Dissapointed in the Windows 10 Tech preview so far

[PGHammer]

Of course it's navigable. The Windows 8 UI was navigable. It's not optimal though. 

 

 

 

Uh, no. I'd like them to turn Control Panel into something far more usable for k+m users. It could use A LOT of improvement. I just don't see the solution in Metro PC settings as it exists now... Just like the Metro calculator isn't really optimised to run in a window at this point.

Control Panel really didn't change from Windows 7 - in other words, you are basically stating that Control Panel even there was suboptimal.  So what would you add/improve to make it WORTH retaining for keyboard+mouse users?  The same applies to the non-ModernUI Calculator - what should be done to make it worth retaining?

 

If you are going to relegate - or kill off - certain ModernUI applications, then come up with improvements to the desktop applications to make them worth retaining, as opposed to retaining them simply for the sake of tradition.

[Anibal P]

So many people here should just stick to official releases, you don't understand what "Technical Preview" or Alpha, Beta, RC process is or how it works 

 

And if you thought 10 was going to be radically different from 8, then you either ignored the whole presentation or you live in fantasyland, 10 is a progression and more refinement of what 8 started, which was not a bad start, contrary to popular minority belief 

[Dot Matrix]

migration? Maybe I'm misunderstanding you, but imo this is another case of where Control Panel should remain the k+m UI (but should also be cleaned up a lot) and automatically turn into the Metro-style UI via Continuum. OR get rid of Control Panel but then major changes would have to happen on the Metro UI side to optimise it for k+m usage...

PC Settings is already mouse ready

[theyarecomingforyou]

Again, you are thinking that ALL keyboard+mouse users work the same way - that is something I disagree with.  Something that nobody knows is how many work that way due to lack of options or by user-preference, as Windows 8 was also the first version of Windows to break out of that single method of interaction.  Not all keyboard+mouse users work the same way - the same applies to tablet users;  I didn't make the reference to keyboard users on tablets for my health.

I didn't suggest that at all. However, I recognise that mouse and keyboard users tend to use computers different to tablet and laptop users. Windows 8 forced a single approach on all users, whereas Windows 10 provides users options. If a desktop user wants to use the Start Screen on Windows 10 they can - it isn't forced upon them like in Windows 8.

 

Windows 10 is better suited to the average needs of users than Windows 8. It still lacks some basic options though, like allowing Explorer to launch in the 'This PC' view rather than the 'Home' view.

[Active.]

Here'S a clue as to what's wrong with PC Settings at this point. I fully realise this will (most likely) change. Yes this is alpha quality (or whatever). It'll change. My only point is that it absolutely has to. Just like the Metro Calculator. OR they have to take advantage of Continuity to morph traditional apps into WinRT apps somehow (e.g. morph Desktop IE into Metro IE and vv) I'll be the first to congratulate MS if they actually manage to pull off the feat of making Metro apps highly usable in a window for k+m users. We're not there yet.

 

[Ian W]

Control Panel really didn't change from Windows 7 - in other words, you are basically stating that Control Panel even there was suboptimal.

I will take this opportunity to point out that I really disliked what Windows 7 did to the Control Panel. Up to Windows Vista, the location acted like a typical folder in Windows Explorer, where users could change the size and arrangement of icons, and in Windows Vista, use the grouping and filtering options to narrow down results.

The Control Panel in Windows 7 removed the level of customization offered by Classic View and forced either a Large Icons or Small Icons view when not in Category view.

[redvamp128]

Why would you want to do an upgrade? Surely a clean install is the best thing to do here?

 

Actually, you want some percentage of Developers to upgrade.   This for example is to see how their application reacts to an upgrade or even worse.  When I mean worse, I mean for example a product installs just fine on a vanilla install but fails if the user upgraded then tried to install the product.  I have ran into that such issue with multiple .DLL versions in the past where there were some older versions of .DLL that programs would try to use even though the system no longer used them after an upgrade.  In a perfect world everyone would do a clean install, but I have actually worked on computers that have transitioned through upgrades. 

 

I worked on a computer that started life off as XP=upgrade to VIsta=upgrade to Windows 7.  

 

To put it in a nutshell... 

You want some folks to upgrade to see how a system functions through an upgrade to see if there are either OS issues or Application issues following an upgrade.  

I have even seen some applications fail to install after an upgrade that was previously installed, because the average user is not going to do this advised method.

 

Recommendations for upgrading: (in theory this works best)

Uninstall all applications that are not part of the OS.

Get all OS updates

Upgrade

Get all updates

Re-install your applications

(in theory everything should work)

 

This is what mostly happens;

User sees upgrade- Upgrades on the spot

Applications stop working- User tries to re-install  that usually fails.. tries to remove it (sometimes this fails as to the installer references are now in the .OLD) folder- then re-install which is about a 50-50

 

So actually you want people to install using upgrades to find potential problems with the OS and also with your favorite Applications.

[Active.]

 in Windows Vista, use the grouping and filtering options to narrow down results. [...] The Control Panel in Windows 7 removed the level of customization offered by Classic View and forced either a Large Icons or Small Icons view when not in Category view.

 

Win 10 certainly looks a lot better than that.   :x

[Ian W]

Win 10 certainly looks a lot better than that.   :x

Windows 10 looks better than the top image, the bottom image, or both? The Control Panel in Windows 10 hasn't changed much from Windows 7.

I must admit that I prefer the PC Settings in Windows 10 and hope that Microsoft will soon add all of the options in the Control Panel to PC Settings.

[Active.]

Windows 10 looks better than the top image, the bottom image, or both? The Control Panel in Windows 10 hasn't changed much from Windows 7. 

 

 Well, Vista looks even worse. But Win 10 looks better than either Vista or 7, since the window decoration has changed. And thankfully the icons will, too. But, like I said, the Control Panel could use a lot of improvement. Or, if they optimise PC settings for window usage then, I guess, I'm fine with that too.

 

[j2006]

Um, the Tech Preview is no where near the final version... think of it as Windows 8.1 with a hint of Windows 10's features.  The majority of the new features have been stripped out until the Consumer Preview.  As they said, this preview is more for IT Pros to prepare their enterprises/business's infrastructure and for those on Windows XP-7 to get used to the new Windows 8-10 interface.   Even both the new Start Screen and Continuum they showed during the conference are not in the Tech Preview.   Just wait until the Consumer Preview... that's when we truly get into the Threshold  :)

[Active.]

Um, the Tech Preview is no where near the final version... think of it as Windows 8.1 with a hint of Windows 10's features.  The majority of the new features have been stripped out until the Consumer Preview.  [...] just wait until the Consumer Preview... that's when we truly get into the Threshold  :)

the focus shouldn't be (and I'm assuming/hoping it isn't) on new features but on refining existing features. And while MS doesn't have the greatest track record in that area, I for one am hopeful this time will be different.

[Noir Angel]

I'll probably still install another start menu app as I'm really not impressed by the functionality this "hybrid" abortion presents, but I do find the fact that some settings crossover between the modern "PC Settings" app and the control panel, and that you have to switch between the environments to change various things, it just reinforces my view that it's still software with an identity crisis. I like having it so that you can simply turn the control panel into a menu and have all the applets there, which is one of the reasons I am a fan of the old style start menu.

 

As far as I'm concerned, this direction puts some of the wrongs to bed but I won't be happy until I can avoid using "modern" crap altogether.

[gate1975mlm]

Has anyone heard if Windows 7 Aero skin will be returning in Windoiws 10 in some form?

 

Or is the current skin in Windows 10 Tech Preview going to be it? Because if you ask me it looks exactly like Windows 8.1 skin and that is not a good thing in my opinion :(

 

And why can't Microsoft bring back the option to disable the transparent taskbar like in Windows 7?

[PGHammer]

I'll probably still install another start menu app as I'm really not impressed by the functionality this "hybrid" abortion presents, but I do find the fact that some settings crossover between the modern "PC Settings" app and the control panel, and that you have to switch between the environments to change various things, it just reinforces my view that it's still software with an identity crisis. I like having it so that you can simply turn the control panel into a menu and have all the applets there, which is one of the reasons I am a fan of the old style start menu.

 

As far as I'm concerned, this direction puts some of the wrongs to bed but I won't be happy until I can avoid using "modern" crap altogether.

Javik, that is basically a complete reversion back to 7 - which even most of the critics of 8 or the Technical Preview admit was not exactly optimal for even keyboard+mouse users, let alone users of anything else.

 

Could the reason for that was that what was possible with Windows 7 could not even have caught up to 7's hardware base?

 

One thing I have been trying to point out is that Windows 8, Windows 8.1, and even the Technical Preview take better advantage of the EXISTING hardware of 7 (and in some cases, even Vista) than the operating systems released on that hardware did.  That is the REAL embarrassment (or at least should be for most of the critics of 8 and later).

 

I included my then-desktop in the Developer Preview testing pool (despite its age) for straightforward compatibility and usability testing - I roped in the notebook (Technical Preview) for the same reason - and it's even older.  I noticed the spread between the OS and the hardware base merely with Windows 7 - if anything, Windows 8 and later have made that same gap even more obvious - and that is on not merely 7-era hardware, but even VISTA-era hardware.

 

Apparently, we - as users, mind you - have been literally driving (our PCs) with "training wheels" - why are we still insisting on doing so?

 

Is taking greater advantage of our hardware capabilities THAT scary and frightening?

[Dot Matrix]

Has anyone heard if Windows 7 Aero skin will be returning in Windoiws 10 in some form?

Or is the current skin in Windows 10 Tech Preview going to be it? Because if you ask me it looks exactly like Windows 8.1 skin and that is not a good thing in my opinion :(

And why can't Microsoft bring back the option to disable the transparent taskbar like in Windows 7?

No.

[dvb2000]

I know its going to get rapid updates, but I was really expecting a new OS, not Win 8.1 with a new task switcher and start menu. Its literally the same OS underneath.

 

I'm sticking with Windows 7. I wish Microsoft would sell the rights for Windows 7 to a 3rd party. If it was still available for new computers and existing users, in competition for all the metro based versions of Windows, then all metro derivatives would be dead in a heartbeat as Microsoft sold zero copies of the trash.

[+Zagadka Subscriber²]

How bad an idea would it be to install Win10 Preview as the main OS?

[dvb2000]

Is taking greater advantage of our hardware capabilities THAT scary and frightening?

 

No one is interested in touch on the desktop/laptop, so thats irrelevent, other than that what hardware does w8 take better advantage of?

[Praetor]

How bad an idea would it be to install Win10 Preview as the main OS?

 

pretty bad; this is an Alpha release, not for consumers but for enterprises and admins to use it for testing the production apps and seeing whatever problems can arise, so one can expect diverse problems like random slowness, crashes and whatever funky weirdness or none of them; also this version is sending telemetry data to Microsoft, so they can build the final release with the best possible feedback from the users, so using as a main OS provides a better feedback to Microsoft but a poor experience to you.

 

Remember that you using this OS you are, basically, a tester for Microsoft.

[Dot Matrix]

I'm sticking with Windows 7. I wish Microsoft would sell the rights for Windows 7 to a 3rd party. If it was still available for new computers and existing users, in competition for all the metro based versions of Windows, then all metro derivatives would be dead in a heartbeat as Microsoft sold zero copies of the trash.

Right... You do that.

[Quillz]

How bad an idea would it be to install Win10 Preview as the main OS?

It's actually pretty stable and most legacy/desktop apps that worked on Win8 will work on this. It's third-party Modern apps that, for the most part, don't work correctly, since they need to be updated to run in a window.

[Active.]

all the metro based versions of Windows, 

I wouldn't exactly call Win 10 "metro based" at this point. If you take MS by their word, Windows 10 really does represent a change in philosophy.  Remember, the vision of Windows 8 was that you were supposed to think of the Desktop environment as "just another (legacy) app" in the Metro environment. The Start Screen was supposed to be everybody's home base, there existed an additional task switcher that was separate from the Desktop. They've completely done away with that duality.  "We don't want that duality." (Belfiore). 

[libertas83]

 

You're joking, right? Windows 8 forced desktop users to use an interface designed for tablets and was incredibly awkward to use on mouse and keyboard. It certainly didn't allow users to 'fine-grain the user experience'.

 

 

Of course it's navigable. The Windows 8 UI was navigable. It's not optimal though. 

 

 

There is nothing about Windows 8 or Metro that is "suboptimal" for navigating with a keyboard and mouse and in fact, is just quite as easy as any other desktop app. I can even argue, that the Start Screen is far more usable with a keyboard and mouse then the Windows XP Start Menu especially on a trackpad where I often screw up the fly out menus and have to start over.

 

There were only 2 real weaknesses of Metro apps.

1.) Full screen app only made the app waste space on larger monitors and made multitasking more difficult. Snap made it better but still took away the freedom of having multiple windows open for power users like me.

 

2.) API sucks! They gutted the .NET API to create Windows Runtime, WinRT, which made for less compelling apps and is by far the biggest issue today. I look forward to see how they improve WinRT to fix the issues.  

[dvb2000]

There is nothing about Windows 8 or Metro that is "suboptimal" for navigating with a keyboard and mouse

 

lol - not even Microsoft are pushing that line any more.

 

They've admitted it was an unmitigated disaster on the dekstop and laptop. The fact that sales are less than Vista REALLY tells the story of its failure.