[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Windows 8 UI improvements (Page 1 of 3)
Posted: 3/26/2012 9:25:20 AM EDT
Ran into this one this morning.
Windows 8 UI improvements by Ry Jones, on Flickr |
|
Quoted:
i don't know why everyone is even talking about win 8 its going to suck like every other release windows XP good, Vista bad, win 7 good win8, has to be bad, and so on. Ahhh, I see you don't remember WinXP before SP1 or SP1a or SP2 or SP3 .... that's the ONLY explanation for you thinking it was "good." |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
i don't know why everyone is even talking about win 8 its going to suck like every other release windows XP good, Vista bad, win 7 good win8, has to be bad, and so on. It's basically built on Windows 7. Vista and 7 share more in common than 7 and 8. I don't get the hate for Vista. 7 is better, yes, but Vista is much better than XP. Windows has made constant forward progress on every release for over a decade. Shoe-horning Windows releases into preconceived frameworks where every other release sucks is fucking stupid. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: i don't know why everyone is even talking about win 8 its going to suck like every other release windows XP good, Vista bad, win 7 good win8, has to be bad, and so on. Ahhh, I see you don't remember WinXP before SP1 or SP1a or SP2 or SP3 .... that's the ONLY explanation for you thinking it was "good." Most people were probably still running 2000 or 98 for a while after XP came out. I know I kept running 2000 for quite a while after XP debuted. |
|
does win8 natively support a2dp bluetooth? its astonishing to me that my stereo bluetooth moto s9hd headphones dont work in win7.
With XP at least there were manufacturer drivers that supported a2dp. with win7 no only is there no native support, but I cant find any win7 drivers for it either |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
i don't know why everyone is even talking about win 8 its going to suck like every other release windows XP good, Vista bad, win 7 good win8, has to be bad, and so on. It's basically built on Windows 7. Vista and 7 share more in common than 7 and 8. I don't get the hate for Vista. 7 is better, yes, but Vista is much better than XP. Windows has made constant forward progress on every release for over a decade. Shoe-horning Windows releases into preconceived frameworks where every other release sucks is fucking stupid. let me guess ...your a sales guy and not IT? 
|
|
From what I've seen of 8 so far, I have two main problems with it. 1) It's a tablet touchscreen interface. You can make it work with a desktop, sure, but it won't be as good as an OS designed to be a desktop OS from the beginning. 2) It looks like they're doing everything they can to hide the "moving parts" behind more and more fluff, making it harder to actually manage the system. Running this in a corporate environment is going to be interesting. We skipped Vista in our office environment, and I suspect we will skip 8 as well. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
i don't know why everyone is even talking about win 8 its going to suck like every other release windows XP good, Vista bad, win 7 good win8, has to be bad, and so on. It's basically built on Windows 7. Vista and 7 share more in common than 7 and 8. I don't get the hate for Vista. 7 is better, yes, but Vista is much better than XP. Windows has made constant forward progress on every release for over a decade. Shoe-horning Windows releases into preconceived frameworks where every other release sucks is fucking stupid. I'm sorry but, you're wholly incorrect. Vista was a Win7 beta that M$ decided to sell to people. It was an abomination not only from a coding aspect but, also from a usability viewpoint. I'd rather boil my son's liver in oil and feed it to my dogs than be forced to use that abortion of an OS. Vista is to computing what the Trabant is to driving. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
i don't know why everyone is even talking about win 8 its going to suck like every other release windows XP good, Vista bad, win 7 good win8, has to be bad, and so on. It's basically built on Windows 7. Vista and 7 share more in common than 7 and 8. I don't get the hate for Vista. 7 is better, yes, but Vista is much better than XP. Windows has made constant forward progress on every release for over a decade. Shoe-horning Windows releases into preconceived frameworks where every other release sucks is fucking stupid. I'm sorry but, you're wholly incorrect. Vista was a Win7 beta that M$ decided to sell to people. It was an abomination not only from a coding aspect but, also from a usability viewpoint. I'd rather boil my son's liver in oil and feed it to my dogs than be forced to use that abortion of an OS. Vista is to computing what the Trabant is to driving. I wasn't a "fan" of Vista, but it wasn't that bad. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: i don't know why everyone is even talking about win 8 its going to suck like every other release windows XP good, Vista bad, win 7 good win8, has to be bad, and so on. Ahhh, I see you don't remember WinXP before SP1 or SP1a or SP2 or SP3 .... that's the ONLY explanation for you thinking it was "good." Most people were probably still running 2000 or 98 for a while after XP came out. I know I kept running 2000 for quite a while after XP debuted. 2000 was a good OS. But I went to XP the day it went gold. |
|
Quoted:
I don't get the hate for Vista. 7 is better, yes, but Vista is much better than XP. Gotta disagree on this one. Vista was horrible. It came pre-installed on one of the Dell computers I used to use at my old job and even after spending many hours trying to tweak it, it still sucked. It was slow on a computer with a Intel Core Duo quad core processor, and 4 GB's of RAM. It was so bad that I went back to using Windows XP. So far Windows 7 works great for me on a several year old laptop, haven't had a blue screen of death on it, nor have I had a blue screen of death on my Windows XP desktop in more than three years. Looking forwared to see how Windows 8 will work on tablets. |
|
Quoted: From what I've seen of 8 so far, I have two main problems with it. 1) It's a tablet touchscreen interface. You can make it work with a desktop, sure, but it won't be as good as an OS designed to be a desktop OS from the beginning. 2) It looks like they're doing everything they can to hide the "moving parts" behind more and more fluff, making it harder to actually manage the system. Running this in a corporate environment is going to be interesting. We skipped Vista in our office environment, and I suspect we will skip 8 as well. Same here. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
i don't know why everyone is even talking about win 8 its going to suck like every other release windows XP good, Vista bad, win 7 good win8, has to be bad, and so on. It's basically built on Windows 7. Vista and 7 share more in common than 7 and 8. I don't get the hate for Vista. 7 is better, yes, but Vista is much better than XP. Windows has made constant forward progress on every release for over a decade. Shoe-horning Windows releases into preconceived frameworks where every other release sucks is fucking stupid. I'm sorry but, you're wholly incorrect. Vista was a Win7 beta that M$ decided to sell to people. It was an abomination not only from a coding aspect but, also from a usability viewpoint. I'd rather boil my son's liver in oil and feed it to my dogs than be forced to use that abortion of an OS. Vista is to computing what the Trabant is to driving. I wasn't a "fan" of Vista, but it wasn't that bad. Did you ever support in an enterprise environment? |
|
Quoted:
Did you ever support in an enterprise environment? No. And I don't support 7 in an enterprise environment, either. 
But I see your point. I was thinking about it as an end user (an advanced end user to be sure, but an end user accountable to no one but himself, nonetheless). |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Did you ever support in an enterprise environment? No. And I don't support 7 in an enterprise environment, either.
But I see your point. I was thinking about it as an end user (an advanced end user to be sure, but an end user accountable to no one but himself, nonetheless). I'd rather stick my wife's tit and my penis in the food processor than go back to that hell. "none of our shit works" ... "I know, nobody important decided to support this OS with any kind of coding, nobody cares about it, it's a silly fad, it will be gone soon." .... "but, but, none of our shit works!" As an end-user, I would assume you'd be MORE pissed about Vista than me, nothing fucking worked! It was crap software from jump street. I'm waiting for anyone in "the industry" to explain to me why Vista would suck the life out of hardware that Win7 screamed on. Why would I need to install a "newer" and "more powerful" OS on a machine to get it to not run like shit? Fucking M$ ... I'm going to go do a shot. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Did you ever support in an enterprise environment? No. And I don't support 7 in an enterprise environment, either.
But I see your point. I was thinking about it as an end user (an advanced end user to be sure, but an end user accountable to no one but himself, nonetheless). I'd rather stick my wife's tit and my penis in the food processor than go back to that hell. "none of our shit works" ... "I know, nobody important decided to support this OS with any kind of coding, nobody cares about it, it's a silly fad, it will be gone soon." .... "but, but, none of our shit works!" As an end-user, I would assume you'd be MORE pissed about Vista than me, nothing fucking worked! It was crap software from jump street. I'm waiting for anyone in "the industry" to explain to me why Vista would suck the life out of hardware that Win7 screamed on. Why would I need to install a "newer" and "more powerful" OS on a machine to get it to not run like shit? Fucking M$ ... I'm going to go do a shot. I really didn't have any trouble with it. Wait, I take that back. I did have an intermittent issue with open/save dialogs hanging for 30 seconds or so, but only if the machine was joined to a domain, and only after the machine had been logged in for something like an hour (no idea what was up with that). It was resolved in SP1. That's all I got, really. At this point, I was already a full time Linux user, more or less. So I'll admit that I probably missed a few opportunities for pain. When Windows 7 came out (I was an early beta tester), it actually worked well enough (even in beta!), that I made it my primary desktop OS the day it was released to the public. I still like it quite a bit. Right now, I'm giving OSX a go as my primary desktop OS (been a couple of weeks, now). I'm doing fine, thus far. Six of one, half a dozen of the other. I tend to do well with whatever OS you give me. Have Google, will find workaround.
|
|
W8 Server is rock solid. I've got a virtual W8 client running on it, and that too is rock solid. But Metro can suck my non-touchscreen balls. I don't have a fucking touchscreen on my Exchange boxes, so the interface is kindly invited to go give MS Bob a rimjob while the paperclip offers suggestions and the dog watches. |
|
Quoted:
The overreaction to Vista was beyond fucking stupid. People bitching and moaning about things they don't understand at-fucking-all. With 20 years of professional IT experience (including supporting it in an enterprise environment) I can honestly say there was no "overreaction" to the suckage that is Vista. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
The overreaction to Vista was beyond fucking stupid. People bitching and moaning about things they don't understand at-fucking-all. With 20 years of professional IT experience (including supporting it in an enterprise environment) I can honestly say there was no "overreaction" to the suckage that is Vista. I suppose I get that, but most people never got the chance to use it in that environment. The vast majority of it's users were home users, or IT guys who ran it for testing purposes. Most of the IT guys I know, never actually deployed it across the enterprise. They stuck with XP, and eventually moved to 7. And hell, my own company (outside of IT) is still using XP. 
It's times like this that I really enjoy being a Cisco voice geek. I just use whatever.
|
|
Quoted: Quoted: The overreaction to Vista was beyond fucking stupid. People bitching and moaning about things they don't understand at-fucking-all. With 20 years of professional IT experience (including supporting it in an enterprise environment) I can honestly say there was no "overreaction" to the suckage that is Vista. Not 20 years here, but yes. I think we did 20 or so deployments to test and they lasted about 2 weeks before the revert. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: i don't know why everyone is even talking about win 8 its going to suck like every other release windows XP good, Vista bad, win 7 good win8, has to be bad, and so on. It's basically built on Windows 7. Vista and 7 share more in common than 7 and 8. I don't get the hate for Vista. 7 is better, yes, but Vista is much better than XP. Windows has made constant forward progress on every release for over a decade. Shoe-horning Windows releases into preconceived frameworks where every other release sucks is fucking stupid. I'm sorry but, you're wholly incorrect. Vista was a Win7 beta that M$ decided to sell to people. It was an abomination not only from a coding aspect but, also from a usability viewpoint. I'd rather boil my son's liver in oil and feed it to my dogs than be forced to use that abortion of an OS. Vista is to computing what the Trabant is to driving. I wasn't a "fan" of Vista, but it wasn't that bad. Probably not. However, since I followed it from its early beta origins (as "Blackcomb" IIRC) and was wowed by what Vista was supposed to be, I was so put off by what it actually was that I refused to install it on any of my machines. Now, WinME was that bad. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Did you ever support in an enterprise environment? No. And I don't support 7 in an enterprise environment, either. But I see your point. I was thinking about it as an end user (an advanced end user to be sure, but an end user accountable to no one but himself, nonetheless). I'd rather stick my wife's tit and my penis in the food processor than go back to that hell. "none of our shit works" ... "I know, nobody important decided to support this OS with any kind of coding, nobody cares about it, it's a silly fad, it will be gone soon." .... "but, but, none of our shit works!" As an end-user, I would assume you'd be MORE pissed about Vista than me, nothing fucking worked! It was crap software from jump street. I'm waiting for anyone in "the industry" to explain to me why Vista would suck the life out of hardware that Win7 screamed on. Why would I need to install a "newer" and "more powerful" OS on a machine to get it to not run like shit? Fucking M$ ... I'm going to go do a shot. I have installed Win7 on old XP machines and found that performance is as good as XP and in some cases better. |
|
Quoted: W8 Server is rock solid. I've got a virtual W8 client running on it, and that too is rock solid. But Metro can suck my non-touchscreen balls. I don't have a fucking touchscreen on my Exchange boxes, so the interface is kindly invited to go give MS Bob a rimjob while the paperclip offers suggestions and the dog watches.  |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
i don't know why everyone is even talking about win 8 its going to suck like every other release windows XP good, Vista bad, win 7 good win8, has to be bad, and so on. It's basically built on Windows 7. Vista and 7 share more in common than 7 and 8. I don't get the hate for Vista. 7 is better, yes, but Vista is much better than XP. Windows has made constant forward progress on every release for over a decade. Shoe-horning Windows releases into preconceived frameworks where every other release sucks is fucking stupid. I'm sorry but, you're wholly incorrect. Vista was a Win7 beta that M$ decided to sell to people. It was an abomination not only from a coding aspect but, also from a usability viewpoint. I'd rather boil my son's liver in oil and feed it to my dogs than be forced to use that abortion of an OS. Vista is to computing what the Trabant is to driving. I wasn't a "fan" of Vista, but it wasn't that bad. WinVista sucked the life out of hardware that screams, and I mean SCREAMS with win7 on it. It was MS's way of making some cash in the interim on a product that was OK to release, but really not ready, and DEFINITELY not right for the market. Was a way to beta test what they were going to do with win7. You can see it regularly. A sucky windows comes out, and then pretty soon after....the REAL OS comes out....... XP is a product of windows 2k. Win2k is a product of WinNT Win2k sucked balls. Xp was good Windows 95 was pretty good for the time. WinME...........not ever again. I subscribe to the every other OS concept when it comes to M$. Can you really support the claim that Win ME was a step forward? Really? |
|
I haven't installed the Win8 beta yet, but I may eventually. Right now, my time is monopolized by becoming familiar with OSX. I'll get around to 8 eventually. I've been reading up on it.
Still, I've been thinking about it. Microsoft evidently made some HUGE UI changes. I'm not sure this is a good idea - even if you could convince me that the changes were ultimately for the better. Microsoft doesn't have the position it once had - it can't just dictate radical changes, and know that the world is going to follow along. Think about it, the release of Windows 95 was a seismic shift over Windows 3.11. You HAD to adapt then, lest ye die on the vine (and good on them for forcing the issue while they could, because it needed to be done). Windows 98 (especially SE) was a refinement in the UI paradigm, with major under the hood engineering improvements. Windows 2000 was Windows 95 (usability-wise) with a HUGE nod to engineering concerns. I stuck with this for a LONG time. Windows XP blended the UI sweetness that was 98, with the rock solid underbelly that was 2000. At every step along the way, IT departments were actually eager to migrate everyone to the new thing. XP adoption (in my world, which was still heavily involved with desktop support at the time) skyrocketed. And I think it's important to note that this incredible rate of adoption was on the merits of the OS itself, as well as the ease in which it could be introduced to the enterprise. Eventually however, Windows XP needed a UI refresh BAD. Microsoft milked that cow for a LONG time. It was eventually dated as hell, and it pissed me off enough, to actually start preferring Linux desktops, for my own use. When they released Vista (perhaps prematurely - it depends who you ask), it was a defensible step in the right direction. They eventually perfected it with 7, and I was a total convert. It's an excellent desktop operating system. I really like Windows 7, both from an engineering perspective, and from a usability perspective. To me, all it needs from this point on is refinement. Tweak a little here, and a little there. If you want to radically change the experience in the long term...fine - but make it a LONG TERM change. Each release from here on out, should be an incremental change towards their version of perfection. Once a year, they should "improve" the experience just a little. Seriously, what they have today, is fundamentally sound. Don't fuck with it, too much - not all at once. In this sense, I think Apple did it right. OSX was installed on all new Macs in something like 2002 (XP was released in something like 2001). Now, the current incarnation of OSX is quite a bit different than the original in a lot of important ways, but the basics are still there, from a casual user's perspective. Apple made one VERY radical change to the user experience (brute force - like MS did with 95, Vista and to a much esser extent, 7), and even began demanding that developers pick up the pace, and adapt or die. I especially like that last part. It was bold. But it was a one time seismic shift. Every iteration since then has been incremental, giving users and developers alike, time to comfortably adjust. I don't understand why Microsoft is doing what they doing, with 8. It strikes me as yet another seismic shift in thinking, even as IT departments nationwide are still struggling to upgrade to Windows 7 from XP (can you believe that!?!), for one reason or another. Incremental improvements. Learn it, love it, live it. |
|
Quoted:
Oh yes... the Frownie-Face replaces the BSOD Just one of MANY improvements! I managed to invoke a kernel panic on my OSX machine, after a botched restore. 
It's not pleasant looking. It's kind of like "We don't actually expect that this will ever happen to you, so it's going to look BSD ugly when it does, except that it won't, except for those times that it does".
|
|
Last Windows OS I had that was bad was Windows ME. XP was GTG for me even before SP1. My first build on Vista ran like a top but I had to wait a bit to leave XP as drivers were slow to surface on some of my hardware. Rock solid though on Vista Business. Win7 Pro has been smooth as glass as well. My Apple OS' have been drama free also. Really the only OS I have to repeatedly tinker with to optimize device performance is Android but I do enjoy tinkering with it. iOS on the other hand seems ready to go on anything I pick up.
|
|
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: i don't know why everyone is even talking about win 8 its going to suck like every other release windows XP good, Vista bad, win 7 good win8, has to be bad, and so on. It's basically built on Windows 7. Vista and 7 share more in common than 7 and 8. I don't get the hate for Vista. 7 is better, yes, but Vista is much better than XP. Windows has made constant forward progress on every release for over a decade. Shoe-horning Windows releases into preconceived frameworks where every other release sucks is fucking stupid. I'm sorry but, you're wholly incorrect. Vista was a Win7 beta that M$ decided to sell to people. It was an abomination not only from a coding aspect but, also from a usability viewpoint. I'd rather boil my son's liver in oil and feed it to my dogs than be forced to use that abortion of an OS. Vista is to computing what the Trabant is to driving. I wasn't a "fan" of Vista, but it wasn't that bad. WinVista sucked the life out of hardware that screams, and I mean SCREAMS with win7 on it. It was MS's way of making some cash in the interim on a product that was OK to release, but really not ready, and DEFINITELY not right for the market. Was a way to beta test what they were going to do with win7. You can see it regularly. A sucky windows comes out, and then pretty soon after....the REAL OS comes out....... XP is a product of windows 2k. Win2k is a product of WinNT Win2k sucked balls. Xp was good Windows 95 was pretty good for the time. WinME...........not ever again. I subscribe to the every other OS concept when it comes to M$. Can you really support the claim that Win ME was a step forward? Really? You know, I don't think Win2k was that bad. I thought it was good in context - what were the alternatives? WinNT4? Ancient and had no USB support. Win98?  WinME?  |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
The overreaction to Vista was beyond fucking stupid. People bitching and moaning about things they don't understand at-fucking-all. With 20 years of professional IT experience (including supporting it in an enterprise environment) I can honestly say there was no "overreaction" to the suckage that is Vista. In my experience Vista was a great OS release for enterprise environments and I’m sure Windows 8 will follow be great for exactly the same reason… It sucked so bad that no one wanted to use it. And that meant all the techs could just keep supporting the old OS that they already knew. |
|
Quoted: I haven't installed the Win8 beta yet, but I may eventually. Right now, my time is monopolized by becoming familiar with OSX. I'll get around to 8 eventually. I've been reading up on it. Still, I've been thinking about it. Microsoft evidently made some HUGE UI changes. I'm not sure this is a good idea - even if you could convince me that the changes were ultimately for the better. Microsoft doesn't have the position it once had - it can't just dictate radical changes, and know that the world is going to follow along. Think about it, the release of Windows 95 was a seismic shift over Windows 3.11. You HAD to adapt then, lest ye die on the vine (and good on them for forcing the issue while they could, because it needed to be done). Windows 98 (especially SE) was a refinement in the UI paradigm, with major under the hood engineering improvements. Windows 2000 was Windows 95 (usability-wise) with a HUGE nod to engineering concerns. I stuck with this for a LONG time. Windows XP blended the UI sweetness that was 98, with the rock solid underbelly that was 2000. At every step along the way, IT departments were actually eager to migrate everyone to the new thing. XP adoption (in my world, which was still heavily involved with desktop support at the time) skyrocketed. And I think it's important to note that this incredible rate of adoption was on the merits of the OS itself, as well as the ease in which it could be introduced to the enterprise. Eventually however, Windows XP needed a UI refresh BAD. Microsoft milked that cow for a LONG time. It was eventually dated as hell, and it pissed me off enough, to actually start preferring Linux desktops, for my own use. When they released Vista (perhaps prematurely - it depends who you ask), it was a defensible step in the right direction. They eventually perfected it with 7, and I was a total convert. It's an excellent desktop operating system. I really like Windows 7, both from an engineering perspective, and from a usability perspective. To me, all it needs from this point on is refinement. Tweak a little here, and a little there. If you want to radically change the experience in the long term...fine - but make it a LONG TERM change. Each release from here on out, should be an incremental change towards their version of perfection. Once a year, they should "improve" the experience just a little. Seriously, what they have today, is fundamentally sound. Don't fuck with it, too much - not all at once. In this sense, I think Apple did it right. OSX was installed on all new Macs in something like 2002 (XP was released in something like 2001). Now, the current incarnation of OSX is quite a bit different than the original in a lot of important ways, but the basics are still there, from a casual user's perspective. Apple made one VERY radical change to the user experience (brute force - like MS did with 95, Vista and to a much esser extent, 7), and even began demanding that developers pick up the pace, and adapt or die. I especially like that last part. It was bold. But it was a one time seismic shift. Every iteration since then has been incremental, giving users and developers alike, time to comfortably adjust. I don't understand why Microsoft is doing what they doing, with 8. It strikes me as yet another seismic shift in thinking, even as IT departments nationwide are still struggling to upgrade to Windows 7 from XP (can you believe that!?!), for one reason or another. Incremental improvements. Learn it, love it, live it. I installed the last developer preview on my conventional laptop. I HATE the new UI. I get what they're trying to do and if I had a touchscreen I'd probably like it more. But it sucks for conventional hardware. Touchscreen LCDs for desktops aren't exactly common or widespread. Why they didn't make incremental changes to the traditional windows desktop and leave it in place, AND have the new UI for touch enabled hardware, I'll never understand. I also will never understand why they took the 16 bit subsystem out of Win7x64 but I digress. I should point out that there is a limited traditional desktop environment, but it's not what we long term Windows users would like or expect. |
|
Quoted:
even as IT departments nationwide are still struggling to upgrade to Windows 7 from XP (can you believe that!?!), for one reason or another. I'm on XP right now at work. It works well but it's hard using it after having Windows 7 at home. I'll keep 7 until I need something from 8. I won't upgrade just because. |
|
Quoted:
I'm running it and it is a pain in the ass. I LOVE W7 but I'm close to trashing W8. It may be great for tablet and touchscreen users but my experience has been that it sucks for a keyboard/mouse user. I'll stick with W7 and Android. I don't think it's logical to base your entire decision and condemn a product based on a BETA piece of software... |
|
Quoted:
Eventually however, Windows XP needed a UI refresh BAD. Microsoft milked that cow for a LONG time. It was eventually dated as hell, and it pissed me off enough, to actually start preferring Linux desktops, for my own use. When they released Vista (perhaps prematurely - it depends who you ask), it was a defensible step in the right direction. They eventually perfected it with 7, and I was a total convert. It's an excellent desktop operating system.... Just out of curiosity, what made you switch from Linux? ...small incremental changes... Driver support issues? |