WZOR Talks About Windows (Codename) 9, Is a DP Imminent?


Recommended Posts

You sound like a 5 year old.

Also it seems like you haven't used a current version of Windows. Win 8.1 is great

Couldn't care less what I may sound to you actually, is it forbidden to say that I find that design ugly?

 

I've used 8/8.1 multiple times, on computers I fix, it works great, that's true, I still find it ugly though, ugly to the point that I prefer to miss on new features (also because I don't feel I need them) rather than upgrading to it.

 

My issue is not with performance or stability, is design, that's why I hope Microsoft will give users plenty of opportunities to customize the look and feel of their OS.

 

I find metro or modern or whatever ugly, I just want the chance to get rid of it from my system, I'm only asking for what Microsoft has always given to its customers: the possibility to make your system real personal via customization.

I want the customization options that were present in Win 7 but taken out in Win 8 to return - full customization of Window chrome, colors, fonts and schemes.

 

And virtual desktops (like many other features) have always been in the Win32 API, they were just never exposed to users.


Couldn't care less what I may sound to you actually, is it forbidden to say that I find that design ugly?

 

I've used 8/8.1 multiple times, on computers I fix, it works great, that's true, I still find it ugly though, ugly to the point that I prefer to miss on new features (also because I don't feel I need them) rather than upgrading to it.

 

My issue is not with performance or stability, is design, that's why I hope Microsoft will give users plenty of opportunities to customize the look and feel of their OS.

 

I find metro or modern or whatever ugly, I just want the chance to get rid of it from my system, I'm only asking for what Microsoft has always given to its customers: the possibility to make your system real personal via customization.

 

I agree that we need more customization options. But Metro as a design language is a huge success. Its been copied by nearly everyone - Apple (iOS and OSX), Android (ICS onwards), multiple other programs and websites. Flat shaded UI elements and getting rid of fancy borders, 3d effects etc is the way many designers are adopting, I don't think you can escape that.

I want the customization options that were present in Win 7 but taken out in Win 8 to return - full customization of Window chrome, colors, fonts and schemes.

 

And virtual desktops (like many other features) have always been in the Win32 API, they were just never exposed to users.

 

I agree that we need more customization options. But Metro as a design language is a huge success. Its been copied by nearly everyone - Apple (iOS and OSX), Android (ICS onwards), multiple other programs and websites. Flat shaded UI elements and getting rid of fancy borders, 3d effects etc is the way many designers are adopting, I don't think you can escape that.

Yup, I'm realizing I'm not a fan of flat design, for instance I really like Mavericks but I don't like Yosemite, I don't like iOS 7 either. To me older Apple designs looked refined, sophisticated, icons in Yosemite, iOS 7 and 8, Windows Metro look "simple", to me they almost look like something you can find in children books :/ For some reason I like Linux Mint Cinnamon :huh:

 

You're right, kinda sucks to be me nowadays :laugh:

  • Like 1

Yup, I'm realizing I'm not a fan of flat design, for instance I really like Mavericks but I don't like Yosemite, I don't like iOS 7 either. To me older Apple designs looked refined, sophisticated, icons in Yosemite, iOS 7 and 8, Windows Metro look "simple", to me they almost look like something you can find in children books :/ For some reason I like Linux Mint Cinnamon :huh:

 

You're right, kinda sucks to be me nowadays :laugh:

You're not alone. There was ahuge outcry over iOS7, everyone called it ugly (because it is), same for Yosemite, same for Metro. But I think it can be done tastefull, e.g. Android looks quite nice, so does Windows Phone. Not sure if it translates all that well to pc screens.

 

I honestly don't like Windows 7 borders and Aero after using 8, but 8 is a little too sparse. They need to have some visual cues about depth, texture etc.

Ugh. Did they really have to bring back folder hierarchies in Start?

 

They can't cater to everybody's individual wishes! lol :s If they make a change to Windows, someone complains, they change it back, someone complains that they liked the other way, and they change it back again then Windows won't last another 2 years! It is impossible to please everybody! 

They can't cater to everybody's individual wishes! lol :s If they make a change to Windows, someone complains, they change it back, someone complains that they liked the other way, and they change it back again then Windows won't last another 2 years! It is impossible to please everybody! 

 

don't worry about individual comments or complaints but on a broader scale, if 30-40 comments reflect the same analysis, then that would be a plausible thing to work on.

Is it assumed the search pin just triggers the current search sidebar?

 

Maybe?  I personally don't have issue with it but maybe they changed that or plan to as well.  We haven't seen what happens when that's clicked only the one next to it for virtual desktops.

I want to see what the start menu looks like when it goes full screen

Will we still have then list with apps on the left or will that disappear?

 

Brad, have you seen that in action, minimizing and maximizing the start menu?

I just would like to eleborate on my "crusade" against Metro.

 

Personal tastes are not up for debate obviously, I can go on and rant all day about how I find a certain design ugly and I still won't win any supporters; however, my "personal war" on Metro is based on the assumption that I believe people just don't care about those apps.

 

My reasoning is based on current adoption of 8/8.1, which is, as you know, very low, and personal experience with people using 8/8.1, none of them, both home and business users, ever use apps, nor feel the need to.

 

Think about any metro app from a desktop user standpoint and you'll see that you can perform those same tasks more efficiently from your browser.

 

On your desktop do you use the news app or just visit a website, or maybe get your news from your social media feed? How about weather? Or maps? Do you use apps or you just google " (city) weather" or just google the address and then rely on Google Maps?

 

The same goes for the apps from websites, on your desktop do you run the app or just visit their website?

 

People are used to access and consume content in a certain way, via a browser, you can get streaming, news, games, maps, etc, from your browser, you just don't need to use several different apps which serve only one purpose.

 

Business users will just keep using full blown desktop programs, programs not apps, they probably have their calendars on their smartphones synced with their calendars in Outlook, or more commonly they'll just use the calendar on their smartphones.

 

How often do desktop users find themselves using apps instead of a real software? Do you use, for instance, Skype desktop or app? Browser desktop or app? Office desktop or app? Do you use PC Settings or Control Panel? Charms Bar on the desktop?

 

I think apps have no place in a desktop environment, people will keep ignoring them, or look at them as a redundant nuisance, and I think customers sent a pretty clear message to Microsoft regarding the mix of "traditional" desktop software and apps, and, personally, I don't like that Microsoft is, apparelently, still trying to push Metro apps to desktop users, I actually find it irritating on their part to keep shoving down people's throats something they don't want, they tried and failed, just give up.

 

Just separate mobile touch-optimized devices from desktop keyboard and mouse devices, they're two different environments, with two different usages and two different needs, that's why I believe they need two different OS and different software.

 

I'm not saying Windows 9 will fail too because of Metro, but I fear that if they keep mixing Metro and Traditional at all costs Windows 9 will still have a hard time selling and convincing users, especially corporate users, to move away from more traditional environments.

 

Just my two cents, at the end of the day I'm not running a Fortune 500 company so Satya Nadella surely knows better than me.

@computerbase screenshot:

 

did you notice the "add remove windows features"-screen / screen number 15?

 

there is the "legacy language support" checkbox.

 

This is an amazing tidbit regarding compatibility.

MFC-MBCS-projects won't run without this checkbox.

Read this:

http://blogs.msdn.com/b/vcblog/archive/2013/07/08/mfc-support-for-mbcs-deprecated-in-visual-studio-2013.aspx

"MFC support for MBCS deprecated in Visual Studio 2013"

 

Hell this is fast.  :(  

 

Faster than i expected.

I just would like to eleborate on my "crusade" against Metro.

 

Personal tastes are not up for debate obviously, I can go on and rant all day about how I find a certain design ugly and I still won't win any supporters; however, my "personal war" on Metro is based on the assumption that I believe people just don't care about those apps.

 

My reasoning is based on current adoption of 8/8.1, which is, as you know, very low, and personal experience with people using 8/8.1, none of them, both home and business users, ever use apps, nor feel the need to.

 

Think about any metro app from a desktop user standpoint and you'll see that you can perform those same tasks more efficiently from your browser.

 

On your desktop do you use the news app or just visit a website, or maybe get your news from your social media feed? How about weather? Or maps? Do you use apps or you just google " (city) weather" or just google the address and then rely on Google Maps?

 

The same goes for the apps from websites, on your desktop do you run the app or just visit their website?

 

People are used to access and consume content in a certain way, via a browser, you can get streaming, news, games, maps, etc, from your browser, you just don't need to use several different apps which serve only one purpose.

 

Business users will just keep using full blown desktop programs, programs not apps, they probably have their calendars on their smartphones synced with their calendars in Outlook, or more commonly they'll just use the calendar on their smartphones.

 

How often do desktop users find themselves using apps instead of a real software? Do you use, for instance, Skype desktop or app? Browser desktop or app? Office desktop or app? Do you use PC Settings or Control Panel? Charms Bar on the desktop?

 

I think apps have no place in a desktop environment, people will keep ignoring them, or look at them as a redundant nuisance, and I think customers sent a pretty clear message to Microsoft regarding the mix of "traditional" desktop software and apps, and, personally, I don't like that Microsoft is, apparelently, still trying to push Metro apps to desktop users, I actually find it irritating on their part to keep shoving down people's throats something they don't want, they tried and failed, just give up.

 

Just separate mobile touch-optimized devices from desktop keyboard and mouse devices, they're two different environments, with two different usages and two different needs, that's why I believe they need two different OS and different software.

 

I'm not saying Windows 9 will fail too because of Metro, but I fear that if they keep mixing Metro and Traditional at all costs Windows 9 will still have a hard time selling and convincing users, especially corporate users, to move away from more traditional environments.

 

Just my two cents, at the end of the day I'm not running a Fortune 500 company so Satya Nadella surely knows better than me.

 

First, apps are real software. There's no limitations on what they can become. Second, apps also = programs. I use many applications on my desktop, and those include Metro and legacy desktop applications.

 

Third, there is no reason Metro cannot exist on the desktop. It's a better proponent for a new era in computing than the largely legacy desktop is, and can better scale to accommodate a wide range of personal devices, than the legacy desktop can. The Metro UI, and Metro applications are in a better position to carry Windows forward, than the 90's era legacy still remaining in the OS.

  • Like 2

It does for what I need

 

I know apps can be uninstalled on 8/8.1, I hope they will keep this possibility, I just simply don't want to see apps anywhere near me, I personally think they look ugly and childish, I wouldn't even want to see a list of that stuff, I would try to achieve a Windows 7 look and erase any reminder of their "modern" stuff that I personally don't care about.

 

I just want a proper working edition of Windows, without anything "metro", if Microsoft will give users the possibility to clean the OS uninstalling apps fine, unless I'll look somewhere else for my PC.

What you "don't care about" is probably something you haven't used for more than a week. You haven't got done into the nitty-gritty powerful part of the Modern UI. You'll understand how useful the new task manager, charms bar, and PC settings App are. You probably did not need to project things from the get-go, so you haven't used the new Winkey+P menu, you probably did not install it on more than one PC or update to 8.1 August Update, in which case you would see how powerful Settings Sync and Onedrive are. You've also probably never given the new Mail app a try, and let me tell you the organization is simple, yet intuitive. OneNote is another thing that is great about the Modern UI. Taking notes for school on a Surface or laptop type devices, as I have seen students and teachers do, really helps them keep organized.

  • Like 2

To those arguing that apps are not software, yes they are.

 

Apps are Mac OSX Applications, Windows Apps, Windows Desktop (Legacy) apps/Programs, Android Apps, Play Store Apps, Nokia Android Apps, Amazon Apps, iOS Apps, iPhone Apps, Android Tablet Apps, iPad apps are all called "Apps" and they are all software. Windows (Modern UI) apps tend to have more functionality than other MOBILE apps, and tend to look better than Desktop Apps or OSX APPlications.

 

 

...and personal experience with people using 8/8.1, none of them, both home and business users, ever use apps...

The thousands that use Windows Apps everyday would disagree with you. Yes adoption is slow, yes it is a new concept that users are still trying to understand and maybe in the future implement into their daily lives. To day that Apps aren't the future is like saying Windows 7 is not better than XP, which obviously you seem to also disagree with.

Windows 9 will be DOA.

 

People don't like extreme change. Microsoft have not learned from their mistakes with Windows 8. I'm very disappointed. I've used Windows since version 3, however it looks like that will change soon.

Windows 9 will be DOA.

People don't like extreme change. Microsoft have not learned from their mistakes with Windows 8. I'm very disappointed. I've been using Windows since version 3.1.

That's kinda why they're giving you the option to set it up exactly like the "classic" versions of Windows.. no extreme changes. Since you mentioned it, the change from 3.1 to NT/95 was much bigger/extreme, and yet the world seems to shockingly still prefer Windows over anything else.

Personally rather happy with where it's going, regardless of if you like the classic or the modern styles. (Visual style could still use some sprucing up but.. *shrug* I change that on every OS regardless.)

Windows 9 will be DOA.

 

People don't like extreme change. Microsoft have not learned from their mistakes with Windows 8.

Sorry, but that's BS. Change is part of the game. You can't keep complaining about it.

  • Like 2

Windows 9 will be DOA.

 

People don't like extreme change. Microsoft have not learned from their mistakes with Windows 8. I'm very disappointed. I've used Windows since version 3, however it looks like that will change soon.

 

How is this extreme change compared to Windows 7, because everybody skipped Windows 8 right?

The start menu is evolved, just like it did from 95 to 98 to ..... 7

And there is a new type of applications you can run, or just ignore if you don't want them.

Other then that, everybody is making you log in with some sort of account that aggregates lots of things for you and connects to the cloud

That's what makes re-installing your pc these days a breeze.

 

If you don't want any of this, you can just turn it all off.

But MS has always enabled new features standard, with the option to turn them off again if you like

 

With an attitude like that it just makes sense for you to just stick with what you got

Windows 9 will be DOA.

 

People don't like extreme change. Microsoft have not learned from their mistakes with Windows 8. I'm very disappointed. I've used Windows since version 3, however it looks like that will change soon.

And there wasn't extreme change from 3.x -> 9x?

 

Program Manager was replaced. File Manager was replaced. The taskbar was added. Much of the UI chrome was changed. For someone who has been using Windows as long as you claim, you seem to think this is the first time Windows has ever had a major change.

  • Like 2

Maybe?  I personally don't have issue with it but maybe they changed that or plan to as well.  We haven't seen what happens when that's clicked only the one next to it for virtual desktops.

I'm assuming since search is back in Start that the pin is going to be universal search.  Frankly sad about the icon as I was hoping for a circle. ;)

 

I'm betting the quick admin menu stays, but I honestly don't get why they implemented Start that way.  That's not modern at all, its a bastard of two extremes mashed together.  Not happy so far with what looks to be a tragically redundant widget launcher.  Let them be different, but connect them in more meaningful ways.  Separate but equal-ish!

 

To those arguing that apps are not software, yes they are.

 

No one is arguing that, you are just belaboring the point that Applications > Apps > Widgets.

 

The thousands that use Windows Apps everyday would disagree with you. Yes adoption is slow, yes it is a new concept that users are still trying to understand and maybe in the future implement into their daily lives. To day that Apps aren't the future is like saying Windows 7 is not better than XP, which obviously you seem to also disagree with.

 

And yet it is such an old concept that the iPhone triggered an ah ha moment for a generation as soon as they could wipe their greasy fingers on them from the couch.

So are the options for multiple displays. :(

Do you mean this?

 

5376d1333772038-taskbar-hide-show-multip

 

 

It is not on my Surface either, I think that it adapts to if you have an external display connected or not. He probably didn't.

c01vn.png

After you change your Start style:

 

 

Notice also that "Show Windows Store apps on the taskbar" is gone:

 

 

Maybe that option comes back when you select the option to use the start screen

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Posts

    • 10 games join Xbox Free Play Days this weekend by Pulasthi Ariyasinghe Another Free Play Days offer has just landed, and this one is a unique one. On top of offering 10 games to jump into for Xbox players, all the titles are from a single publisher: No More Robots. The promotion has games like Little Rocket Lab, Spirittea, Descenders Next, Let's Build a Zoo, and much more. Almost every game in the selection does need an Xbox Game Pass Ultimate, Premium, or Essential subscription, so keep this in mind when browsing. Many of the titles are Xbox Play Anywhere titles though, so both Xbox console and PC players can jump in. Here's how the announcement blog post described some of the available titles: There is one game that's available to all Xbox players without the need for any subscriptions, which is Descenders. Here are the announced games and the platforms they are available to play on: Little Rocket Lab (Xbox Series X|S, Xbox One, PC) Spirittea (Xbox Series X|S, Xbox One, PC) Soccer Story (Xbox Series X|S, Xbox One, PC) Descenders Next (Game Preview) (Xbox Series X|S, Xbox One, PC) Let's Build a Zoo (Xbox Series X|S, Xbox One, PC) Hypnospace Outlaw (Xbox Series X|S, Xbox One, PC) Slayers X: Terminal Aftermath: Vengance of the Slayer (Xbox Series X|S, Xbox One, PC) Nowhere Prophet (Xbox Series X|S, Xbox One, PC) Family Man (Xbox Series X|S, Xbox One) Descenders (Xbox Series X|S, Xbox One, PC) To easily find the titles on Xbox consoles, first head to the Store, then in the sidebar, find the Home section. In there, open the Subscriptions tab. The Free Play Days collection will show up in this area. This week's Free Play Days promotions will end on Sunday, June 7, at 11:59 pm PT.
    • 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.
  • 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
      476
    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!