Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 27th Aug 2015 23:18 UTC
Windows This hit the news yesterday.

Microsoft released Windows 10 four weeks ago today, and now the company is providing a fresh update on its upgrade figures. 14 million machines had been upgraded to Windows 10 within 24 hours of the operating system release last month, and that figure has now risen to more than 75 million in just four weeks.

As somebody who uses Windows every day, and who upgraded to Windows 10 a few weeks before it was released, let me make a statement about all the positive Windows 10 reviews that not everyone is going to like. There are only two reasons Windows 10 is getting positive reviews. First, because it's free. This one's a given. Second, and more importantly: Windows 10 is getting positive reviews because none of the reviewers have forced themselves to use nothing but Metro applications.

Here's the cold and harsh truth as I see it: despite all the promises, Metro applications are still complete and utter garbage. Let me explain why.

Thread beginning with comment 616805
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Against the grain
by tidux on Fri 28th Aug 2015 05:04 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Against the grain"
tidux
Member since:
2011-08-13

Aside from metro and a few moderate performance tweaks, the only things differentiating Win10 from Win7 are all the horrible privacy-invading data leeches, and most of those got backported to Win7.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[4]: Against the grain
by avgalen on Fri 28th Aug 2015 10:11 in reply to "RE[3]: Against the grain"
avgalen Member since:
2010-09-23

No difference between 7 and 10 except for some moderate performance tweaks? You must be either trolling or you have only used Windows 7 the last few years. If you remove your focus from Metro to the Desktop you would have noticed lots of major and minor tweaks, conveniences and improvements. Some of these are for powerusers only, others just make life easier for everyone

* Notification Center
* Multiple Desktops
* Snapping in quadrants
* Much better multi-screen and high-dpi support
* Much better touch support
* HyperV
* TaskSwitcher (CTRL+TAB in addition to ALT+TAB)
* ISO-mounting
* Copy pasting in command-prompt (FINALLY ctrl+c, ctrl+v works)
* The ribbon in Explorer that allows you to "copy path"
* Have you even compared the Task Manager?
* Much improved file-management with Explorer
* Major improvements on behind the scene, enterprisey support for things like deployments (just do dism /? on win7 and win10)
* Winkey+X
* Much better support for lots of new technologies, from UEFI/GPT/Advanced-Format-HD, SSD, USB3 to 3D Printing
* Almost everything can now be changed, configured, installed, uninstalled, reset without requiring a reboot or even having to logout
* Much faster startups, reboots, standby, powermanagement
* and maybe most importantly, no 250 updates after an install (for now) ;)

I could honestly continue this list with 50 more things that improve my way of working with Windows and that I would miss if I ever had to work on that ancient OS that is now 4 versions and 6 years old.

I completely agree that Metro is an unfullfilled promise. Not because there is anything wrong with it technically, but simply because app-developers didn't develop apps for it. Why didn't they? Because you develop apps for users and only a small percentage of users can run Store-Apps while everyone can run Desktop-Apps. What will fix Metro is not the next version but having hundreds of millions of potential users to attract dev-love. Currently devs have to choose between "local apps" that are very powerful but people keep using old versions and "web apps" that are much harder to develop but people will always use that 1 centralized version. Store apps nicely provide the best of both worlds but just haven't caught enough attraction on any pc-platform

I also completely agree that Edge is an unfinished browser that needs a lot of fixing up. I think the rendering engine is extremely solid and they made a lot of good choices but for now it just doesn't handle well. Luckily this thing is an app so it will continuously get improved (no "next version" that is going to fix everything, but "it gets better every month and maybe in October it is mostly usable, in January it can replace IE and next year it is awesome)

Reply Parent Score: 9

RE[5]: Against the grain
by shotsman on Fri 28th Aug 2015 10:34 in reply to "RE[4]: Against the grain"
shotsman Member since:
2005-07-22

The ribbon in Explorer is a positive? Really?
All it does is take up scarce vertical resolution.

I really do beg to differ here.

Reply Parent Score: 7

RE[5]: Against the grain
by John_Smith on Fri 28th Aug 2015 10:43 in reply to "RE[4]: Against the grain"
John_Smith Member since:
2013-03-29

You Sir are extremely annoying... You wrote almost word for word what I was going to write. ;)

I would even add some other little things I've noticed since I use it and that were real blessings for me.

- On the fly resizable CMD and PS prompts. FINALLY
- Remote execution of GPO's (OK... Existed already with 8)
- Startup of application focused on the mouse position in multi-screen environment
- Huge improvement in centralized management for enterprises

The problem of Thom's analysis is that it takes as fact that W10 must be judged by the sole usage of "Metro Apps" and we are light-years from that. I think that the major focus in W10 was again to create a real desktop OS without losing its ability to work on phones/tablets.

The big error MS made with W8 was to force a phone UI over a production desktop. This was an utterly bad move that has only been barely worked around with W8.1

With W10 you REALLY have an easy way to switch between a desktop UI and a phone/tablet UI. This makes perfectly sense when put in relation to Surface3 Pro tablets.

There ARE some choices that still are awful in the interface (The worst I think is old+new control panel). But all in all W10 in an excellent OS with amazing changes under the hood. I don't think I'm too far from truth when I say that it's a progression similar to 7 from XP.

Edit: Forgot to mention support for REALLY old hardware. I tested the upgrade on an old Fujitsu Laptop (Core duo / 2GB of RAM / 32Bit Win7). It worked like a charm... All hardware, including the fingerprint sensor, works perfectly and even faster than before

Edited 2015-08-28 10:58 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[5]: Against the grain
by RobG on Fri 28th Aug 2015 14:27 in reply to "RE[4]: Against the grain"
RobG Member since:
2012-10-17

"Why didn't they? Because you develop apps for users and only a small percentage of users can run Store-Apps while everyone can run Desktop-Apps."

I disagree, the reason I, as a Windows developer with over 20 years experience, decided not to develop ModernUI/Universal Apps is twofold:

1. Sandboxing. This makes sense on a phone, but much less on a desktop. It makes it quite hard to access some O/S services and makes the wrong trade-offs in my opinion.

2. The Store. I may be going against the grain (in a different way), but I dislike the Store model. I blame Apple for introducing it, but the other big tech companies seem to have swallowed it whole.

To me its a freedom issue. I should be able to write whatever software I want, run whatever software I want, and distribute it how I want. I cannot even freaking distribute an "Universal" app unless I go through the freaking store. I don't want Microsoft (or Apple or whomever) acting as the censor deciding what is OK for me to run or view on my computer. I hate the whole walled garden idea, and think Steve Jobs should be crucified for introducing it (if he wasn't already dead).

[End Rant]

Reply Parent Score: 10

RE[5]: Against the grain
by Lennie on Sat 29th Aug 2015 15:54 in reply to "RE[4]: Against the grain"
Lennie Member since:
2007-09-22

I completely agree that Metro is an unfullfilled promise. Not because there is anything wrong with it technically, but simply because app-developers didn't develop apps for it. Why didn't they? Because you develop apps for users and only a small percentage of users can run Store-Apps while everyone can run Desktop-Apps.


I think the point is: Thom only talked about the apps Microsoft developed for Metro/Modern/whatever.

And what sucks about those apps.

If Microsoft can't even fulfill this promise on their own platform then how you can expect other developers to get it right ?

This shows there probably is a structural problem.

Reply Parent Score: 3