|
Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today. |
18th February 2013, 05:15 AM | #481 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 32,124
|
2 different interfaces which access two different sets of programs, neither of which can be accessed by the other.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
18th February 2013, 05:25 AM | #482 |
Becoming Beth
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Central Vale of Humility (USA, sort of)
Posts: 27,292
|
I'm just not suffering from this separation you're talking about. I can start up desktop apps from icons in the Metro UI. I can run more of them from my taskbar or the desktop itself while I'm there. I can get to the Metro screen from anywhere in the desktop with one click and run anything I want to there with another. I can switch easily between the two when they're both (or all) running.You're claiming a distinction where I see little or no difference from a user's perspective. |
__________________
"A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when the need for illusion is deep." "Ninety percent of the politicians give the other ten percent a bad reputation." |
|
18th February 2013, 05:43 AM | #483 |
Becoming Beth
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Central Vale of Humility (USA, sort of)
Posts: 27,292
|
You're missing the point icerat was making. It's the ability to have all those options in one device. The scenario he described is almost exactly what I was doing with my Motion tablet (XP Tablet Edition) as far back as 2004. Docking station at work. Tablet with touch screen in the field. Laptop (using keyboard cover) at meetings and at home. That was a very vertical market machine ... with vertical market pricing and last decade technology. Motion was actually building the machines as they were ordered. I've been waiting since then for the price and weight to come down and the battery time to go up. We're there now, and Win 8 is a recognition of that truth. There needed to be mainstream exposure and acceptance. It was just a geeky curiosity to most people back then. Now it is becoming what most people will expect for their mundane computing needs. I think it's great. |
__________________
"A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when the need for illusion is deep." "Ninety percent of the politicians give the other ten percent a bad reputation." |
|
18th February 2013, 10:36 AM | #484 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 4,177
|
The Windows 8 metro/modern/touch screen/mobile UI is a mess, IMO. It might work with a phone or tablet, but it does not work for the way I use my laptop.
For the mobile UI, Windows creates a grid of tiles with an icon for each and every registered executable. This includes scripts and utilities meant to be run from a command line. If you click the icon for a legacy program, it throws you into the desktop UI, which is where you stay even after you close the program. So there's no continuity for those who really do want to use the mobile UI on their desktop machine. By default, certain file types (e.g., media files) are associated with programs designed for the mobile UI. So, if you're in the desktop UI and you double click an .avi file, it will open a program that does not have the desktop menus and controls, and you're back in the mobile UI. It sounds like a disaster, right? I was reading about this and thinking, gee, should I limit my choices to the dwindling supply of Windows 7 machines when I pick out a new laptop? But ultimately I zeroed in on a machine with hardware specs that were just too good to pass up for the price, so I plunged into Windows 8. I'm glad I did, because it's not that hard to set up the OS so it works just like it did in Windows 7. Now, when I boot, I see two tiles. One is the weather, because it is kind of handy to see what the temperature is when I'm starting my day. That is my sole concession to Windows 8. The other tile leads to the legacy desktop environment, and that is where I stay. One thing they have done, that has value to me, is optimize their code so the OS is much lighter on the CPU and memory. They have also refined certain features... a more verbose file copy dialog, a better task manager, improvements to the file system that make it easier to use and manage libraries, a better file manager with integrated controls and utilities. It is gratifying to realize that somebody in that vast organization understands how I use my computer and what I care about. Windows 8 is actually a good OS, once the mobile UI is completely out of the way. And probably the mobile UI, and the way it is deployed on the desktop, will improve with successive iterations. |
18th February 2013, 11:38 AM | #485 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: sweden
Posts: 5,764
|
Why? How is it worse than say iOS or Android?
Quote:
What I don't understand is why people without touch equipment insist on using the touch apps?
Quote:
Seriously, how many people would that affect? And isn't this still better than trying to use the old windows start menu on a tablet form device? The start screen is just a start menu. Works just fine to access touch apps or desktop apps, there's nothing specifically "mobile" about it.
Quote:
Quote:
|
__________________
Benford's law of controversy - Passion is inversely proportional to the amount of real information available |
|
18th February 2013, 12:21 PM | #486 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 4,177
|
iOS and Android might be just as useless in a desktop environment, which is why their developers don't market either as a desktop OS.
I don't insist. I have purged them from my life. But I had to do that. The default Windows 8 configuration puts the touch screen UI front and center. It affects anyone who buys a laptop with Windows 8. I at least understood what was happening when I clicked an icon and ended up in the desktop UI, but I can see how many people would find it confusing and disorienting. It looks like a phone UI to me, and it certainly is not optimized for desktop users. It wasn't fixed on my new HP laptop, which I bought about 3 weeks ago. The first time I opened a media file from the file manager, it put me into an app without the standard Windows controls. I know how to deal with this, but some people would be totally baffled. I mean, seriously... I have friends who ask me questions like, "OK, how do I get these photos from the USB stick onto my computer?" For those kinds of users, getting shunted back and forth between two different UIs, with different controls and conventions, is a real problem. That works for most people. I live on an island, with no electric utility. I have an inverter and a bank of lead-acid batteries in a closet upstairs. When I'm done using my computer, I power it off and unplug it. But this is not a problem for me. I have everything set up exactly the way I want it. |
18th February 2013, 01:14 PM | #487 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: sweden
Posts: 5,764
|
Yet there's a very large market for keyboards for these devices. I know, I bought one
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
__________________
Benford's law of controversy - Passion is inversely proportional to the amount of real information available |
|
18th February 2013, 01:56 PM | #488 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 4,177
|
Here you raise an interesting point. I'm seeing these Android sticks for $50-$100 and the miniature keyboards designed to work with them. Apparently they are used for media PCs, with a limited range of functions including video, music and web browsing.
I suppose those functions are enough for more than half of all users, maybe 75 percent. I'll bet a large percentage of people who have been using PCs for years will eventually migrate to other platforms, because they are cheaper and simpler. Undoubtedly MS sees this trend, and Windows 8 is an attempt to create a UI that will keep those people on Windows. I think they have a ways to go. Mixing in legacy apps, which require the legacy interface, will confuse the very people who want the simplified UI. Meanwhile, I need a full-on desktop environment. And Windows 8 provides a good one. So, I don't really have a complaint. And I was expecting to have LOTS of complaints, and I love to bitch about MS anyway. If I'm happy, that says Windows 8 is pretty good. I do, however, see a long-term, existential problem for MS. One reason the Android sticks are so cheap is because the OS is free. |
18th February 2013, 03:23 PM | #489 |
New Blood
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 12
|
windows 8
I think i will wait on this one......more to come
|
18th February 2013, 03:33 PM | #490 |
Cowardly insulter of Buddhism
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 1,146
|
|
__________________
I can't believe that having said what I said was interpreted as having been what I said when I said it, because I said it where I said it, when I said it, and who I said it to. Only in America! |
|
19th February 2013, 05:16 AM | #491 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 32,124
|
|
19th February 2013, 06:08 AM | #492 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: sweden
Posts: 5,764
|
|
__________________
Benford's law of controversy - Passion is inversely proportional to the amount of real information available |
|
19th February 2013, 07:40 AM | #493 |
The Infinitely Prolonged
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Westchester County, NY (when not in space)
Posts: 15,612
|
A lot of this depends on user comprehension with the UI.
Most (but not all) people seem to approach Windows 8 with puzzlement, at first. Some are able to "RTFM" and get used to it. Others resort to pushing the mobile UI out of the way. And, many of those take it a step further to bring back certain desktop features that went missing. All three indicate varying levels of how the OS is problematic. Even those who "RTFM" probably wouldn't need to, if only the OS was more directly intuitive, or kept more of the legacy features from Win7. One could argue that no one really needs to "make it so that half the OS is inaccessible". However, if doing so makes it much more convenient for some people to use it, then that doesn't say much in favor of the UI design, in general, even if some people manage to get used to it without such modifications. No one really needs climate control in their cars. For the first decades of automobile history, such systems didn't even exist. It took a while for A/C to become a standard feature in most models. If a major automaker decided that A/C was outdated, because fewer people are using it due to enviornmental preservation, thus no new models came with it.... they're gonna have a tough time selling cars! Despite the dealer's attitude that no one really needs it, and most people can get used to not having it. |
__________________
WARNING: Phrases in this post may sound meaner than they were intended to be. SkeptiCamp NYC: http://www.skepticampnyc.org/ An open conference on science and skepticism, where you could be a presenter! By the way, my first name is NOT Bowerick!!!! |
|
19th February 2013, 01:39 PM | #494 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 4,177
|
I wouldn't describe the process I have followed as making half the OS inaccessible. I would describe it as minimizing the presence and visibility of a skin that is not, as far as I can tell, intrinsically necessary.
MS should have included this skin as an option if they wanted to include it at all. It's the first iteration of something that may have promise for the future, but is not yet a mature or practical interface, especially for computers without a touch screen. Forcing it on users was a major mistake. But I am happy with Windows 8 overall. I never shared the popular enthusiasm for Windows 7. I preferred XP over 7, and I preferred 2000 over XP. Now, the Windows 8 desktop UI appeals to me for the same reasons I liked Windows 2000. It is clean and thoughtfully designed. The changes are not obvious or eye-catching. They are subtle refinements that make sense and enhance the utility of the OS. And Windows 8 is significantly faster than 7. |
19th February 2013, 10:39 PM | #495 |
Becoming Beth
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Central Vale of Humility (USA, sort of)
Posts: 27,292
|
I'm not sure what you are responding to here, Wowbagger. Squeegee says; Note the highlighted phrase. In common parlance this would be recognized as meaning "have no choice", or "are compelled to", or "is a requirement", and is suggesting that this is an undesirable and unavoidable quality in the Win 8 OS. Icerat responds (correctly) that this is not true; IOW, it is not a requirement of the Win 8 OS to "make it so that half the OS is inaccessible before it works well". Having quoted this exchange you respond with; Yes. This is true. "One could argue that". Thing is, nobody has. Except for you, that is. There is a clear and intrinsic difference between "have to" and "needs to". If only there were a name for when someone pretends that somebody else has said something entirely different from what was actually said, and then argues against what they made up. |
__________________
"A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when the need for illusion is deep." "Ninety percent of the politicians give the other ten percent a bad reputation." |
|
20th February 2013, 03:08 AM | #496 |
Adelaidean
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 11,857
|
|
__________________
|
|
20th February 2013, 04:56 AM | #497 |
Creativity Murderer
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: In 2.5 million spinning tons of metal, above Epsilion Eridani III
Posts: 7,958
|
I upgraded while it was cheap. Not that bad thoughm, as long as you kill Metro.
|
__________________
Don't mind me. |
|
20th February 2013, 05:27 AM | #498 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 32,124
|
Throughout this thread your main line of argument has been that you shouldn't use the Metro interface or apps if you're running a desktop machine. Are you now saying that you should? And, if you are, doesn't that make all the reviews you've dismissed as invalid because they were using the Metro interface and apps on a desktop machine valid?
|
20th February 2013, 09:17 AM | #499 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: sweden
Posts: 5,764
|
I don't know what you're misinterpreting, but I never said any such thing.
Quote:
But I don't need to disable it. I don't need to even uninstall it, though I could. I certainly don't need to "disable" all access to it just to use Windows 8, which is what you stated. I just don't use it. |
__________________
Benford's law of controversy - Passion is inversely proportional to the amount of real information available |
|
20th February 2013, 10:36 AM | #500 |
The Infinitely Prolonged
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Westchester County, NY (when not in space)
Posts: 15,612
|
One person feels (correctly or not) that they "have to make it so that half the OS is inaccessible before it works well as a desktop OS".
Another person argues that no, they don't really "have to", at all. I was arguing that both people could be correct, at least in how they each prefer to use the operating system. But, in both cases, flaws in the design of the OS could be recognized, (as I've outlined). Is my post clear, now? I've seen the "nobody really needs..." argument enough times, that I felt it was worth reiterating. |
__________________
WARNING: Phrases in this post may sound meaner than they were intended to be. SkeptiCamp NYC: http://www.skepticampnyc.org/ An open conference on science and skepticism, where you could be a presenter! By the way, my first name is NOT Bowerick!!!! |
|
20th February 2013, 03:28 PM | #501 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 32,124
|
|
20th February 2013, 05:08 PM | #502 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: sweden
Posts: 5,764
|
Would you like a mirror so you can just self-debate?
I'll speak slowly and use small(er) words. Evaluating apps designed for a touch screen on a non-touch screen is obviously stupid. Evaluating an OS on a non-touch screen by using apps designed for touch is obviously stupid. You don't need to use these apps on Windows 8, it works just fine without them, out of the box. You also don't need to make them "inaccessible" in order for the OS to work. Non-touch apps and the non-touch desktop environment all work just fine and dandy, out of the box, virtually indistinguishable from Windows 7. Got it? |
__________________
Benford's law of controversy - Passion is inversely proportional to the amount of real information available |
|
20th February 2013, 07:16 PM | #503 |
The Infinitely Prolonged
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Westchester County, NY (when not in space)
Posts: 15,612
|
Well, except for where it IS distinguishable. And, these are not to be brushed off so lightly.
Windows 8 has:
Yes, there are a few pluses: The ribbon in the file explorer, the task bar that can expand to different monitors, etc. But, overall the UI is worse off for desktop users, compared to Win7. |
__________________
WARNING: Phrases in this post may sound meaner than they were intended to be. SkeptiCamp NYC: http://www.skepticampnyc.org/ An open conference on science and skepticism, where you could be a presenter! By the way, my first name is NOT Bowerick!!!! |
|
20th February 2013, 07:45 PM | #504 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 4,177
|
I don't agree. I'm seeing comments all over the Internet by people who find Windows 8 to be a confusing mess, and I can see why they do. With Windows 95, MS introduced a set of desktop conventions, consisting of a task bar with three window controls on the right and drop-down menus on the left, depending on the application. Every Linux distro I have tried in recent years uses the same conventions. It is an excellent design that has stood the test of time. No one will convince me that MS has suddenly hit on something that is dramatically better. All they have done is port the single-tasking interface of a smart phone to the desktop, which amounts to a giant step backward for desktop users. What is worse, they are mixing two, completely different sets of conventions in the same OS. Obviously that's going to throw a lot of people.
I really like Windows 8, now that I have it set up the way I want. I think it may be the best since Windows 2000. But I couldn't recommend it to most of my friends, unless I was available to help them figure out what is going on. |
20th February 2013, 10:55 PM | #505 |
Becoming Beth
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Central Vale of Humility (USA, sort of)
Posts: 27,292
|
I've been using Win 8 on a non-touch screen device since right after New Year's. I think the reviews were just wrong. I've been reading the same reviews as everyone else for the past year. Probably more of them than the average. I expected to encounter all sorts of irritating if not insurmountable difficulties. Imagine my surprise when I found that all the negative crap was just that. Crap. I don't expect every single aspect of a new OS to be perfectly transparent. I have yet to see one which is. Win 8 , for me at any rate, has proven to be no worse than any others and less so than most. I've come to the conclusion reading this thread and other criticisms that there is a huge "get off of my lawn" component to most of the grousing about Win 8. I'm nearly sixty. I hope I never get that cranky and set in my ways. |
__________________
"A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when the need for illusion is deep." "Ninety percent of the politicians give the other ten percent a bad reputation." |
|
20th February 2013, 11:08 PM | #506 |
Becoming Beth
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Central Vale of Humility (USA, sort of)
Posts: 27,292
|
You're not making any sense. Either they are correct or they aren't. If someone is complaining about an OS because of something they are wrong about, then they are just wrong. They think they have to do something a certain way, but they don't. They're wrong. That isn't a valid criticism of the OS. It's a mistaken one. If they choose to use an OS a certain way, and the OS allows them to do it, that isn't a flaw in the OS. It might be if they have to, but that was icerat's point. They don't have to.
Quote:
It is if your point was that no matter how well Win 8 accommodates a user it's still bad.
Quote:
Fine. Reiterate when you're not building a straw man. That has nothing to do with the exchange you were commenting on. |
__________________
"A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when the need for illusion is deep." "Ninety percent of the politicians give the other ten percent a bad reputation." |
|
21st February 2013, 03:22 AM | #507 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 32,124
|
|
21st February 2013, 09:06 AM | #508 |
The Infinitely Prolonged
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Westchester County, NY (when not in space)
Posts: 15,612
|
Something, I might add, that no one else is copying!
You bring up a good point. Almost everyone copied the Start Button/Taskbar idea. Even Apple added a "Dock" inspired by it. No one is copying Live Tiles, though. I wonder why..... Perhaps you can't be bothered to read the post you were originally responding to. Here's the point, again, spelled out a little better: Person A and B have both been using Windows for a long time. Person A is initially confounded by the new version of the OS. He reads a manual or two to learn how to use it, and doesn't modify anything much. He eventually gets used to the new UI. Person B is also confounded by the new OS. He decides to modify it in certain ways, so it is easier for him to use. Yes, Person B could have gone the route of Person A, and just got used to it. No one needs to modify the OS to make it usable. But, he decided he doesn't want to put up with the conventions of the new UI. They make little sense to him. If Windows 8 was better designed, neither situation would have to happen. If Windows 8 was more intuitive, Person A would not have to read a manual to figure it out, and get used to a new UI. Remember: Person A was already using Windows for a long time. If Windows 8 was more KVM-friendly, Person B would not be so compelled to modify the system to make it easier for them to use. Both situations reflect problems with the design of Windows 8. Yet, both approaches are "correct" in how each has chosen to address those flaws, according to their needs. Do you have any other questions? |
__________________
WARNING: Phrases in this post may sound meaner than they were intended to be. SkeptiCamp NYC: http://www.skepticampnyc.org/ An open conference on science and skepticism, where you could be a presenter! By the way, my first name is NOT Bowerick!!!! |
|
21st February 2013, 11:20 AM | #509 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: sweden
Posts: 5,764
|
|
__________________
Benford's law of controversy - Passion is inversely proportional to the amount of real information available |
|
21st February 2013, 11:59 AM | #510 |
Graduate Poster
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,765
|
...if Windows 8 had been written to Wowbagger's exact specification I would guarantee that both situations would continue to happen. If you rewrite how to do something: you are going to find people who don't get it but will use it and your will find people that don't get it and will try and fix it.
You haven't pointed out a problem with the design of Windows 8. You've pointed out a problem with the design of people. Microsoft has decided that in order to better suit the changing market it needed to change its OS. They may have made some mistakes. It might have upset some users. But they have determined they won't maintain their market share by standing still. After having read this thread the complaints about Windows 8 seem remarkably trivial. Certainly nothing here will put me off upgrading when I have the budget and need. |
21st February 2013, 12:30 PM | #511 |
The Infinitely Prolonged
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Westchester County, NY (when not in space)
Posts: 15,612
|
I don't claim to be the world's foremost expert on UI design. But, there are a few simple things I would have done, that would prevent both situations from happening:
1. I would keep the Start Button on the taskbar as an option, with all or most of the Win7-style start menu available when clicked. 2. I would have the tablet-specific full-screen interfaces available as an option over the existing OS, much like the Media Center Edition of Windows past. It would be activated on touch-capable devices by default. But, you can turn it on and off easily. 3. There would be one taskbar for all apps: Desktop and Modern UI alike. There is no technical reason why Modern UI apps can't share the taskbar with desktop items. On tablet machines, the taskbar could be set to auto-hide by default. No need to read manuals, if you already used Windows in the past. No need to do heavy modificaitons for the reasons stated in this thread. And NONE of these ideas are difficult engineering challenges, or anything like that. (I might also be inclined to ditch the "live tiles" with a widget-like system of Android, but that would be something to think about further, before I would commit to it.) I think operating systems should be designed for people. Not the other way around. There are, in fact, objective ways to assess the design of a user interface. The flaws I point out are specific to Windows 8. I fully agree with that! This isn't about Microsoft changing the OS. Microsoft can, and should change the OS for the future of computing devices. The problem is that they did it badly, this time around. That is the nature of UI design flaws: User interfaces are generally more superficial than any other components of an OS. So, any flaws with them would appear to be trivial. The complaints about Windows Me and Windows Vista went deeper, because they mostly dealt with deeper design issues: Hardware and software compatability, file performance, etc. So, take this debate within the scope it deserves. Yes, these issues are going to appear trivial. But, since they do impact how one actually uses the OS, its applications, and the workflow between them.... I think these are problems that deserve to be spoken up about. (ETA: If I wanted to be REALLY superficial, I would complain more about the amateurish art-direction the OS had taken. But, I decided there are, in fact deeper superficial things to discuss, so we'll save that gawdawfullness for another day.) |
__________________
WARNING: Phrases in this post may sound meaner than they were intended to be. SkeptiCamp NYC: http://www.skepticampnyc.org/ An open conference on science and skepticism, where you could be a presenter! By the way, my first name is NOT Bowerick!!!! |
|
21st February 2013, 12:57 PM | #512 |
Featherless biped
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Aporia
Posts: 26,431
|
Firefox has become unusable for me on Windows 8. Since starting to use this system a couple of months ago it was frequently grinding to a halt for half a minute or so with flash videos but now the blue screens have become too frequent to continue. Explorer runs like a dream though. Not happy and hope Firefox is not being shafted somehow here.
|
21st February 2013, 01:28 PM | #513 |
Graduate Poster
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,765
|
...meh. As I said: trivial.
Quote:
How many users needed to refer to this mythical "manual?"
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
But after thirteen pages you have managed to successfully convince me there isn't an issue. With all the bleating and yelling about Windows 8 I would have expected bigger issues than a few changes in workflow. You seem to be vastly underestimating how well people can pick new things up. The lack of a start button has not caused riots on the streets. |
22nd February 2013, 01:33 AM | #514 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 32,124
|
|
22nd February 2013, 05:34 AM | #515 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: sweden
Posts: 5,764
|
What's the point of having the ability to connect a printer if you're not going to use a printer?
What's the point of supporting track pads if you're using a mouse? It seems you think OS manufacturers should be writing separate software to suit all possible hardware configurations. Does that make sense to you? |
__________________
Benford's law of controversy - Passion is inversely proportional to the amount of real information available |
|
22nd February 2013, 06:09 AM | #516 |
Adelaidean
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 11,857
|
|
__________________
|
|
22nd February 2013, 07:53 AM | #517 |
The Infinitely Prolonged
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Westchester County, NY (when not in space)
Posts: 15,612
|
These are easy things to do, but they would make the OS a LOT more convenient and easier to use for a LOT more people.
When the taskbar and Start button were first added to Windows 95, they might have seemed trivial to most people. The old Program Manager was a perfectly fine way to access applications, after all. Until you realize how widely the new features were used and copied by other operating systems. Ask icerat. He's the one who kept telling me to "RTFM!" The goal for Microsoft was to develop a single operating system that would work well on multiple types of devices: Desktop machines with keyboards & mice , touch-screen tablet machines, and even TV consoles, etc. A nice goal, if you can achieve it! The problem is that they seemed to hack together a user interface that is not really optimized for any of those platforms. It is missing features mobile users would generally like to have: Notification logs and persistent clocks, for example. As well as features desktop users generally like to have: Start buttons and a single Win7-style Start Menu, etc. Tablet users have to delve into the Desktop for too many things. Desktop users have to use the full-screen tablet interface for too many things. My basic solution would make sense in achieving the actual goal they set out to do. It would NOT have even cost much more time, money or other resources to do it. The ingredients already existed in previous editions of Windows. Technically, ALL operating systems are transitional: They all move towards or establish trends in computing, that the next one has to improve upon. But, I do not even see this as a "transitional" OS in the context you imply. A well-designed OS would have features for making the OS easy and convenient to use, for any and all platforms and input devices it is expected to be used with. It is counter-productive to rip features out that were already established as easy-to-use for one or more of those platforms. Not nearly as many of them would. If you read back through this thread, you will find that almost all of my arguments have a basis in objective arguments, and do not even necessarily reflect my own subjective desires for operating systems. I will provide one example, here: I complained, earlier, that there was no visual Start button on the taskbar, anymore. However, my own laptop often has the taskbar (and thus the Start button) set to Auto-hide, to maximize my screen space. Though, I often take it out of auto-hide when giving it to other people. Why would someone who does not even keep a visual button then complain about the lack of one in the new OS?! Because I know that a LOT people need one: Some people will not know or remember to move to the corner. Not everyone is capable of moving their mouse to the corner (people with disabilities, or some multiple-monitor configurations). Not everyone has a Windows key. Some people cannot or do not use their Windows keys. Etc. These are objective reasons for keeping the option of showing a start button in the OS. (Some people think the Charms bar is too jarring or gaudy, and disable that Start button location. But, I will admit that is more in the realm of subjectivity.) It is one thing for a user accept the option of hiding it. It is quite another to say: "No, you can not have one at all!", unless they install a 3rd party utility. It is a slap in the face of those who need one for objective reasons. If you read my other arguments carefully enough, you will find that they all strive to have a basis in objectivity, like that. Before you remind me that I installed Start8 on my Win8 VM (and plan to do so with my new Ultrabook), I wanted to reiterate two points: 1. The Start8/Win7 Start Menu style is better than the Win8 Start Screen: It is NOT full screen, it has access to a lot more features and items, etc. That is the real advantage to the utility! 2. When people borrow my machines, they will probably appreciate it. I fully suspect people can and will pick up this new thing, if it continues to be forced upon them. That is not the problem. People can, and do, get used to things that are objectively bad for them: They get involved in cults. They stand by their kidnappers (Stockholm syndrome). They live in disgusting hoards. They eat bananas that are just not as sweet as previous generations. You might be AMAZED at just what things people can end up getting used to! I have no doubt that there will never be any riots in the streets because of Windows 8. But, that doesn't say very much. |
__________________
WARNING: Phrases in this post may sound meaner than they were intended to be. SkeptiCamp NYC: http://www.skepticampnyc.org/ An open conference on science and skepticism, where you could be a presenter! By the way, my first name is NOT Bowerick!!!! |
|
22nd February 2013, 09:18 AM | #518 |
Creativity Murderer
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: In 2.5 million spinning tons of metal, above Epsilion Eridani III
Posts: 7,958
|
Re: Windows 8 another Vista?
I find it interesting that "Blue" so far looks more like 7
|
__________________
Don't mind me. |
|
22nd February 2013, 09:52 AM | #519 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: sweden
Posts: 5,764
|
|
__________________
Benford's law of controversy - Passion is inversely proportional to the amount of real information available |
|
22nd February 2013, 01:04 PM | #520 |
The Infinitely Prolonged
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Westchester County, NY (when not in space)
Posts: 15,612
|
|
__________________
WARNING: Phrases in this post may sound meaner than they were intended to be. SkeptiCamp NYC: http://www.skepticampnyc.org/ An open conference on science and skepticism, where you could be a presenter! By the way, my first name is NOT Bowerick!!!! |
|
Thread Tools | |
|
|