Linked by snydeq on Mon 3rd Dec 2012 14:57 UTC
Permalink for comment 544085
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Features
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/13/13 14:35 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/11/13 17:07 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/10/13 23:13 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/08/13 14:57 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/07/13 11:40 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/04/13 12:45 UTC
Linked by nfeske on 05/31/13 10:12 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/29/13 16:59 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/24/13 17:26 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:38 UTC
More Features »
Sponsored Links



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.