Windows 8 Falls Behind Even the Maligned Vista


Recommended Posts

It does take me back but the search pane is gone so I have to go bring it all up again and let it know I want to search the store and not the default files. Ideally there should just be a search box at the top of the store.

I can totally see the point of apps, on a phone or tablet they are great, but on a big monitor, with lots of space to multitask, its just limiting me.

I'm undecided on the Search myself. I really, really like the idea of a unified location for search, that's in one consistent place, no matter the app, but like you said, sometimes a contextual search should be more obvious.

The best I can offer is that you press Win+Q when in an app. That should activate the search for the app that you're in, rather than search for the system. For example, if you are in the Windows Store, then pressing Win+Q should open a search in the Windows Store, and not elsewhere.

I kind of agree with you as far as metro.. not for desktop. I am seriously thinking about moving to Imac as my next purchase.

I must say Windows 7 is a stable version of Windows, but I made the move to a mac 3 years ago, and havn't missed Windows at all!

on the contrary. Customizing Windows is one thing.. to enhance or whatever you want to do. What YOU did is hack Windows 8 to be more like Windows 7. How many people that you know hack their Windows 7 to look more like Windows XP? If you have to add something to make it look like last years version..then why not just stick with last years version? The whole point of Windows 8 is lost on you because you want it to function more like Windows 7.

now who's getting it all wrong? the new start screen is only one small part of Windows 8, there have been a lot of other changes made, both on the front and back end of things. I really like a lot of the new desktop enhancements made in Windows 8, I myself have Start8 installed as well but I still find myself using the start screen still depending on what i'm doing

also not hacking, as it's just a program that doesn't even touch system files unlike Transformation Packs which i mention below

You aren't customizing..you're reverting. Big difference.

I'm all for Windows 8 on touch screens. It makes sense. (except for the abomination when it dumps you onto the desktop) but for non touch devices? Bleh.

no there really isn't a difference in this respect. if you want to talk reverting and completely changing, look at transformation packs, that's on a whole other level (which is what you seem to think making one change it)

That's not typical of user's screens. In fact someone went out of their way to troll with that picture. What is half that junk?

Ok, well here is my start screen. I haven't done anything to it.

testsa.jpg

Now you will say "Well just unpin all that stuff" True I could, though I don't use the start screen I use start8, but I never had to clean any of that stuff up on windows 7

post-420821-0-87550200-1356812859.png

Nick?

Ok, well here is my start screen. I haven't done anything to it.

Now you will say "Well just unpin all that stuff" True I could, though I don't use the start screen I use start8, but I never had to clean any of that stuff up on windows 7

Actually I think sometimes the user might have had to. Icons are usually created on the desktop, and sometimes in the start menu, unless the user turns off the "Show recently used applications", or whatever it was called.

I usually deslected the option to create a desktop icon, but I think it's obvious what I mean.

Now you will say "Well just unpin all that stuff" True I could, though I don't use the start screen I use start8, but I never had to clean any of that stuff up on windows 7

That's because it sat buried away in the Start Menu. No one ventures there, so no one ever knew how much clutter it created. Now it's time for installers to clean up their mess. But you're crying over archaic programs that no one ever uses.

That's because it sat buried away in the Start Menu. No one ventures there, so no one ever knew how much clutter it created. Now it's time for installers to clean up their mess.

When I think of the start menu, I don't think of clutter.

post-420821-0-87550200-1356812859.png

Typical users are going to spend lots of time properly categorizing and organizing their Start Screen? Really? The same people who shoved everything on the Desktop as shortcuts before Start Menu search?

Honestly, warwagon's picture was more accurate. They'll have apps plastered all over the start screen like someone sneezed all over their screen.

When I think of the start menu, I don't think of clutter.

It was cluttered all right, and cramped.

Typical users are going to spend lots of time properly categorizing and organizing their Start Screen? Really? The same people who shoved everything on the Desktop as shortcuts before Start Menu search?

Honestly, warwagon's picture was more accurate. They'll have apps plastered all over the start screen like someone sneezed all over their screen.

So far, I see no evidence of that. I know quite a few users of Windows 8, and they picked up right away that you can move and group tiles.

Typical users are going to spend lots of time properly categorizing and organizing their Start Screen? Really? The same people who shoved everything on the Desktop as shortcuts before Start Menu search?

Honestly, warwagon's picture was more accurate. They'll have apps plastered all over the start screen like someone sneezed all over their screen.

Not to mention these are the same people that have 9....yes I had a few people with 9 (NINE) IE toolbars on their computer. You could barely see the websites, and they did not mind that mess! It is shocking.

It was cluttered all right, and cramped.

yes and no. at least in the start menu things stayed alphabetized and not just in the order that you installed things

I do not dislike the start screen by any means but I think it could still use a little work (looks forward to windows blue update :))

It was cluttered all right, and cramped.

So far, I see no evidence of that. I know quite a few users of Windows 8, and they picked up right away that you can move and group tiles.

So being organized is now considered to be cluttered? There is a reason they make subfolders and maybe folders in there. Sometimes they have tools where you might use every once and a while, but it was much more organized.

This is like saying a doctors office is not organized because the separate patient files into individual file folders...THAT WAY is MUCH more organized. And the Start Menu WAS MORE organized than the Start Screen because they tucked some advanced tools in sub folders.

That's because it sat buried away in the Start Menu. No one ventures there, so no one ever knew how much clutter it created. Now it's time for installers to clean up their mess. But you're crying over archaic programs that no one ever uses.

It is impossible for installers to "clean up their mess" as what is needed varies wildly by person and the task that needs to be done. For instance, I don't need to launch the Visual Studio Command Prompt every day, but I do need it occasionally. How would the installer decide when it should create this shortcut and when it shouldn't? Having it buried somewhere that it can be surfaced from effortlessly makes the most sense. This was what the Start Menu did very well in Windows 7. It allows app developers to place shortcuts for everything that may be needed and allowed users to easily dig up those shortcuts when they were needed.

The Start Screen works counter to that. It requires the user to constantly clean up after every installer to get to the same point as Windows 7. Really, if MS wanted to keep it that way they should have placed an intermediary screen between the installer and the Start Screen asking users what shortcuts do they want on their Start Screen out of the 50 the installer has just created. But like most things in Windows 8, this stuff wasn't well thought out.

Typical users are going to spend lots of time properly categorizing and organizing their Start Screen? Really? The same people who shoved everything on the Desktop as shortcuts before Start Menu search?

Honestly, warwagon's picture was more accurate. They'll have apps plastered all over the start screen like someone sneezed all over their screen.

I guess if it's messy both ways (Start screen, Desktop), then it's not really a fault with the Start Screen. In cases like that, they might still like the Start Screen better, since they'll end up working from that the same way they worked from the desktop. And now they can scroll for more, rather than relying on ever smaller desktop icons.

yes and no. at least in the start menu things stayed alphabetized and not just in the order that you installed things

I do not dislike the start screen by any means but I think it could still use a little work (looks forward to windows blue update :))

So being organized is now considered to be cluttered? There is a reason they make subfolders and maybe folders in there. Sometimes they have tools where you might use every once and a while, but it was much more organized.

This is like saying a doctors office is not organized because the separate patient files into individual file folders...THAT WAY is MUCH more organized. And the Start Menu WAS MORE organized than the Start Screen because they tucked some advanced tools in sub folders.

Stuff is still alphabetized and organized by "Folder" (Albeit they're now expanded) in the "All Apps" part of the Start screen. That hasn't changed. The front end of the Start screen is that part of the Start Menu where all the "Recently used Applications" were.

So being organized is now considered to be cluttered? There is a reason they make subfolders and maybe folders in there. Sometimes they have tools where you might use every once and a while, but it was much more organized.

This is like saying a doctors office is not organized because the separate patient files into individual file folders...THAT WAY is MUCH more organized. And the Start Menu WAS MORE organized than the Start Screen because they tucked some advanced tools in sub folders.

Nobody wants to dig through subfolders of subfolders.

Typical users are going to spend lots of time properly categorizing and organizing their Start Screen? Really? The same people who shoved everything on the Desktop as shortcuts before Start Menu search?

Honestly, warwagon's picture was more accurate. They'll have apps plastered all over the start screen like someone sneezed all over their screen.

i think that shift has already been made. people organizing their 'icons' in groups or different screens is common now, no?

anecdotal: my father (73) has organized the win8 start to how he likes it. i didn't teach him. hes never owned a smart phone or tablet.

Nobody wants to dig through subfolders of subfolders.

That was the beauty of Start Menu search. The user didn't have to deal with the stuff in the Start Menu that way. The applications would organize their respective icons in logical sub folders and the end user would pull them up via search. 500 shortcuts could be added without cluttering anything. Even Windows was smart enough to only pick one icon to highlight as the "new" application in the menu, even if it created 500 icons on install.

now who's getting it all wrong? the new start screen is only one small part of Windows 8, there have been a lot of other changes made, both on the front and back end of things.

Not even slightly talking about changes made to it's "front and backend" of things. I'm talking about the look, feel and useability of Windows 8 and why you would need a "program" to enable the startmenu when you are so overjoyed with Windows 8 to begin with? Why not just use Windows 8 as Windows 8 instead of adding a "feature" that makes it more like Windows 7? Unless you are admitting that Windows 8 actually functions less that Windows 7..

I really like a lot of the new desktop enhancements made in Windows 8, I myself have Start8 installed as well but I still find myself using the start screen still depending on what i'm doing

Desktop enhancement? Do tell because I'm not seeing any desktop enhancement.

Stuff is still alphabetized and organized by "Folder" (Albeit they're now expanded) in the "All Apps" part of the Start screen. That hasn't changed.

I was more talking the main start screen (as was posted in the screenshots earlier) not so much the all programs section (which you are correct about btw)

That was the beauty of Start Menu search. The user didn't have to deal with the stuff in the Start Menu that way. The applications would organize their respective icons in logical sub folders and the end user would pull them up via search. 500 shortcuts could be added without cluttering anything. Even Windows was smart enough to only pick one icon to highlight as the "new" application in the menu, even if it created 500 icons on install.

Funny, when I installed the Office demo, the only icons I got on Start were the main apps. Everything else was buried in All Apps. It's time for other developers to do the same.

i think that shift has already been made. people organizing their 'icons' in groups or different screens is common now, no?

anecdotal: my father (73) has organized the win8 start to how he likes it. i didn't teach him.

Age isn't a factor in how one decides to organize. I know people who have 10 IE toolbars and a desktop full of shortcuts and files and ones who don't This cuts across age barriers. Probably a lot like people and how clean their car is on the inside. Age isn't a definitive predictor of how clean one will have the inside of their car.

That was the beauty of Start Menu search. The user didn't have to deal with the stuff in the Start Menu that way. The applications would organize their respective icons in logical sub folders and the end user would pull them up via search. 500 shortcuts could be added without cluttering anything. Even Windows was smart enough to only pick one icon to highlight as the "new" application in the menu, even if it created 500 icons on install.

I don't know what Dot Matrix was saying earlier. Those sub folders are still there, and everything is still organized in them as they were in the Start menu. And just like the Start Menu, the user still has to click "All Applications/Apps" to get to those sub folders.

I was more talking the main start screen (as was posted in the screenshots earlier) not so much the all programs section (which you are correct about btw)

Oh, I see. I guess I'm not sure where this discussion is focused on then, because the functionality that both sides are talking about is still there. Even the way to access that functionality, (In this case, the sub folders where all that extra stuff was organized.) is pretty much the same too.

EDIT: I guess in the main Start screen, MS made a decision to "organize" based on the most recently installed. They just put that stuff at the end of the tiles. Maybe, "Alphabetize" should be an option?

Not even slightly talking about changes made to it's "front and backend" of things. I'm talking about the look, feel and useability of Windows 8 and why you would need a "program" to enable the startmenu when you are so overjoyed with Windows 8 to begin with? Why not just use Windows 8 as Windows 8 instead of adding a "feature" that makes it more like Windows 7? Unless you are admitting that Windows 8 actually functions less that Windows 7..

when the hell did i say Windows 8 functions less than 7?!? and once again I say, how is adding a start menu any different than adding a dock? both change functionality yet you only seem to dispute the start menu
Desktop enhancement? Do tell because I'm not seeing any desktop enhancement.

you are blind then. let me make a list for you

1. ribbon in explorer

2. improved copy dialog box/algorithm

3. much improved Task manager

those are the top 3 front end changes, there are many more smaller changes in the backend

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Posts

    • A 13 billion year old secret about our Universe's origin was revealed by Sayan Sen Image by Pascal Küffer via Pexels Researchers at the Max-Planck-Institut für Kernphysik (MPIK) in Heidelberg had recreated a key chemical reaction from the early universe, producing results that could change scientists' understanding of how the first stars formed. The study focused on the helium hydride ion (HeH⁺), which is widely regarded as the first molecule to form in the universe. Scientists believe HeH⁺ appeared around 380,000 years after the Big Bang, when the universe had cooled enough for electrons and atomic nuclei to combine into neutral atoms in a period known as recombination. This marked the beginning of chemistry in the cosmos. Immediately after the Big Bang about 13.8 billion years ago, the universe was extremely hot and dense. As it expanded and cooled, hydrogen and helium became the dominant elements. Once neutral helium atoms formed, they could react with ionised hydrogen nuclei, or protons, to create helium hydride ions. Although simple in structure, HeH⁺ played an important role in the young universe. It was the first step in a chain of reactions that eventually produced molecular hydrogen (H₂), a molecule made up of two hydrogen atoms and now the most abundant molecule in the universe. Molecular hydrogen later became a key ingredient in the formation of the first stars. At the time, the universe had entered a phase often called the cosmological "dark age." Matter had become transparent to light following recombination, but there were still no stars or galaxies producing visible light. Several hundred million years would pass before the first stars appeared. For those first stars to form, large clouds of gas had to collapse under their own gravity. To do that, the gas needed to cool by releasing energy. While hydrogen atoms can help with this process at high temperatures, they become less effective below about 10,000 degrees Celsius. Molecules can continue the cooling process by releasing energy through rotational and vibrational motions. Scientists have long considered HeH⁺ a potentially important coolant because of its comparatively large dipole moment, a property that describes how electric charge is distributed within a molecule and allows it to release energy efficiently. The amount of helium hydride present in the early universe may therefore have influenced how easily the first stars could form. At the same time, HeH⁺ was constantly being destroyed. Under primordial conditions, its main destruction mechanisms were recombination with free electrons and chemical reactions with hydrogen atoms. These reactions ultimately helped produce molecular hydrogen, linking the formation and destruction of HeH⁺ to the chemistry that shaped the early universe. For many years, theoretical studies suggested that reactions between HeH⁺ and hydrogen atoms would become much slower at low temperatures. Scientists believed there was an energy barrier along the reaction pathway that reduced the chances of the reaction taking place in the cold conditions of the early universe. The new study suggests otherwise. To investigate the process, researchers recreated a closely related reaction using deuterium, a naturally occurring isotope of hydrogen that contains one proton and one neutron in its nucleus. When HeH⁺ collides with deuterium, it forms an HD⁺ ion and a neutral helium atom. This allows scientists to study the reaction in a controlled way while closely mimicking the behaviour of the original reaction involving hydrogen. The experiments were carried out at the Cryogenic Storage Ring (CSR) at MPIK, a specialised facility designed to recreate conditions similar to those found in space. Researchers stored HeH⁺ ions in the 35-metre storage ring for up to 60 seconds at temperatures just a few kelvins above absolute zero and merged them with a beam of neutral deuterium atoms. By adjusting the speeds of the two particle beams, the team measured how the reaction rate changed with collision energy, which is directly related to temperature. The researchers found that the reaction rate remains almost constant as temperatures decrease. In other words, the reaction does not slow down at low temperatures as earlier models predicted. “Previous theories predicted a significant decrease in the reaction probability at low temperatures, but we were unable to verify this in either the experiment or new theoretical calculations by our colleagues,” explained Dr Holger Kreckel of MPIK. “The reactions of HeH⁺ with neutral hydrogen and deuterium therefore appear to have been far more important for chemistry in the early universe than previously assumed,” he continued. According to the researchers, the reaction appears to be barrierless, meaning there is no energy obstacle preventing it from taking place efficiently even at very low temperatures. The findings support recent theoretical work led by physicist Yohann Scribano, whose group identified an error in a widely used potential energy surface, a mathematical model used to describe how the energy of a system changes during a chemical reaction. The error appears to have caused previous studies to significantly underestimate reaction rates under primordial conditions. The new calculations closely match the experimental results. Together, they suggest that helium chemistry in the early universe may need to be re-evaluated. Because molecules such as HeH⁺ and molecular hydrogen played an important role in cooling primordial gas clouds, the findings could help scientists build more accurate models of how the first stars formed. By showing that helium hydride was likely destroyed more efficiently than previously thought, the study offers new insight into the chemical processes that shaped the universe during its earliest stages and helped set the conditions for the emergence of the first stars. Source: Max-Planck Institute, EDP Sciences This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.
    • "What an interesting smell you've discovered"
    • It could EASILY be 70 for the base game BUT + lots of FOMO to make it up to 100-120, like a few days Early Access, online money, pre-order bonus cars, weapons, missions, clothing, avatars or profile stuff, etc... And still WAY TOO MANY people would buy those and make Rockstar insane money.
    • Just to understand: your solution to getting rid of an online password manager is...another online password manager?
    • Cjam 2.5.0.0 by Razvan Serea Cjam is a lightweight and fast MP3 editor for Windows that lets you cut, join, and edit MP3 files without re-encoding. This means your audio quality remains untouched, and edits happen instantly. Cjam is ideal for quick, lossless edits—whether you're trimming music, combining tracks, or preparing audio for learning tools or podcasts. It features batch processing, scripting support, cue and playlist file handling, and a simple interface. Cjam is perfect for anyone who needs efficient MP3 editing without the complexity of full audio suites. Cjam requires a PC running Windows 10 or later and Microsoft .NET 6.0 or later. Key features for Cjam: No Re-encoding: Edit MP3 files without losing quality. Cut and Join MP3: Easily cut, trim, and combine MP3 tracks. Batch Processing: Edit multiple files at once for faster workflows. Scriptable Interface: Automate tasks with a custom command language. Cue and Playlist Support: Handle CUE and playlist files for seamless audio management. Fast and Lightweight: Quick processing with minimal system resources. Lossless Audio Editing: Ensure your edits don't affect audio quality. Simple User Interface: Clean, intuitive design for easy navigation. File Format Support: Works with MP3, Cjam-specific file formats (CJAMC, CJAMJ, CJAM). Cjam 2.5.0.0 changelog: Added clipboard-based import/export support for mp3DirectCut Added clipboard-based export support for REAPER Added support for naming IMP3 elements Changed the Reset behavior to preserve Undo/Redo history; use Shift key + Reset button to clear it Added a new command parameter (qcp) Added 8 new entries to lang.txt (main_c124-126, main_d150-151, main_m082, vme_c014, vme_d005) Fixed a bug where the il parameter was incorrectly applied when pasting VMP3s into the main list Fixed several other minor bugs Download: Cjam 2.5.0.0 | 1.4 MB (Freeware) Links: Cjam Home Page | Cjam Manual | Screenshot Get alerted to all of our Software updates on Twitter at @NeowinSoftware
  • Recent Achievements

    • Dedicated
      JuvenileDelinquent earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • First Post
      DrWankel earned a badge
      First Post
    • Reacting Well
      DrWankel earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • Week One Done
      Supreme Spray LV earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      Genuinetonerink- Dubai earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      504
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      163
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      91
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      75
    5. 5
      Michael Scrip
      72
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!