Windows 8.1- Desktop lovers rejoice (brief review)


Recommended Posts

This thread is entertaining and saddening all at once, for a bunch of supposed nerds, geeks, and supposed IT experts and admins, I see entirely too much clinging to the old ways just because attitude here, had this same discussion with a few if the IT guys at work too, most go into win 8/8.1 with their minds already set that Metro and the Start Screen sucks and no matter what reality and real world experience says otherwise you will cling to your antiquated was, and that's fine, but admit that's all it is, it not any more efficient or not using the Start screen than a bloated Start menu, hell most of us rarely used the menu or Start screen, all the important apps should already be pinned to your task bar

 

TLDR, you like the old ways, good, keep your old inefficient ways, but realize eventually you will "get" the Start Screen and like it once you actually try it with an open mind

 

Oh look, it's the same old tired narrative that the start screen is superior and anyone who disagrees is merely "stuck in the past" or "resistant to change" with absolutely zero justification as to why the start screen is superior.

The start menu was hardly elegant. It suffered from being relic designed for a previous era. You can't hold onto that forever.

It's design left little room for expansion or new features without massive change. Microsoft wants to expand Windows' mobility, so the Start Menu had to go. Even on Desktops, the Start Screen has positive benefits over the menu. Greater scalability, greater visibility of the icons, and cloud syncing, for example. For ordinary users, this outweighs the poor and outdated features of the start menu, despite users familiarity with it.

Oh look, it's the same old tired narrative that the start screen is superior and anyone who disagrees is merely "stuck in the past" or "resistant to change" with absolutely zero justification as to why the start screen is superior.

 

You are only picking on one little part of what he wrote.

He is right though, it's amazing how hard IT people complain about this, while you would think that we all got into this business because we like new things, we love to experiment, but the way it looks, people here feel like it's better to have a status quo and not move on at all just so they don't have to change there ways, or have to learn something new.

 

That IS the wrong attitude if you want to be in IT, it's all about new things and constant learning

I don't think there has been any version of windows in history that has divided the windows community like this.

 

I love the start screen the most on a tablet, but the love stops there. I don't like the start screen as much as the start menu on laptops or desktops and I feel the start screen is a step down in windows ui evolution also. The start screen takes the entire screen, it takes longer to move your mouse to open a program, the search is not visible unless you start typing, your library folders are not there unless you pin them,  and the start screen makes working on the desktop less productive. The start menu is smaller, opening programs takes less time, you have all your library folders on the side unlike the start screen, the search is visible unlike the start screen, you can launch programs in the search and the start menu opens faster than the start screen .

 

Overall I think the start screen caters to touch displays more and the start menu is caters better for desktop users.

You are only picking on one little part of what he wrote.

He is right though, it's amazing how hard IT people complain about this, while you would think that we all got into this business because we like new things, we love to experiment, but the way it looks, people here feel like it's better to have a status quo and not move on at all just so they don't have to change there ways, or have to learn something new.

 

That IS the wrong attitude if you want to be in IT, it's all about new things and constant learning

 

Did it ever occur to you that people might have valid reasons for disliking these changes? Did it ever occur to you these changes might not strictly be for the better in every aspect?

 

You moan about people saying you're an idiot for liking the Start Screen, and yet you have absolutely zero empathy for the other side of the coin.

 

You know what else is the wrong attitude? Accepting any change at face value, and never considering alternatives.

  • Like 2

(Y) Amen! I cant tell you how many times proponents of the start screen told others they are dumb and/or resistant to change.

I will just say this to all supporters of the new Start screen......

 

NOT EVERYONE WANTS TO SEE THEIR ENTIRE SCREEN USED UP BY A BUNCH OF ICONS. SOME PREFER SOMETHING A LOT MORE ELEGANT LIKE THE START MENU. IF YOU LIKE THE START SCREEN GOOD FOR YOU, BUT DON'T GO AROUND TELLING PEOPLE WHO DON'T THAT THEY ARE STUPID, RESISTANT TO CHANGE ETC.

  • Like 2

Did it ever occur to you that people might have valid reasons for disliking these changes? Did it ever occur to you these changes might not strictly be for the better in every aspect?

You moan about people saying you're an idiot for liking the Start Screen, and yet you have absolutely zero empathy for the other side of the coin.

You know what else is the wrong attitude? Accepting any change at face value, and never considering alternatives.

The start screen is a long term investment. The positives outweigh whatever perceived negatives there are with this change. The start screen opens up Windows to new opportunities more easily than the start menu did (as evidenced by this current change already).

Anarkii, just wondered why your clock shows 3:57 PM on the 4/11/2013 (also the 0 seems to be missing from infront of the 4), i wasn`t aware it was that time anywhere in the world yet ;)

Maybe that`s something to do with the 'Evaluation Copy' deal...

I feel like the new sidebar search feature with combined search results is a pretty nice improvement over the annoying full-screen search in 8.0. And it lessens the need to even see either the Start Screen or the All Apps page. Although Windows could really use something like Quicksilver, in my opinion. 

I will just say this to all supporters of the new Start screen......

 

NOT EVERYONE WANTS TO SEE THEIR ENTIRE SCREEN USED UP BY A BUNCH OF ICONS. SOME PREFER SOMETHING A LOT MORE ELEGANT LIKE THE START MENU. IF YOU LIKE THE START SCREEN GOOD FOR YOU, BUT DON'T GO AROUND TELLING PEOPLE WHO DON'T THAT THEY ARE STUPID, RESISTANT TO CHANGE ETC.

 

I have to disagree that the Start Menu was elegant. I thought it was inefficient, cluttered, difficult to organize, and hard to find anything in. The Start Screen IMO is a lot closer to elegant - easy to organize as you see fit, easy to scan and find what you want, even if you don't organize. And if you use Metro apps, you get actual information on the Start Screen - weather updates, new email notifications, etc. The Start Menu was just a clunky, static list. I thought it was a downgrade from Program Manager back in 1995 (since you could easily organize the icons in PM), and while I got used to it, I never thought it was particularly efficient or elegant.

Did it ever occur to you that people might have valid reasons for disliking these changes? Did it ever occur to you these changes might not strictly be for the better in every aspect?

 

You moan about people saying you're an idiot for liking the Start Screen, and yet you have absolutely zero empathy for the other side of the coin.

 

You know what else is the wrong attitude? Accepting any change at face value, and never considering alternatives.

 

Yes, it did occur to me that people might have valid PERSONAL reasons for disliking some of the changes, doesn't mean that their opinion all of a sudden becomes general truth. There are plenty of the so called professionals who have absolutely no issue with the changes. So it all comes down to personal opinion. Way to many people here state their personal opinion as fact.

 

My 'moaning' was a reply to somebody yelling that he was tired of being called whatever, I just replied some of us were tired of being called shills or whatever.

 

My biggest complaint with the nay say'ers of Win 8 is that they can't come up with a better solution without having MS giving up on the tablet space.

It always comes down to reverting to Win7

I only ever checked 8.1 on a friend's computer, I don't see this swaying anyone who disliked 8, but I guess it could be a decent upgrade for those not minding 8. Me, I disabled everything Metro, but I found it simply too unstable, so right now I pretty much have a spare Windows 8 license which I'll probably gift to someone.

I only ever checked 8.1 on a friend's computer, I don't see this swaying anyone who disliked 8, but I guess it could be a decent upgrade for those not minding 8. Me, I disabled everything Metro, but I found it simply too unstable, so right now I pretty much have a spare Windows 8 license which I'll probably gift to someone.

Hey I can always use another Win 8.0 license :)

My biggest complaint with the nay say'ers of Win 8 is that they can't come up with a better solution without having MS giving up on the tablet space.

It always comes down to reverting to Win7

 

Absolute rubbish. Even with the basic approach of making the start menu an option (akin boot to desktop is in 8.1) does nothing to harm or impede MS's push into the tablet space.

 

There have been a myriad of suggestions and ideas put forward, but they were all quickly swept under the rug by sycophants.

 

No, some idiotic exec at Microsoft made the decision to obliterate the start menu because they thought it was a threat to the start screen and the attached store. And that choice has arguably done far more harm to the progress of Windows 8.x and by extension, the start screen ecosystem.

Absolute rubbish. Even with the basic approach of making the start menu an option (akin boot to desktop is in 8.1) does nothing to harm or impede MS's push into the tablet space.

 

There have been a myriad of suggestions and ideas put forward, but they were all quickly swept under the rug by sycophants.

 

No, some idiotic exec at Microsoft made the decision to obliterate the start menu because they thought it was a threat to the start screen and the attached store. And that choice has arguably done far more harm to the progress of Windows 8.x and by extension, the start screen ecosystem.

 

If you really want that start menu, why don't you get one of the available programs?

We've been using little tools and programs as long as I can remember on Windows to make it more to our liking.

 

So with the vision MS has, of one OS/UI on all platforms, how could they have done this better, all I hear comes down to completely different UI's,......

 

I'm not saying Win8.x is perfect lots of places for improvement, but the new way of working hasn't hindered me in the slightest.

If you really want that start menu, why don't you get one of the available programs?

We've been using little tools and programs as long as I can remember on Windows to make it more to our liking.

 

So with the vision MS has, of one OS/UI on all platforms, how could they have done this better, all I hear comes down to completely different UI's,......

 

I'm not saying Win8.x is perfect lots of places for improvement, but the new way of working hasn't hindered me in the slightest.

 

Nothing in this post addresses my previous point, you've just ignored it and resorted to the usual parroting of MS PR.

  • Like 2

Nothing in this post addresses my previous point, you've just ignored it and resorted to the usual parroting of MS PR.

 

There was no previous point.

 

And there we go again, we must be paid to say things like that right?

There was no previous point.

 

And there we go again, we must be paid to say things like that right?

 

Yes, generally when you ignore the content of a post, move the goalposts and then respond with some asinine marketing speak, you do rather make yourself look like a shill.

 

Otherwise your response would of been one of "oh yeah I guess Microsoft could have done that", rather than "b-but muh one UI and futures of computerings".

 

It is your (and others) resistance to considering alternate courses of action that is the problem here.

  • Like 2

You guys realize you're not arguing about any version of Windows right now? Rather the right to argue, the rules of arguing, and the fervor of the arguments ... lol.

You guys realize you're not arguing about any version of Windows right now? Rather the right to argue, the rules of arguing, and the fervor of the arguments ... lol.

 

This wouldn't happen if people actually argued the point, and didn't intentionally avoid or ignore topics when they hit conclusions where Microsoft simply could of handled things better. (You're one of the few that doesn't do this)

 

Because that's the ultimate conclusion at the end of all these various topics, Microsoft screwed up and proceeded with a course of action that was more harmful to them overall than if they had been accommodating and offered users a choice.

 

Windows 8 wouldn't of been hated, the marketshare would of been much higher, and it most likely would have also helped their efforts elsewhere too. Everyone is happy except the very few usual malcontents that really DO hate any change regardless of reason.

  • Like 2

with the vision MS has, of one OS/UI on all platforms, how could they have done this better, all I hear comes down to completely different UI's,...... 

Well, what's wrong with UIs that are purpose-built for the class of device one is using? Seems to me, the vision of a single UI regardless of the platform is exactly what is criticised by some.

This wouldn't happen if people actually argued the point, and didn't intentionally avoid or ignore topics when they hit conclusions where Microsoft simply could of handled things better.

 

Because that's the ultimate conclusion at the end of all these various topics, Microsoft screwed up and proceeded with a course of action that was more harmful to them overall than if they had been accommodating and offered users a choice.

 

Windows 8 wouldn't of been hated, the marketshare would of been much higher, and it most likely would have also helped their efforts elsewhere too. Everyone is happy except the very few usual malcontents that really DO hate any change regardless of reason.

 

They definitely made some bad decisions but I'm not sure they had much choice. They were getting their clocked clean by iOS and Android tablets and phones. The Explorer UI simply will not work on tablets/touch, that's not what it was designed for and has failed miserably on tablets and phones. They have a long way to go but their is light at the end of the tunnel. They are selling tablets, and the phones are selling as well as can be expected given all that's still missing from both platforms.

 

The changes from 8 RTM to 8.1 are encouraging. Windows did not come out of the womb at v.7. Their biggest problem is small market share not encouraging a whole lot of development.

 

But I do agree 8 RTM was full of inexcusable mistakes, poor decisions, poor execution, and poor code. Some things were bad telemetry such as whatever data drove the horrendous search implementation. Yet it's turning out the telemetry on how most multitask and use or don't use the Start Menu may end up being correct, or more correct than wrong.

This wouldn't happen if people actually argued the point, and didn't intentionally avoid or ignore topics when they hit conclusions where Microsoft simply could of handled things better. (You're one of the few that doesn't do this)

 

Because that's the ultimate conclusion at the end of all these various topics, Microsoft screwed up and proceeded with a course of action that was more harmful to them overall than if they had been accommodating and offered users a choice.

 

Windows 8 wouldn't of been hated, the marketshare would of been much higher, and it most likely would have also helped their efforts elsewhere too. Everyone is happy except the very few usual malcontents that really DO hate any change regardless of reason.

Yet all of this is again simple opinion.

They definitely made some bad decisions but I'm not sure they had much choice. They were getting their clocked clean by iOS and Android tablets and phones. The Explorer UI simply will not work on tablets/touch, that's not what it was designed for and has failed miserably on tablets and phones. They have a long way to go but their is light at the end of the tunnel. They are selling tablets, and the phones are selling as well as can be expected given all that's still missing from both platforms.

 

The changes from 8 RTM to 8.1 are encouraging. Windows did not come out of the womb at v.7. Their biggest problem is small market share not encouraging a whole lot of development.

 

But I do agree 8 RTM was full of inexcusable mistakes, poor decisions, poor execution, and poor code. Some things were bad telemetry such as whatever data drove the horrendous search implementation. Yet it's turning out the telemetry on how most multitask and use or don't use the Start Menu may end up being correct, or more correct than wrong.

 

I think you mistake my intent, I have no opposition to Microsoft pursuing those segments nor do I oppose the existence of Metro in general. What I do however oppose is the forced mixing of the two from both directions.

 

Microsoft could of taken a cleanly segregated approach that would of benefitted both platforms, but they didn't because most likely the usual idiot execs thought forcing Metro on the desktop would boost it's adoption in general. In the end it harmed both.

 

Heck, this isn't totally without precedent. Look at the slow adoption of DirectX 10, again arguably not helped by the original tying to NT6.x.

 

Yet all of this is again simple opinion.

 

No, it's simple fact. You just don't want to admit Microsoft did something wrong/poorly.

  • Like 2

 

No, it's simple fact. You just don't want to admit Microsoft did something wrong/poorly.

 

I just think I live a simpler life, granted I don't rely on technology for my job anymore like I used to, but I upgrade, notice some differences, learn how it works and move on with my life. 

I might get annoyed about some things once and a while but I just don't go yelling that these changes are hostile, MS made the biggest mistake in their life, yadayadayada

 

If they change everything again when it comes to Win 9, i'll do the same thing again.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Posts

    • Qmmp 2.3.3 by Razvan Serea Qmmp (Qt-based MultiMedia Player) is a free, open-source audio player that delivers a classic music listening experience with a modern foundation. Inspired by the legendary Winamp, Qmmp features a familiar, customizable interface that supports both Winamp and XMMS skins, making it instantly recognizable to long-time users. It handles a wide variety of audio formats including MP3, OGG Vorbis, FLAC, WAV, AAC, and many others, ensuring smooth playback across diverse music libraries. In addition to basic playback, Qmmp offers advanced features such as a 10-band equalizer, crossfading, gapless playback, and audio visualization plugins. Users can manage playlists efficiently, create and save multiple lists, and even enable streaming from online sources. Plugin support extends the player’s capabilities, allowing integration of features like lyrics display, ReplayGain, and more. Built with the Qt framework, Qmmp runs smoothly and efficiently, making it ideal even for older systems. 10 great QMMP features you might not know: Global Hotkeys Support – Control playback using customizable system-wide keyboard shortcuts. CUE Sheet Support – Automatically detects and plays tracks from CUE files for full album playback. Last.fm Scrobbling – Integrated support for sending playback data to Last.fm. Audio CD Playback – Play music directly from audio CDs. Command Line Interface – Control Qmmp via command-line options for scripting or automation. System Tray Integration – Minimize to and control playback from the system tray. MPRIS Support – Integration with desktop media player controls via the MPRIS (Media Player Remote Interfacing Specification) interface. Spectrum Analyzer and Oscilloscope – Built-in visualizations for real-time audio feedback. Configurable Notifications – Custom pop-ups for track changes and playback status. Multiple Output Backends – Support for ALSA, PulseAudio, JACK, and more, offering flexible audio routing. Qmmp 2.3.3 changelog: fixed build with PipeWire versions less than 0.3.50; fixed settings dialog layout; fixed default CUE encoding; fixed possible null pointer dereference; fixed tracks order when added using drag and drop (2.3.3 only); fixed uninitialized structure usage; improved sid plugin: added libsidplayfp 3.0 support; added feature to build without residfp engine; fixed memory leak; fixed displaying audio information; updated Japanese translation (2.3.3 only). Download: Qmmp 64-bit | 24.0 MB (Open Source) Download: Qmmp 32-bit | 24.1 MB View: Qmmp Homepage | Screenshot Get alerted to all of our Software updates on Twitter at @NeowinSoftware
    • BATorrent 3.0.3 is out.
    • The current Statcoungter desktop numbers has Google Chrome increasing it's market share this past year and currently commanding 75% share. Everybody else is just making up the numbers with even MS Edge losing 3% this past year and has dipped just below 10% share which is staggering considering it's default on every Windows deviced purchased. If these numbers are correct that terrible Edge number is both devastating and embarrassing for MS especially when you add in the terribly low Bing market share. This leads me to ask a couple of questions as the default browser holding just less than 10% market share seems really weird. It used to be that all Chromium browsers were being counted as Google Chrome in some cases.  Is this still happening? Do these high Google Chrome numbers contains some Edge user numbers?
    • Yeah, all web browsers seem to have some junk in them these days. The regular Brave browser has a lot of unnecessary stuff in it, similar to Microsoft Edge, so I don't see any benefits of using Brave over Microsoft Edge if you already have Microsoft Edge fully set up with ad blockers and that. The cleanest or best free browser outside of 'Microsoft Edge' I’ve tried so far is 'Samsung Browser'. It has very little bloat and is a nice-looking web browser with an inbuilt 'Ad blocker'. I also really like the web browser called 'Floorp' that is based on Firefox. This browser can also install Chrome extensions. I have a system wide Ad blocking program for Windows 11 that doesn't just blocks ads in the web browser, but over the whole system. I don't really need a web browser with an inbuilt ad blocker because of that.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Rookie
      moog19 went up a rank
      Rookie
    • Mentor
      grik went up a rank
      Mentor
    • Dedicated
      JKR earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • One Year In
      CHUNWEI earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Conversation Starter
      FBSPL earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      491
    2. 2
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      270
    3. 3
      Skyfrog
      75
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      68
    5. 5
      FloatingFatMan
      63
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!