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 616820
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[5]: Against the grain
by John_Smith on Fri 28th Aug 2015 10:43 UTC 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[6]: Against the grain
by Lennie on Sat 29th Aug 2015 15:59 in reply to "RE[5]: Against the grain"
Lennie Member since:
2007-09-22

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


Then tell me why is the Mail app still crap ? Because they are still forcing people to use a phone interface on a desktop machine.

I'm sure there are smart engineers at Microsoft doing lots of good stuff and incremental improvements where they are needed.

But my guess is, after Windows 8 UI fuck up they just fired all the UI people.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[6]: Against the grain
by ConceptJunkie on Mon 31st Aug 2015 17:48 in reply to "RE[5]: Against the grain"
ConceptJunkie Member since:
2012-05-18

The problem isn't the phone interface on a desktop OS. It's the fact that for even the desktop interface has been ruined. Everything is afflicted with this hideous "flat" UI, on which is much harder to distinguish controls in a window and between windows.

With the exception of Windows 7, every version of Windows since 2000 has been getting uglier and uglier, but at least until Windows 7 you could switch to the functional and clean and visually appealing "classic" Windows theme. Now you can't even do that any more.

Right now, the desktop UI is less configurable than Windows 2, and about as good-looking... and let's recall that Windows 2 was limited to 16 colors.

I really feel that through the 90s and early 2000s, Microsoft has UI right. They did a good job and make clean and consistent UI for their OS. The default XP theme was ugly, but you could turn it off. But now, there are no more standards and everything has this dumb, flat, bland, colorless look to it.

You used to be able to customize a lot of stuff, the fonts and colors and sizes of different Windows elements, now the best you can do is change the color.

I guess recreating the "classic" window theme of Windows 2000 is too hard to do now.

Reply Parent Score: 1