Why have they split Control Panel and Settings?

[DeusProto]

Metro calculator does not even work, with uac turned off....

 

 

No, it was a powerful tool in the control of windows...

 

Right. I have actually used OllyDbg to check into why that is, it does a dumb generic check for the "EnableLUA" registry key and if it has the boolean "false" value (which is set when UAC is disabled) it refuses to run. Microsoft has imposed an artificial limitation on Metro apps that make them halt and close if "EnableLUA" is false  and the user attempts to run them. 

 

There is no reason to force users to keep UAC turned on to use Metro. It should be the user's CHOICE. It is another fine example of how it is dumbed down. 

[Ian S.]

Metro calculator does not even work, with uac turned off....

 

 

No, it was a powerful tool in the control of windows...

I highly disagree with your opinion. For example, changing which icons shown on the desktop and replacing the trash icon for example opens 2+ Windows 98 style dialogs. How about folder permissions? The worst, not really part of CP, but it is still part of the folder settings which is an atrocious mess. On mac there is an add and subtract button under Get Info>>Permissions with a Read/ReadWrite/NoAccess option.

[Ian W]

There is no reason to force users to keep UAC turned on to use Metro. It should be the user's CHOICE. It is another fine example of how it is dumbed down. 

No. It is another fine example of how Microsoft has made the environment more secure.

[Dick Montage]

There is no reason to force users to keep UAC turned on to use Metro. It should be the user's CHOICE. It is another fine example of how it is dumbed down. 

 

This old gem.  UAC is a core component of Windows.  You can set it's settings REALLY low and still use your PC fine.  Turn it off and you're using the OS in an unsupervised, undocumented and unrecommended way.  As such, don't expect it to work 1

[Guest]

It's all part of the dumbing down of windows, to attract the lowest common denominator. Some people learn from their mistakes, microsoft simply have not. Worse, for them, they thought they could pull off a sleight of hand, claiming to return to and fix the desktop, all the while sneaking even more of the metro nonsense in thru the back door. Alas, their poorly executed plan has been well exposed.

 

No, microsoft, resistance to metro will NOT go away.

 

The Control Panel is for schmucks. If you don't want something dumbed down, feel free to use PowerShell for everything.

[DeusProto]

No. It is another fine example of how Microsoft has made the environment more secure.

 

Security by taking away FREE CHOICE is security through obscurity. It is NEVER a good thing to implement artificial checks that take away user choice. 

[Ian S.]

There is no reason to force users to keep UAC turned on to use Metro. It should be the user's CHOICE. It is another fine example of how it is dumbed down. 

UAC was a response to malware. Gatekeeper was Apple's response to UAC.

[Ian W]

Security by taking away FREE CHOICE is security through obscurity. It is NEVER a good thing to implement artificial checks that take away user choice. 

I don't think you know what security through obscurity means. Making UAC mandatory is the opposite of security through obscurity

[DeusProto]

UAC was a response to malware. Gatekeeper was Apple's response to UAC.

 

UAC has been defeated numerous times*. And even if it never was exploited, it should still be up to the end user to opt out of it without first party software refusing to run if it sees UAC as disabled. 

Having WWAHost.exe do a boolean check of the EnableLUA registry key and refusing to run the specified Metro app if its set to "false" is a prime example of Microsoft dumbing things down. Especially when it is also applied to Metro apps that don't even use the internet such as the Calculator app. There is no reason to impose this artificial limitation on power users who choose to edit their registry to truly disable UAC on Windows 8 and above. 

 

An example: https://code.google.com/p/google-security-research/issues/detail?id=118

[PGHammer]

Because they're still intent on injecting more Metro into Windows.

Javik - you develop for Android, correct? (That is according to no less than your avatar.) Is (or is not) your REAL issue with Windows that Android will now face the FULL Windows 10, taking away the ONE advantage Android had compared to RT (lots of apps by comparison)?

Android isn't competing with subsets of full-fledged operating systems any more (such as iOS and RT) for example. Even on Windows 10 for phones, it will have ALL the Windows ecosystem staring it in the face. In other words, the competition has gotten tougher.

If you develop using a Windows-based IDE for Android, it has not only NOT gotten harder, but your IDE choice has grown - not shrunk; Visual Studio 2013 Community and above can now be used to develop Android software. In other words, there will be MORE Android development - not less. However, the "price" you have to pay is that the rest of Windows will now compete against Android for customers. That's NOT your problem - not as a developer. That is on the stakeholders in Android - Google and the ODMs. (Just as dealing with Android was on MICROSOFT - and THEIR ODMs.)

Don't blame Microsoft over Google's misreading of Microsoft as a company.

[Dot Matrix]

Why? They clearly don't have time or resources to do this, why not just add the few modern settings (lock screen etc) into Control Panel, which is mature and tested.

Control Panel doesn't scale. It doesn't work on smartphones and tablets.

 

It's all part of the dumbing down of windows, to attract the lowest common denominator.

How is Metro "dumbed down"? It's no more dumbed down than Shell32.

 

Agreed. It is pretty much guaranteed that several options that exist in the pre-9926 Control Panel will NOT exist ever in the Metro based version.

Metro has oversized icons and window controls that annoys me as a desktop user with a mouse and keyboard. Why should I have my screen real estate wasted for the sake of mobile users?

Metro controls are not that much larger than what is currently available on Windows 7. They've been expanded slightly to be more scalable, and friendly to use with other methods of input. Tiles can be resized if they are too large for you. You have the options there. Use them.

 

And more importantly, why should I have to put up with having to edit the registry to change settings that were once changeable in the control panel? That is a problem that we are going to face ever more increasingly as Microsoft decides not to port over settings that aren't used by 95% of people to the Metro panels.

Settings app is incomplete, and still being worked on. It appears the concept of "WIP" has gone over your head. Plus, editing the registry is dangerous, and is not something that is advisable. Just what the hell are you trying to change?

 

Not really. You cannot resize Metro apps below a certain threshold. Metro apps load more slowly than well coded C++ or C or even C# .NET based apps.

Compare the load time of the Win32 calculator to the new one. Also note how only one instance can be run.

I routinely run multiple control panel applets. Can't do that with Metro.

Also why do all Metro apps use oversized window objects and buttons? Why can't we have small screen economic sized icons and text based items when on a desktop PC with a mouse? Its another example of desktop users having to sacrifice for the sake of mobile users.

Try to resize a Metro app to this small::

Try to make the Metro calculator this small:

Why the Hell do you need windows that small? Metro apps scale as they should. They work great on my laptop's 1366x768 monitor, and I'm sure they work fine on your screen. If you want the ability to run multiple instances, submit the feedback.

 

There is no reason to force users to keep UAC turned on to use Metro. It should be the user's CHOICE. It is another fine example of how it is dumbed down.

No, it shouldn't. You wouldn't have sex without a condom, would you? So why would you want an OS without security?

[Anibal P]

Because they're still intent on injecting more Metro into Windows.

 

Get over it

 

MS has made their decision, Metro = Windows = Metro, it's the way forward 

 

You don't like it? There's OS X, Linux and soon to be unsupported and insecure Win 7, OR you can get over it and deal with Windows and it's move forward 

[notchinese]

Gotta love the idiotic claims about all these things being "impossible" with Metro apps. Newsflash, Microsoft can do whatever they want with them, nothing is impossible. 

[PGHammer]

Security by taking away FREE CHOICE is security through obscurity. It is NEVER a good thing to implement artificial checks that take away user choice.

Please - the biggest reason individuals have for disabling UAC (either partially or totally) is unchanged since Vista (when UAC was first implemented in Windows) - convenience/complacency. In other words, they resent change and are asking that things go back to pre-UAC days.

However, Microsoft ALSO sees the very real possibility of being forced to toughen UAC even more - by government fiat/regulation - in this case, via no less than the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and Title II. Thanks to the United States adopting "net neutrality" as official policy, a straightforward regulation on all platforms that face the Internet would be ALL that would be needed. (In other words, it would apply to more than just Windows and desktop operating systems - it would apply to Android, iOS, etc. - if an OS platform can go online, the regulation would apply.)

What the disablers want is basically a RETURN to "security through obscurity" because working WITH UAC is too much of a strain. However, the question still hasn't been answered as to WHY it's "too much of a strain" - and it's been asked right here on Neowin since UAC on Vista showed up - and nobody has answered it yet other than the "complacency/comfort" meme.

[Jim K Global Moderator]

 

How is Metro "dumbed down"? It's no more dumbed down than Shell32.  

 

 

You already know my deep dislike of the calculator.  It is much too big for a simple calculator application.  Another example is the Video application.  

 

- You can not drag/drop videos...you have to add locations where the videos are.  

- The footprint of the player, like the calculator, is too large (example attached).  What is up with Modern UI applications and their vertical height???

- You can not double click to go in or out of full screen...you must hit the arrow.  

- If you have the player at its smallest footprint...you lose the option to increase/decrease the volume by player control.  But Closed Caption is still an option???

- You have many...many more options with the WMPlayer that you don't have with either the Video or Music app.

 

So yea, they are dumbed down.  

[farmeunit]

The problem I have is people saying it "takes time" for moving Control Panel settings to Settings.  I agree with it taking SOME time, but it's been almost two years since RTM Windows 8 and they've made hardly any progress between 8 and 8.1.  I have NOT played with Win10, yet, but if they haven't moved most of it by now, that's pretty sad.

 

It's an integral part of Windows, not just small feature.  I strictly use the Control Panel, still, just because I don't know what or won't be in the Settings.  The ONLY time I'm actually in Settings is if it's one of those for Windows Update if that pops up first in the search.  Sometimes it's Control Panel version, sometimes the Metro one.

[Dot Matrix]

The problem I have is people saying it "takes time" for moving Control Panel settings to Settings.  I agree with it taking SOME time, but it's been almost two years since RTM Windows 8 and they've made hardly any progress between 8 and 8.1.  I have NOT played with Win10, yet, but if they haven't moved most of it by now, that's pretty sad.

Then you should try it. Almost 70% of CP options have been ported over to Settings. Much feedback has been submitted to get the remaining (non deprecated) options moved over.

[HawkMan]

Please - the biggest reason individuals have for disabling UAC (either partially or totally) is unchanged since Vista (when UAC was first implemented in Windows) - convenience/complacency. In other words, they resent change and are asking that things go back to pre-UAC days.

However, Microsoft ALSO sees the very real possibility of being forced to toughen UAC even more - by government fiat/regulation - in this case, via no less than the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and Title II. Thanks to the United States adopting "net neutrality" as official policy, a straightforward regulation on all platforms that face the Internet would be ALL that would be needed. (In other words, it would apply to more than just Windows and desktop operating systems - it would apply to Android, iOS, etc. - if an OS platform can go online, the regulation would apply.)

What the disablers want is basically a RETURN to "security through obscurity" because working WITH UAC is too much of a strain. However, the question still hasn't been answered as to WHY it's "too much of a strain" - and it's been asked right here on Neowin since UAC on Vista showed up - and nobody has answered it yet other than the "complacency/comfort" meme.

 

I don't even notice I haven't set UAC to lowest settings yet anymore in windows 8.1...

You already know my deep dislike of the calculator.  It is much too big for a simple calculator application.  Another example is the Video application.  

 

- You can not drag/drop videos...you have to add locations where the videos are.  

- The footprint of the player, like the calculator, is too large (example attached).  What is up with Modern UI applications and their vertical height???

- You can not double click to go in or out of full screen...you must hit the arrow.  

- If you have the player at its smallest footprint...you lose the option to increase/decrease the volume by player control.  But Closed Caption is still an option???

- You have many...many more options with the WMPlayer that you don't have with either the Video or Music app.

 

So yea, they are dumbed down.  

 

If only windows allowed you to install and run more and other applications than the built in ones which are technically just supposed to be basic functionality apps... oh well maybe in the future MS will see reason and allow me to install more apps, like photoshop video players picture viewers calculators and all this ######... it's like they don't understand that an OS is just a "house" to put all "your" applications in and run them and your computer...

[MikeChipshop Member]

Why? They clearly don't have time or resources to do this, why not just add the few modern settings (lock screen etc) into Control Panel, which is mature and tested.

You're the reason they need to close betas down again to a select few. Please hand your preview card at the reception on the way out, we'll see you again at RTM.

[Jim K Global Moderator]

 

If only windows allowed you to install and run more and other applications than the built in ones which are technically just supposed to be basic functionality apps... oh well maybe in the future MS will see reason and allow me to install more apps, like photoshop video players picture viewers calculators and all this ######... it's like they don't understand that an OS is just a "house" to put all "your" applications in and run them and your computer...

 

Nice cop out.  The point of the post was that between two programs inherent to Windows (WMPlayer and Video) ... the WMPlayer is clearly better while the Modern UI Video application is dumbed down.  Dot asked how Modern UI applications were "dumbed down"...so I gave an example.

[Ian W]

I agree with it taking SOME time, but it's been almost two years since RTM Windows 8 and they've made hardly any progress between 8 and 8.1.

This is not true, and I believe that those aren't even all the features that Windows 8.1 added to PC Settings.

[Ian S.]

You already know my deep dislike of the calculator.  It is much too big for a simple calculator application.  Another example is the Video application.  

 

- You can not drag/drop videos...you have to add locations where the videos are.  

- The footprint of the player, like the calculator, is too large (example attached).  What is up with Modern UI applications and their vertical height???

- You can not double click to go in or out of full screen...you must hit the arrow.  

- If you have the player at its smallest footprint...you lose the option to increase/decrease the volume by player control.  But Closed Caption is still an option???

- You have many...many more options with the WMPlayer that you don't have with either the Video or Music app.

 

So yea, they are dumbed down.  

I agree they need drag and drop, eliminate the calc's splash screen and size restriction.

[EnterpriseT]

The control panel is aweful and not touch friendly. They need a viable alternative so they can have a non-desktop tablet sku that doesn't need to have a half desktop for compatibility (RT). They have already said that everything will move to "settings" and it is for the better. Hopefully it will be more extensible because any of the 3rd party (generally driver companies) or even 1st party Microsoft programs that tied into CP (Outlook) did so in a poor way aesthetically and functionally. If they can make a seamless way to access an app's settings from there in a logically grouped way, they have a real improvement.

 

I hope they can find a way to improve the interface a bit though. Having lists sortable by column similar to the current explorer method is a must. These things will come, and hopefully before launch.

[HawkMan]

Nice cop out.  The point of the post was that between two programs inherent to Windows (WMPlayer and Video) ... the WMPlayer is clearly better while the Modern UI Video application is dumbed down.  Dot asked how Modern UI applications were "dumbed down"...so I gave an example.

 

Your example was a video players designed to be easily used on small touch tablets, while they left the old WMplayer in for desktops, since 99% of desktop users install other media players anyway. you can't cherry pick applications out of the ones designed to be simple to say that "metro is simplified and dumbed down". Yes metro apps can and are dumbed down in some cases, they don't have to be, They are designed for purpose like all apps. 

[Jim K Global Moderator]

Your example was a video players designed to be easily used on small touch tablets, while they left the old WMplayer in for desktops, since 99% of desktop users install other media players anyway. you can't cherry pick applications out of the ones designed to be simple to say that "metro is simplified and dumbed down". Yes metro apps can and are dumbed down in some cases, they don't have to be, They are designed for purpose like all apps. 

 

ok then...the Modern UI calculator (which has replaced the w32 version) has a few things missing.  Not cherry picking...just stating facts.

 

If I were nitpicking than I would say that the Reader, at least on my system, the font isn't crisp (which is weird...and I've submitted Feedback)...see attached.  Also no drag/drop.

 

Also, the video app is relevant if what Dot keeps preaching comes true...where Modern UI applications will replace their W32 counterparts.  Why replace W32 programs with inferior Modern UI applications?  Modern UI, in its present form, is a step backwards.

 

However, since this thread is primarily about the Control Panel/PC Settings...I'll digress.  The PC Settings is shaping up nice...hopefully they will not dumb it down.