The direction Microsoft took with Windows 8  

855 members have voted

  1. 1. Do you like the direction Microsoft took with Windows 8?

    • Yes I love it, i'll be upgrading
    • No I hate it, i'll stick with Windows 7
    • It doesn't bother me
    • I will use Windows 8 with a start menu hack program


Recommended Posts

ARM Windows tablets are 3 years too late.

There's already one vendor of ARM tablets out there who has shipped 60-80M units, who has a vibrant third-party software/hardware ecosystem, etc. Why would consumers dump that platform for ARM Windows, which has... an incomplete touch interface, nearly zero third-party software, and hardware that's likely to be less pretty AND more expensive? And why would developers invest in that platform when it has an installed base of zero units?

I absolutely do not understand why MS is totally changing the nature of Windows to catch up to this tablet market. It's like if Ford realized that some people stopped using pickup trucks for commuting and started driving Civics instead, so their response is to make the 'new F-150' a compact sedan. And if people say it's useless for real work... well, the Ford marketing folks point to the trailer hitch and say 'but you can still tow with it'.

There's a reason automakers make multiple sizes of vehicles: because different people have different needs.

Tablets, unlike netbooks, aren't going away. This is a game where it's better to be late, than never arrive at all. That iPad changed the way people go about their computing needs. I have friends that live or die by it, totally ditching their laptops. Tell me again why Microsoft should stick to a desktop only model? I asked this question before, and I'll ask it again. Name the last time a big must have app (not game) came to Windows, was developed specifically for Windows (not ported), and takes advantage of modern Windows APIs? Off hand, I get Evernote, Office, Photoshop, Maybe AutoCAD, and Paint.NET. 4 of those have killer iPad equivalents. So, if I can do my work on an iPad, have all the benefits of a portable device, why should I stick with a clunker of a desktop? Tell me again why Microsoft shouldn't change to meet the changing demands of consumers? Windows 8 gives the best of both worlds. I can sit on a desktop and still do my work, and when I need to go mobile, I have a Metro side of things to work with. Even on the desktop, some of these Metro apps blow their desktop counterparts out of the water. OneNote for example.

Paradigms rise and fall?

IBM will still sell you a mainframe that's compatible with mid-1960s code! And every few years, they update it, even though I'm sure the market for mainframes has been shrinking for decades. And, it's worth noting, IBM is still in that business, and quite profitably, whereas they dumped the newer PC business years ago.

So keyboard/mouse productivity OSes are a shrinking market. Doesn't mean they're going to die, especially when no one has figured out a better alternative for productivity work. So why can't Microsoft continue to deliver an uncompromised keyboard/mouse OS?

There is nothing that is preventing you from using Windows 8 with a keyboard and mouse. Nothing. In fact, from my own usage, it works better with the two than even Windows 7 does. But there's also the changing face of desktop technology that forces a new way of doing things. There's no denying that the mouse is no longer the only game in town, as it once was when Windows 95 was developed.

Microsoft's actions in W8 have all but signaled that the desktop's days are numbered. And it is now up to users like me to signal to Microsoft that we will not tolerate the direction in which they are headed. And that, in fact, we don't tolerate that the desktop had been relegated to this position of second-class citizen.

Then don't use them? Stick with Windows 7. Go to Apple or Linux. Develop your own OS. Plenty of choice out there.

Thou hast imbibed too much Kool-Aid.

So, if I can do my work on an iPad, have all the benefits of a portable device, why should I stick with a clunker of a desktop?
Keyword: "if". And again, I don't see Apple, the maker of the iPad, trying to shoehorn their iPad interface to their Macs. And judging from their latest round of obnoxious Mac ads, they aren't about to replace Macs with iPads. As much as I hate to say it, I think Apple is right about something after all...
Even on the desktop, some of these Metro apps blow their desktop counterparts out of the water. OneNote for example.
Keyword: "some". Some applications lend themselves to a Metro experience. How shocking that a program designed to emulate a pad of paper works so well with a UI paradigm that emulates a pad of paper! So... you got any examples beyond OneNote?
Then don't use them? Go to Apple or Linux. Develop your own OS. Plenty of choice out there.
That's not an argument. That's the equivalent of saying, "I don't like what you have to say, so shut up." What I plan to do if Microsoft doesn't change course is completely irrelevant to my opinion that Microsoft is on the wrong course.

Thou hast imbibed too much Kool-Aid.

Keyword: "if". And again, I don't see Apple, the maker of the iPad, trying to shoehorn their iPad interface to their Macs. And judging from their latest round of obnoxious Mac ads, they aren't about to replace Macs with iPads. As much as I hate to say it, I think Apple is right about something after all...

Keyword: "some". Some applications lend themselves to a Metro experience. How shocking that a program designed to emulate a pad of paper works so well with a UI paradigm that emulates a pad of paper! So... you got any examples beyond OneNote?

That's not an argument. That's the equivalent of saying, "I don't like what you have to say, so shut up." What I plan to do if Microsoft doesn't change course is completely irrelevant to my opinion that Microsoft is on the wrong course.

Macs will be in for a change soon. They'll need it to stay afloat. Their OS has been the same since before I was born.

And yes, I do. Mail, MetroTwit, Internet Explorer, SplashTop, Weather, Bing.

And, no the argument still stands. I don't like Linux, so I use Windows. If you don't like Windows, you have plenty of alternatives. Windows 7 still works. Desktop on Windows 8 still works (No one is forcing you to use Metro apps after all), Linux, Apple, etc.

Tablets, unlike netbooks, aren't going away. This is a game where it's better to be late, than never arrive at all. That iPad changed the way people go about their computing needs. I have friends that live or die by it, totally ditching their laptops. Tell me again why Microsoft should stick to a desktop only model? I asked this question before, and I'll ask it again. Name the last time a big must have app (not game) came to Windows, was developed specifically for Windows (not ported), and takes advantage of modern Windows APIs? Off hand, I get Evernote, Office, Photoshop, Maybe AutoCAD, and Paint.NET. 4 of those have killer iPad equivalents. So, if I can do my work on an iPad, have all the benefits of a portable device, why should I stick with a clunker of a desktop? Tell me again why Microsoft shouldn't change to meet the changing demands of consumers? Windows 8 gives the best of both worlds. I can sit on a desktop and still do my work, and when I need to go mobile, I have a Metro side of things to work with. Even on the desktop, some of these Metro apps blow their desktop counterparts out of the water. OneNote for example.

I have no problem with Microsoft making a tablet product. I think it's likely to be doomed because the iPad got there first, but why not try? And hey, maybe there's money to be made being in third place.

Ford will sell you a Fiesta, and they'll sell you a F-350. If fewer people want pickup trucks, they'll cut production of pickup trucks and increase production of Fiestas (which is actually quite costly, since they might have to retool a factory for hundreds of millions of dollars). But they're not going to make an F-350 that's LESS capable of truck work simply because they see fewer people buying pickup trucks for car-type purposes.

That's the fundamental problem here: there are many, many situations for which keyboard/mouse, full-fledged desktop OS are not ideal, in particular casual Internet consumption use. Now that things like iPads are available, these users are quite wisely dumping their ill-fitting keyboard/mouse PCs for tablets. Microsoft, in attempt to catch up to this trend, is throwing overboard the people whose needs are best served by keyboard/mouse OSes. Yes, there's still the desktop there, but it is absolutely obvious that it is a second-class citizen.

Macs will be in for a change soon. They'll need it to stay afloat. Their OS has been the same since before I was born.

Ummm, what about Mac OS X? Completely different codebase based on NeXTSTEP.

The classic Mac OS, for better or worse, died with OS 9.2.2. That was ten years ago.

And, no the argument still stands. I don't like Linux, so I use Windows. If you don't like Windows, you have plenty of alternatives. Windows 7 still works. Desktop on Windows 8 still works (No one is forcing you to use Metro apps after all), Linux, Apple, etc.

I feel like I am repeating myself. Yes, I know that Windows 7 is an option, and yes, it is my intention to stick with Windows 7 on all my computers except for my headless server, which will get Windows 8 because of Hyper-V and the new storage spaces thing (and since it's headless, the UI is not something that I have to worry about). But this thread is about why I am resisting Windows 8 and sticking with Windows 7. Simply stating, "You can use Windows 7," does absolutely nothing to address this discussion about my (and others') complaints against Metro and why we choose 7 over 8.
And yes, I do. Mail, MetroTwit, Internet Explorer, SplashTop, Weather, Bing.
Desktop IE: tabs are easy to access, open, and close. If I want to cross-reference stuff between a webpage and stuff in other programs, I can, because I can have multiple windows simultaneously visible on my 1080p screen. Oh, and I have the option to use a proper browser like Firefox, which I will not have on Windows 8 for ARM.

Mail: I guess nested folders are out, huh? And so much for composing a mail message in one window while I cross-reference other mail messages in another window. Well, this is an improvement over webmail. But that's not saying much.

Bing: Dude, why is there even a separate app for this? It's a search engine. Just go to the browser.

Weather on Windows 7 - Jam my mouse into the lower-right "peek" corner, note current temp, conditions, and the forecast for today and the next three days, move mouse back, continue whatever I was doing.

Weather on Metro - Stop what I'm doing and go to the start screen. And then go back to the app that I was in... which is a bit tricky without a taskbar. Whatever the case, there are definitely some clicks involved here.

I would really like people who hate Windows 8 to list down what they hate about Windows 8 in a methodical bullet form or what they miss in Windows 8 that was there in Windows 7.

Common things I have heard:

1) Boot to Metro UI: How is this a major problem? Windows 8 boots much faster than Windows 7 (technicalities aside) and while it boots into Metro UI, all you need to do is hit the "Windows" button (or, "Windows + D"?) to get into Desktop. As far as I have used the Release Preview, it hardly takes a second to switch into Desktop Mode.

2) Cannot search, this, that: Is hitting the "Windows" key, and typing in the name of the program difficult? You can try something like 'Launchy' or 'Search Everything' to search for files and apps. Google it. For me, the 'Windows -> type in the name of the app' works really well.

3) Switching between windows: Really? Isn't it the same as Windows 7? You can use the Superbar, you can use "Alt +Tab"/"Alt + Shift + Tab". What are you missing?

4) Metro UI is disgusting: You don't really have to look at for more than a few seconds... but even otherwise, I found the Weather and News Metro app really neat even on my non-touch 4 year old laptop. Metro UI isn't that bad.

5) You miss aero: As far as I have heard, the new non-Aero theme has improved performance. Either way, I am sure someone would come up with a transparent theme once Windows 8 catches on. Although I am not sure you'd want to do that. It's just something new and it takes a while to get used to. Windows 7 was hated initially by Windows XP elitists and now most of them want Windows XP to die ASAP.

...

For everyone saying that Microsoft are shoving Windows 8 down our throat... they really aren't. If you want to stick with Windows 7, you are welcome to do so. Windows 8 Desktop UI is like an optimized version of Windows 7. It's actually faster and more fluid.

  • The Task Manager is awesome. It's a mixture of the old task bar and 'msconfig'.
  • If you want to Shut Down your computer, just hit "Ctrl + Alt + Del" and see the power button at the down right side.

I cannot find a reason for someone to upgrade from Windows 7 to Windows 8 because it is in essence, the same thing. But if you're one of those who want the latest OS, Windows 8 is pretty awesome and is quite cheap, too.

  • Like 2

Please. Please, please, please. Pretty please, with a cherry on top. There are loads of threads about Windows 8 that cover this exact subject. There is no need for each and every one of us to have our own thread on the subject.

I would answer the question, but I have already done so in several of the numerous threads available.

Please. Please, please, please. Pretty please, with a cherry on top. There are loads of threads about Windows 8 that cover this exact subject. There is no need for each and every one of us to have our own thread on the subject.

I would answer the question, but I have already done so in several of the numerous threads available.

And it's funny because even after all those threads and people explaining why they dislike it we still get posts like these:

Because it's different. Many just don't want to take the time to learn something new.

I don't hate Win8, I simply don't see any logic reason to upgrade from Win 7, have there everything what I need, performance, hmm, with SSD, same as on Win 8, other Win 8 "improvements", I was use Win 7 since it was public and I don't need nothing more, Metro, not my style, until now I don't see any application for this interface, in Windows 7 Start menu I've everything in one place, I don't need run on whole 22" screen with mouse. So I will stick with Win 7, fit perfect for me, so 40$ will stay in my wallet ;)

  • Like 2

Please. Please, please, please. Pretty please, with a cherry on top. There are loads of threads about Windows 8 that cover this exact subject. There is no need for each and every one of us to have our own thread on the subject.

I would answer the question, but I have already done so in several of the numerous threads available.

My bad, I haven't gone through the entire forum. I am relatively new here. Thought I'd visit the forum and all I saw was Windows8 hate threads.

He misses the biggest flaw of Metro: it's fullscreen!

Was it on purpose because he has no arguments from which to counter it?

I don't see it as a flaw. In fact, I am quite indifferent to Metro. Why does it bother you so much when it isn't there staring at you.

I would really like people who hate Windows 8 to list down what they hate about Windows 8 in a methodical bullet form or what they miss in Windows 8 that was there in Windows 7.

Common things I have heard:

1) Boot to Metro UI: How is this a major problem? Windows 8 boots much faster than Windows 7 (technicalities aside) and while it boots into Metro UI, all you need to do is hit the "Windows" button (or, "Windows + D"?) to get into Desktop. As far as I have used the Release Preview, it hardly takes a second to switch into Desktop Mode.

2) Cannot search, this, that: Is hitting the "Windows" key, and typing in the name of the program difficult? You can try something like 'Launchy' or 'Search Everything' to search for files and apps. Google it. For me, the 'Windows -> type in the name of the app' works really well.

3) Switching between windows: Really? Isn't it the same as Windows 7? You can use the Superbar, you can use "Alt +Tab"/"Alt + Shift + Tab". What are you missing?

4) Metro UI is disgusting: You don't really have to look at for more than a few seconds... but even otherwise, I found the Weather and News Metro app really neat even on my non-touch 4 year old laptop. Metro UI isn't that bad.

5) You miss aero: As far as I have heard, the new non-Aero theme has improved performance. Either way, I am sure someone would come up with a transparent theme once Windows 8 catches on. Although I am not sure you'd want to do that. It's just something new and it takes a while to get used to. Windows 7 was hated initially by Windows XP elitists and now most of them want Windows XP to die ASAP.

...

For everyone saying that Microsoft are shoving Windows 8 down our throat... they really aren't. If you want to stick with Windows 7, you are welcome to do so. Windows 8 Desktop UI is like an optimized version of Windows 7. It's actually faster and more fluid.

  • The Task Manager is awesome. It's a mixture of the old task bar and 'msconfig'.
  • If you want to Shut Down your computer, just hit "Ctrl + Alt + Del" and see the power button at the down right side.

I cannot find a reason for someone to upgrade from Windows 7 to Windows 8 because it is in essence, the same thing. But if you're one of those who want the latest OS, Windows 8 is pretty awesome and is quite cheap, too.

I do not hate Windows 8. I just cannot stand the idea of the metro UI on my 30" monitors.

1. I have an SSD, I do not need Windows to boot up any faster than already 5 seconds. I do not need an extra step in the morning just to get to my desktop.

2. Sometimes I need to look at an email or a webpage whenever I need to use the search box in the start menu. I cannot do that with the start screen.

3. A few seconds here, a few seconds there, a few seconds in the morning to switch to Desktop. All of these add up and end in wasted time. The UI is not that good IMO on desktops with multiple 30" displays.

4. You cannot compare this to going from XP -> Vista/7. You can pretty much do the exact same procedure (besides the Control Panel layout and the stuff behind the scenes) in XP, Vista, 7. To launch programs click Start - All Programs - ... Getting 7 and demanding XP does not make any sense. They are similar enough to where the general user will not notice a change in their workflow. Windows 8 is understandable. I find it very hard to do my work with the Start Screen constantly being thrown in my face. And no I do not want dozens and dozens of stuff pinned to my taskbar.I use A LOT of programs, and they all will not fit on my taskbar, so I constantly need to go to the start menu to launch stuff. It breaks my workflow by not only taking too long with the unorganized Start Screen (and no I do not have time to organize it myself, Windows 8 should do that instead of populating hundreds of tiles with no folder structure. I miss the start menu where it automatically organizes everything that I install). To be constantly thrown into two separate UIs irritates me very much.

For everyone saying that Microsoft are shoving Windows 8 down our throat... they really aren't. If you want to stick with Windows 7, you are welcome to do so

What if somebody's computer breaks next year and they are not so technical but hate being forced into Windows 8? Will Windows 7 be available as a downgrade forever? Windows 9, 10, 11, ... will eventually do away with the "destop" mode. So we are eventually forced into the Windows 8 style of doing things.

If you want to Shut Down your computer, just hit "Ctrl + Alt + Del" and see the power button at the down right side.

The average user hates keyboard shortcuts. I have come across this numerous times when I mention a keyboard shortcut and they ask if they can do it with the mouse.

  • Like 3

- The Metro UI is a fail for a desktop user

- mouse unfriendly, unclearly, search results unacceptable

- The new desktop theme looks ugly

- The color scheme is awful

- I don't become the choice to setup my system individual

- Microsoft forces me to use some thing because they want set a new trend? If Microsoft can't build a individual system, not with me!

Please don't forget that not every body is a fan to operate with shortcuts.

  • Like 1

I don't hate Win8, I simply don't see any logic reason to upgrade from Win 7, have there everything what I need, performance, hmm, with SSD, same as on Win 8, other Win 8 "improvements", I was use Win 7 since it was public and I don't need nothing more, Metro, not my style, until now I don't see any application for this interface, in Windows 7 Start menu I've everything in one place, I don't need run on whole 22" screen with mouse. So I will stick with Win 7, fit perfect for me, so 40$ will stay in my wallet ;)

That, I agree with. Addressed that at the end of my post in the original post.

My bad, I haven't gone through the entire forum. I am relatively new here. Thought I'd visit the forum and all I saw was Windows8 hate threads.

Do You Like or Hate Windows 8?

Windows 8 - Intuitive or Not?

Isn't Windows 8 the Start of Something Great?

Benefits of Windows 8?

Four threads from the first 2 pages of the Microsoft Beta sub-forum. With the exception of the last choice, I've made my points in each of the above threads. Check them out, as you'll see a lot of the same arguments in there that will appear in here, and they also contain posts from people that approve of Windows 8 (Dot Matrix, for example) and those that don't like it (myself, for example).

I do not hate Windows 8. I just cannot stand the idea of the metro UI on my 30" monitors.

All other reasons, opinions and self-centered asshatteries aside, RTM leak I've now bothered to check out has proven one thing - Windows 8 lacks polish at every little corner of it.

I am not pro Windows 8, I just wanted to hear a proper counter argument and you guys provide it. Thanks. I agree, Windows 8 is not an essential upgrade. I just love having the latest things, heh.

@ OP - > so just to be clear, looking at your massive counter response to your own question, it wouldn't be a reach to guess you already answered your own question, with an answer you knew all along.... so posting a reply would be pointless.....oh wait.....what have I done.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Posts

    • It STILL has horrid theme support. Hard to look at for me. The white is too bright, and the black too dark. I'm using classic outlook for the Dark Grey theme. It's just right for me.
    • inb4 someone leaves the usual "what an unfortunate name" comment
    • Cuktech 10 Ultra charger review: big display, four ports, 110W total power by Taras Buria Cuktech recently announced a couple of Ultra-branded chargers, including a desktop 300W charger, which I reviewed a few weeks ago. For those who do need that much (or who do not want to spend that much on a charger), Cuktech also offers the 10 Ultra, a traditional wall charger with similar features. Four ports, a big display, and up to 110W of power output. After using it for a few weeks, here are my impressions. Disclaimer: Cuktech provided the review unit without any editorial input or pre-approval. Like the 30 Ultra, the 10 Ultra arrived in a box made of nice cardboard with quality print all over it. Inside, besides the charger, you will find a 240W 6A charger, which, this time, is fully braided. While Cuktech always bundles high-power cables with its chargers and power banks, they are usually regular and unassuming. This time, the cable is much nicer, matching the charger's $59.99 price tag. The charger itself measures 67 x 76 x 33 mm or 2.6 x 3.0 x 1.3 inches and weighs about 250 grams. Considering the charger has four ports and a big display, I would say the compact size is quite impressive, albeit a little hefty. The overall design is similar to other chargers from the manufacturer, minus the chrome Cuktech logo next to the four ports. The Cuktech 10 Ultra has retractable prongs for better portability. Its front side is covered with piano black plastic housing two elements: a capacitive button with backlight and a quite large display for various charging stats. Ports are downward-facing, and I have mixed feelings about such a design. It is not the most convenient when you frequently connect and disconnect cables. It makes you bend over to find the right port to connect, and it is a no-go with outlets mounted closer to the floor. On the bright side, design like this eliminates clutter and sagging, especially when using four cables at once. Plus, you get plenty of space for a big display. Ports include two high-speed USB Type-C ports, one Type-C for less demanding devices, and one classic USB Type-A. The first two ports deliver full 100W, while the third is capped at 45W. As for the Type-A port, its maximum output is 18W. In total, the charger delivers 110W of power, but in my testing, I managed to squeeze 117W when charging two power banks and a tablet. Quite impressive. Type-C1 Type-C2 Type-C3 Type-A Single-port 100W 100W 45W 18W Two ports 80W 20W - - Three ports 65W 20W 20W - Four ports 65W 20W 10W 10W The charger can detect handshake protocols and balance power across all four ports according to each device's needs. As such, power is not limited to the values in the table above. You can have two ports charging at 55W, three ports at 45W + 20W, and more. For some reason, Cuktech is not listing the supported protocols, but a quick test showed that it is compatible with PD3.0, PPS, QC5, DCP, and UFCS. When you connect a compatible device, the charger automatically detects its charging standard and displays it on the screen, for example, Apple 6A or Samsung 3A. Speaking of the screen. The main highlight of the 10 Ultra is its 1.57-inch display with a maximum brightness of 700 nits and 160-degree viewing angles. The display takes up most of the front, and it shows various charging-related information, including total output power, current temperature, power distribution across ports with watts, volts, and amps, a screensaver, and more. You can toggle between the different views by tapping the button, and holding it changes the screen orientation (portrait or horizontal, plus flipped) according to your socket position. The screen is very nice. It is sharp, vivid, and the fonts are easy to read. As for settings, you can change the following: Keep the screen on or off Lock the screen orientation (hold the button to change the screen orientation) Keep the USB Type-A port on Toggle power modes The charger has three power modes: AI: standard mode that automatically allocates power to each connected device. Power Priority: prioritizes power for high-demand devices, such as laptops or power banks. Balanced: splits power evenly across connected devices according to their needs I was skeptical at first, but after testing a few devices in different modes, I can see the benefit of these three modes. The most useful is power priority, which gives the first Type-C port more power. When I was charging a 100W power bank (port 1) alongside a 140W power bank (port 2), Power Priority split the total output about 75-30. Balanced mode, as the name suggests, splits the total output between the two ports more or less equally. As for AI mode, the charger uses its brain to detect which device needs more power. In my testing, it figured out that the 140W power needs a bit more juice. As I said, I expected this to be more of a gimmick, but the three built-in modes turned out quite useful. For example, you can prioritize your laptop while giving other ports a little less power, but still enough to charge at acceptable speeds. Unfortunately, unlike the 30 Ultra, this charger cannot display the battery level of the device being charged. This small feature turned out to be very useful when I was testing the 30 Ultra, as it allowed me to see my phone's battery level without picking it up. Like other Cuktech chargers I tested, the 10 Ultra one proved itself reliable and well-made. It uses Gallium nitride semiconductor technology to reduce the charger's size and improve efficiency. It is also better at dissipating heat, but I have to say that when charging two power banks at 117W total, the charger got hotter than what I would call comfortable (hold it for a few seconds, and you start feeling a burning sensation at your fingertips). However, the built-in thermal indicator remained below the temperature threshold, with the screen reassuring that the device operated at "High performance" (I tested it in a 21 °C / 69 °F room). Overall, the Cuktech 10 Ultra is a solid choice. If you need four ports and you like to nerd out on various stats, it is a very easy recommendation. It will take care of your laptop, phone, tablet, and power bank without breaking a sweat, plus the build, material, and cable quality are top-notch. The mode switcher is handy when charging different devices with different power needs, too. I cannot say a display is a must-have in a charger, especially when it makes you more conscious about where to plug it, but it is a neat addition if you have a socket at your table or bed level, so that you can actually use the display and its features. The more important fact is that despite its size and quality, the display does not make the charger that much more expensive than similarly powerful chargers from competitors. Plus, you can save 10% on the 10 Ultra with a promo code on Amazon. Buy Cuktech 10 Ultra charger - $53.99 on Amazon with a promo code As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.
    • Last week I was investigating an issue with contacts and tried using the new Outlook. In the real (Classic) Outlook, you can easily go to any Outlook folder and present it in a Table View, then customize the columns to show/sort any field, which was exactly what I needed. But of course, the new Outlook doesn't have this feature at all. I gave up. Oh, and can we possibly stop claiming the new Outlook has PST support? What it really has is the ability to use the real Outlook in the background to pretend to have PST support. There is no PST support without the real Outlook installed.
    • Honestly just before Panos left it started to feel like MS just wasnt interested in them so they were being less innovative with them, and then when he DID leave for Amazon its kind of clear the direction is gone. It felt like Panos had both goals and drive, and a vision, but it felt like no matter what his title/department was the Surface devices never had the full interest of the rest of management and he was just pushing a bolder up a hill that MS was adding dirt to as he went.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Conversation Starter
      mobandz earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • Apprentice
      fernan99 went up a rank
      Apprentice
    • One Month Later
      nothanks earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • One Month Later
      B2Proxy earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • One Year In
      MadMung0 earned a badge
      One Year In
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      477
    2. 2
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      247
    3. 3
      Skyfrog
      79
    4. 4
      FloatingFatMan
      76
    5. 5
      Michael Scrip
      60
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!