Why would it? MS has no intention of completely killing off the desktop.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Something I just thought about
by phoenix on Mon 3rd Dec 2012 22:40 UTC in reply to "Something I just thought about"
phoenix Member since:
2005-07-11

Will the new direction of Windows eventually push unsatisfied hardcore users who are attached to the desktop paradigm toward OS X?

[snip]

Have any Windows users here thought about moving to OS X?


We considered it back when Vista was released. Unfortunately, all the Apple laptops at the time were way more expensive than non-Apple laptops. My wife really liked the original iBooks (the brightly coloured ones), but we couldn't affor $1000+ CDN for one.

We managed to hold off on upgrading/replacing her aging (and free) P4-based laptop until almost a year after Win7 came out, and upgraded to a $400 CDN AMD Vision-based laptop.

If there had been a MacOS X-based laptop available for under $500, we'd have jumped ship in a heartbeat!

Reply Score: 3

WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

Will the new direction of Windows eventually push unsatisfied hardcore users who are attached to the desktop paradigm toward OS X? Apple has traditionally poached less savvy users, but now their OS seems conservative even with Lion/Mountain Lion and the trend toward iOSification.

Have any Windows users here thought about moving to OS X?


I can't say I have considered that. The times I've used OSX I didn't like it and I don't see that changing. Sure, I could likely get around and do most of the stuff I do already, but I see no reason to. Also, I'm a gamer and most of my games do not work under OSX, so that's already enough of a reason not to go there in and of itself.

Reply Score: 2

lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

I used it for 4 years (2004-2008) until my iBook died, I used Jaguar through to Leopard.

For me everything was a bit off.

Reply Score: 2

moondevil Member since:
2005-07-08

Have any Windows users here thought about moving to OS X?


I toy with the idea every now and then, but in the end I always end up getting a new PC with dual boot Linux Distribution/Windows.

For technical users like myself, Apple's hardware is just overpriced, taking in account what I can get in terms of CPU and GPU power in PC land. This is what matters to my types of coding.

OpenGL support is a joke with the amount of Apple extensions it has and how long Apple keeps on delaying new versions without announcing their OpenGL roadmap support.

The Mac systems at work are already good enough to hack around when needed.

Reply Score: 3

RE: Something I just thought about
by Temcat on Tue 4th Dec 2012 20:08 UTC in reply to "Something I just thought about"
Temcat Member since:
2005-10-18

I thought about it, but with my investment in Windows software and lock-in into the business ecosystem around certain Windows software (though the latter is becoming increasingly weaker) it isn't likely to happen anytime soon.

Reply Score: 2

earksiinni Member since:
2009-03-27

MacBook Pro's run Windows 7 with aplomb.

Reply Score: 2

Temcat Member since:
2005-10-18

Yeah, I know that I can run Windows on Maс, but I meant specifically switching to OS X, and running the two OSs in parallel feels like too much hassle for a questionable benefit.

Reply Score: 2

Comment by Flatland_Spider
by Flatland_Spider on Mon 3rd Dec 2012 20:51 UTC
Flatland_Spider
Member since:
2006-09-01

Unified 32-bit and 64-bit control tools.

Right now I have a link to the 32-bit ODBC applet on my desktop, and I have a note reminding me that there is a undocumented /32 switch for mmc which I need to access the 32-bit Component Services snap-in.

I still need access to 32-bit controls for legacy 32-bit software, like Office 2010, and I'd rather not have to root around in the Windows system directory to find them or spend days searching for an undocumented switch.

Mount ext, xfs, ufs, nfs, etc. drives.

Posix compatibility.

Reply Score: 2

Wishlist
by Lion on Tue 4th Dec 2012 06:21 UTC in reply to "Comment by Flatland_Spider"
Lion Member since:
2007-03-22

The feature I really want is the ability to use screen scaling in the reverse direction to current when mirroring.

The current behaviour enlarges the smaller screen's contents for the larger display. This is better for readability, but when using a touch device and a high-res external display (surface RT and 1080p tv) I want the TV showing content at native resolution. So I want to be able to shrink the image for the smaller display. While I might not be able to read text as easily on the display I am interacting with, I would still be able to use (for example) video controls without issue.

Reply Score: 2

Comment by Yehppael
by Yehppael on Tue 4th Dec 2012 09:03 UTC
Yehppael
Member since:
2012-08-01

Last time I used Windows for more than a few minutes was XP ~5 years ago. Played around Vista a little when it came out on a laptop that had it as the default OS.

I've used Linux for a while, and I have to say, I'm laughing my ass off reading all these comments. Especially for this particular article, which completely misses the point, though, one user came close, when comparing Gnome 3 with Microsoft.

Microsoft does what Microsoft wants. Their primary motivation is Money (to emphasize the importance). I'm not saying they're some greedy evil corporation, only that they're a FOR PROFIT organization. Making money is the reason for their existence.

Gnome isn't only Gnome 3, there's also the Gnome 2 forks, Gnome Cinnamon, Unity, choices which Windows users will never have.

So, please stop comparing the two, it's insulting. Not just to the users, but to the developers who work on them in their free time.

Edited 2012-12-04 09:04 UTC

Reply Score: 1

RE: Comment by Yehppael
by lucas_maximus on Tue 4th Dec 2012 12:09 UTC in reply to "Comment by Yehppael"
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

Except that it is pretty much redhat developers that have produced a lot of Gnome.

Reply Score: 2

Contextual Scrolling
by kenji on Tue 4th Dec 2012 16:49 UTC
kenji
Member since:
2009-04-08

Please give me contextual scrolling. It drives me crazy that I can't scroll with the mouse without first activating the window (and in some applications, a sub-window must be activated to scroll - this is stupid). Hovering the mouse should be enough.

Also I want virtual desktops or workspaces (out of the box - no third party) but this is less important.

Reply Score: 3

Comment by AnythingButVista
by AnythingButVista on Wed 5th Dec 2012 14:08 UTC
AnythingButVista
Member since:
2008-08-27

That InfoWorld article misses the point. Desktop is the PAST; "Metro" is the FUTURE. The problem with Windows 8 is that you keep getting tossed around between future and past without any present!

Microsoft should've held the Windows 8 release until they could make the new environment at least as powerful as the old "desktop" environment. Everything in Windows from Notepad and the Calculator to the Registry Editor should've been ported to the new environment with no loss in functionality. Instead, Microsoft put a half-baked new environment out there that's barely usable for checking the weather and updating your Twitter. They couldn't even port Office 2013 to the new environment because "Metro" isn't powerful enough to handle Office.

Reply Score: 2