poll Windows 10 Preview (How do you like it?)

[PGHammer]

Rickkins - the problem there is that the only acceptable move (for the critics) is NO move.  It is not objective in the least - they are, literally, voting for the familiar and for complacency.  They are saying "I don't want to move!".

 

It is not a question of consideration, as they refuse to consider it.

 

When a vote is to do nothing, there is no reasoning with such a position.

 

How do you change when change, is literally, the one thing that is NOT wanted at all?

[strotee]

Rickkins - the problem there is that the only acceptable move (for the critics) is NO move.  It is not objective in the least - they are, literally, voting for the familiar and for complacency.  They are saying "I don't want to move!".

 

It is not a question of consideration, as they refuse to consider it.

 

When a vote is to do nothing, there is no reasoning with such a position.

 

How do you change when change, is literally, the one thing that is NOT wanted at all?

Why are these the choices ?

a) love Windows 10

b) hate change and choose to be stuck in the past

 

I'm voting for

c) MS can do better.

[Rickkins]

I disagree. True, the win7 desktop interface was, and still is, pretty damned good, but that does not by any means mean that there is nothing they can do to improve upon it.

[+Fahim S. MVC]

I disagree. True, the win7 desktop interface was, and still is, pretty damned good, but that does not by any means mean that there is nothing they can do to improve upon it.

 

Better than Vista and XP certainly - but not as near as attractive, productive or performant as the Windows 8 desktop interface in my opinion.

[Dashel]

What is wrong with 'metrofying' the Desktop?  As opposed to competing with it?

[Squuiid]

Nothing wrong with change, and for the most part, change can be a good thing.

 

However, not all change is good, or welcome, or even well considered. And THAT is what happened with 8/8.1, and now looks to spill over into 10.

Metro, I'm sure, is all well and fine on touch devices, but should never have been even considered to supplant the regular desktop. It was instituted with zero regard to the Billion plus desktop users worldwide, and THAT is WHY it failed so spectacularly.

 

Sadly, it is quite clear to anyone with an objective eye, that the poindexters at microsoft have learned exactly nothing from the whole 8/8.1 metro disaster.

Instead of doing what they at least alluded to, they have merely tried to sneak metro into the desktop, all the while telling us they were fixing the desktop. I doubt that many people, on either side, see the metrofication of the desktop as "fixing the desktop".

Man, I was so hoping for better.

Well put.

[+Warwagon MVC]

Nothing wrong with change, and for the most part, change can be a good thing.

 

However, not all change is good, or welcome, or even well considered. And THAT is what happened with 8/8.1, and now looks to spill over into 10.

Metro, I'm sure, is all well and fine on touch devices, but should never have been even considered to supplant the regular desktop. It was instituted with zero regard to the Billion plus desktop users worldwide, and THAT is WHY it failed so spectacularly.

 

Sadly, it is quite clear to anyone with an objective eye, that the poindexters at microsoft have learned exactly nothing from the whole 8/8.1 metro disaster.

Instead of doing what they at least alluded to, they have merely tried to sneak metro into the desktop, all the while telling us they were fixing the desktop. I doubt that many people, on either side, see the metrofication of the desktop as "fixing the desktop".

Man, I was so hoping for better.

 

[dr_crabman]

 

I skipped over Vista completely, and mostly liked 7 when it came out, with a couple slight modifications. In a nutshell, I returned the windows XP takbar to its place, dumping the win7 taskbar. The moving of the "show desktop" was just one annoyance. After being to the left hand side for so long, for no apparent reason. Made no sense to me, and in no way could any reasonable see it as "better", or even as good.(although I'll never forget one guys, telling me how he could, and I quote "fly his mouse down to the corner and Bam, there he was"). Still gives me a chuckle.

 

That guy was correct since it's objectively easier to hit targets in the screen corners, you don't have to really aim and can just 'throw' the cursor in the general direction. You may not have liked the change after getting used to the old way and that's fine but basically saying everyone who doesn't agree must be unreasonable and the arguments are a joke is kinda insulting. Of course a minor issue but I'm pointing that one out since I feel it's a perfect example for why many here over time got the strong impression that certain members aren't open to any change at all, instead wanting the same old no matter what while complaining about literally everything.

[PGHammer]

ozzy76 - whether Microsoft can do better involves them being allowed/permitted to do better by their users - that requires a definition of what "better" is first!  Right now, that decision isn't there, as the only alternatives are very polar - either change to embrace other methods of interaction with the PC, or stay put with the interactions permitted by Windows 7.  Support for those new methods of interaction has, by the critics' own words, been disallowed.

[Chicane-UK Veteran]

Honestly I started out fairly excited for Windows 10 but I have to say with each subsequent update as it keeps rolling out, I'm starting to get a little less enthusiastic. 

 

I can't put my finger on, again, what I dislike. I think fundamentally the stuff they're doing under the hood is good - it's fairly quick, some nice technological improvements, etc. But once again I just can't get past some fundamental things they're doing about the look and feel of the OS. The new icons are awful (hopefully they're just placeholders), I find it bizarre they basically backtracked on how Modern applications work (are they all in a window now?), and find the new start screen / start menus even less cohesive and sensible than Windows 8.1's. 

 

I honestly am not posting this to troll. The thread invites opinions. I'm being honest with my opinion. But I even now a good few years on since Microsoft went this new direction with Modern/Metro, I'm still not "getting it" - it doesn't seem to gel. It seems to jar. I personally really think they need to reinvent their UI style again and start over.  

 

And honestly this has nothing to do with being a Mac user and any elitism or any of that kind of stuff. I don't go in for that. I've always been pretty platform agnostic. I'm actually a Windows sysadmin professionally - I use Windows every day! I just... want them to do better. 

[tompkin]

@+Chicane-UK: I will tell you what my opinion is. (For what it's worth). Metro is a fine UI for mobile. That's what it was designed for. When the iPhone came out Microsoft panicked and came out with Metro not only on mobile, but (stupidly) insisted on making desktop users (their bread and butter) use it too. Rightly or wrongly that put a bad taste in desktop users mouth about Metro and it affected their view of Metro on the mobile platform. As a result, Windows Phone sales have been poor. Also, the fact that the Windows App store has been so poor.

 

Windows 10 on the desktop will do fine. Giving it away, consumers will jump on the bandwagon. There will be Windows 7 and 8 laggards but they will eventually move on. Windows Phone, however, is still up in the air. I know 90% of the people won't understand my next few statements but I think it's key to Windows Phone.

 

Windows Phone's only hope is that developers come to the platform.If I were a developer coming to WP I would start by getting a Rasberry Pi (or some device like that) and get used to working with the Windows 10 phone OS with devices. The phone market is getting ready to move on from taking pictures. People are going to want to know if it will notify them when the cake in the oven is ready. A year and a half from now, if we're still discussing whether WP takes the best pictures, WP is toast.

 

I realize I digressed from the original question (Windows 10 on desktop). The answer for me is a qualified yes/wait and see

[PGHammer]

What is with this "designed for mobile" meme?  Because it dares support touch at all?  (Touch is more common on smaller devices - that much IS true - however, it also costs less to implement on small devices compared to notebooks, laptops, desktops, etc.  Still, touch DID appear on larger devices - including desktops; as deployment costs dropped, it has also become more common on more traditionally-sized devices - from notebooks to desktops.)

 

Windows 8+ is also easier to use on non-desktops that DON'T support touch - one area where the Technical Preview itself has advantages is on hardware that supports trackpads and touchpads (which is a LOT of legacy notebooks and laptops).  I am in the process of upgrading my Technical Preview-driven notebook to 10049 (now that I have gotten it recharged).  One area where such a legacy notebook would be useful is an area that is occupied by tablets and Chromebooks - content-consumption devices.  Would you like such a device that lets you use all the Windows software you've been using, AND lets you consume content to your heart's desire - without breaking the bank?  The Technical Preview's hardware requirements are unchanged (not merely little changed) from 7 (or Vista, for that matter) and - if you are running 7 on that hardware - the cost of upgrading the OS is, in fact, zero.  (That certainly isn't true of Android (or ChromiumOS) - you must replace the hardware.)

 

Chicane-UK - what is the easiest way to hit the ground running with new software types, when a from-scratch OS is not really an option?  Add support for the new application types to an existing OS.  However, users are still free to use existing desktop software unchanged.  (So what is the REAL issue?)

 

ModernUI apps DO work better on devices with smaller screens than traditional desktops - there I agree.  However, that also includes traditional laptops and notebooks - including those that don't support touch at all.  (For example, I use more of this sort of software on my legacy notebook than my desktop.)  Basically, the issue is smaller screen size - period - at least for me.

[Chicane-UK Veteran]

@+Chicane-UK: I will tell you what my opinion is. (For what it's worth). Metro is a fine UI for mobile. That's what it was designed for. When the iPhone came out Microsoft panicked and came out with Metro not only on mobile, but (stupidly) insisted on making desktop users (their bread and butter) use it too. Rightly or wrongly that put a bad taste in desktop users mouth about Metro and it affected their view of Metro on the mobile platform. As a result, Windows Phone sales have been poor. Also, the fact that the Windows App store has been so poor.

 

Windows 10 on the desktop will do fine. Giving it away, consumers will jump on the bandwagon. There will be Windows 7 and 8 laggards but they will eventually move on. Windows Phone, however, is still up in the air. I know 90% of the people won't understand my next few statements but I think it's key to Windows Phone.

 

Windows Phone's only hope is that developers come to the platform.If I were a developer coming to WP I would start by getting a Rasberry Pi (or some device like that) and get used to working with the Windows 10 phone OS with devices. The phone market is getting ready to move on from taking pictures. People are going to want to know if it will notify them when the cake in the oven is ready. A year and a half from now, if we're still discussing whether WP takes the best pictures, WP is toast.

 

I realize I digressed from the original question (Windows 10 on desktop). The answer for me is a qualified yes/wait and see

 

Thing is, Windows 10 will do fine on the desktop because basically users don't have any choice (as Microsoft begin to stop supporting older versions of Windows.. which is perfectly reasonable to do) but also because they're going to give it away for free for the first year which is always irresistible. I got Windows 7 Ultimate for free in my delegate bag when I went to TechEd in 2009, and in terms of Windows 8.1 I just use it to make sure I'm "current" in terms of support, etc. That's why I'll always use the latest version of Windows I guess, but I couldn't honestly say I *prefer* Windows 8.1 over Windows 7... or indeed over Windows XP really. 

[DConnell Member]

Nothing wrong with change, and for the most part, change can be a good thing.

 

However, not all change is good, or welcome, or even well considered. And THAT is what happened with 8/8.1, and now looks to spill over into 10.

Metro, I'm sure, is all well and fine on touch devices, but should never have been even considered to supplant the regular desktop. It was instituted with zero regard to the Billion plus desktop users worldwide, and THAT is WHY it failed so spectacularly.

 

Sadly, it is quite clear to anyone with an objective eye, that the poindexters at microsoft have learned exactly nothing from the whole 8/8.1 metro disaster.

Instead of doing what they at least alluded to, they have merely tried to sneak metro into the desktop, all the while telling us they were fixing the desktop. I doubt that many people, on either side, see the metrofication of the desktop as "fixing the desktop".

Man, I was so hoping for better.

 

In what way has Metro ever "supplanted" the desktop? At most, the Menu was replaced by the Screen - every other desktop element was present and fully functional in 8.x, and the desktop is the primary focus in 10. I could - and still can - run every desktop program in 8 that I ran in 7. All 8 did was change the launcher and add another program type to the mix, The desktop was pretty much the same.

 

So how was it "supplanted"?

[Dashel]

Win8 attempted to supplant the desktop in a way that shouldn't be a point of dispute at this stage.  It was never 'just a menu'.  If you still don't 'get' that, then you really need to go back and examine your simplistic assumptions.

 

I remain excited Chicane.  I don't see how you can't gel with Metro when we're finally seeing the fruits we've been waiting three years for.

[DConnell Member]

Win8 attempted to supplant the desktop in a way that shouldn't be a point of dispute at this stage.  It was never 'just a menu'.  If you still don't 'get' that, then you really need to go back and examine your simplistic assumptions.

 

I remain excited Chicane.  I don't see how you can't gel with Metro when we're finally seeing the fruits we've been waiting three years for.

 

I never said Metro was "just a menu". What I said that I don't see, given that the desktop was and remains fully functional and capable of running all the programs I ran on Win7, how the desktop was supplanted. The menu was replaced and another program type was added alongside the desktop. The desktop itself was not cut back in capability at all.

 

How about explaining why you think the desktop was supplanted rather than simply dismissing my statement, which I've actually explained, as a "simplistic assumption"? Making statements like that with no elaboration makes your statement come off as the "simplistic assumption".

[Rickkins]

How about explaining why you think the desktop was supplanted rather than simply dismissing my statement, which I've actually explained, as a "simplistic assumption"? Making statements like that with no elaboration makes your statement come off as the "simplistic assumption".

No, because that would be pointless, and you know it. Sorry, but I have given up.

[DConnell Member]

No, because that would be pointless, and you know it. Sorry, but I have given up.

 

Gotcha. It's much easier to just state your opinions as if they're self-evident truth than to provide explanation.

 

And easier to belittle the opposing viewpoint than discuss it reasonably.

[Ian W]

Win8 attempted to supplant the desktop in a way that shouldn't be a point of dispute at this stage.  It was never 'just a menu'.  If you still don't 'get' that, then you really need to go back and examine your simplistic assumptions.

The definition of supplant is "to succeed and replace." I don't know why you keep repeating this absurd claim that Windows 8 sought to replace the desktop; it did not.

"We challenged ourselves to bring the best of mobility and the best of PCs, in an experience where you don't have to compromise." - Sinofsky, Mobile World Congress.

 

I don't see how you can't gel with Metro when we're finally seeing the fruits we've been waiting three years for.

That's an interesting statement particularly since a lot of what Windows 10 intends to provide wasn't even mentioned three years ago.

[Noir Angel]

Bugged - or complained about?

 

I hear lots of complaints - and very few honest bugs.  Honest bugs are things like the driver issues and other mostly known issues; however, I've been hearing (here at Neowin) more about UI complaints and icon complaints than bugs.

 

Even more telling, the complaints largely revolve around "it's not pointing-device-centric" or "it's not 7".

 

Of course not - it's not SUPPOSED to be 7; Windows 7 is BTDT (Been There, Done That).  Even more telling, where has it gone?

 

Is or isn't Windows 7 still being sold?  Is or isn't Windows 7 still purchasable as a new OS?

 

Consider this - Windows 10 hasn't had a Consumer Preview yet (a genuine beta); instead, it's been Technical Preview after Technical Preview.

 

A lot of the OS is either in flux or outright missing.  Yet it is AT LEAST as usable as 8.1 was, despite that.

 

Worse, I'm hearing a slight hunger for Vista - the second most despised pre-8 Microsoft OS for users (only Windows ME was more despised).

 

Go back and read the complaints ABOUT Vista - right here on Neowin itself.  (I didn't even MAKE any.)  Despite my non-complaints about Vista, I'm not waxing THAT nostalgic that I want Vista Redux - I don't want 7 Redux, either.

 

It is looking more and more like lots of folks are either unwilling to move or are outright nostalgic here on Neowin.

 

If you have application issues (other than the UI), there is even a thread for that - that I created - here in this specific subforum ("Compatibility Failures - What Is Keeping You From Windows 10").  Other than the games Daybreak inherited from Sony (that I kicked off that same thread with) - every application and game that I played in 8 I have been able to play in EVERY build of Windows 10 to date - including the leaked builds.  The number of operating systems that are that clean that they are no worse than the SHIPPING OS - as far as usability goes - previous to 10 number exactly one.  And no - 7 wasn't it, despite it changing less than Vista (which brought the code over from Windows Server).

 

Unlike those complaining, I didn't move the measuring stick (or the goalposts) any compared to even previous versions of Windows - and especially not compared to 7 - after all, why would (or should) I?  My hardware pretty much is unchanged (except for adding the notebook - which predates even 7).  Touch isn't part of the measuring - none of my hardware supports it.  The reason I no longer use an external mouse on my notebook is because the built-in trackpad is now properly supported in the OS - which is Windows 10 9926.  (After I pick up a new power brick, I'm planting 10041 on that same notebook.)  The notebook itself dates back to Vista - which is what originally shipped on it - yet it took three-plus OSes to get the trackpad support right?  Who is to blame, people?  Synaptics (that made the trackpad for HP)?  Microsoft (that supplied the driver said trackpad uses by default)?  Previous users? (After all, the notebook itself had two previous users before I got it - and hundreds of thousands of identical AND similar trackpads - from Synaptics and others - were and are included in notebooks today and years previously - what did those users do?)

 

Complaints are not bugs - BUGS are bugs.

 

Complaints are complaints - and I refuse to conflate, OR mix up, the two.

 

Different thread, same old nonsense. "it works for me therefore everyone else's feedback is invalid".

 

Do you personally have access to every hardware config these people are testing the builds on? I'll wager that the answer is probably no.

[Jim K Global Moderator]

Gotcha. It's much easier to just state your opinions as if they're self-evident truth than to provide explanation.

 

And easier to belittle the opposing viewpoint than discuss it reasonably.

 

Pot meet kettle much?

 

 

The desktop itself was not cut back in capability at all.

 

Though I do not necessarily disagree with this statement...you should relay that information to Dot Matrix who proclaimed "desktop as we knew it, is dead."  I'm only saying this because you and him seem to agree on a lot of Modern UI topics.

https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/1243980-is-microsoft-ignoring-the-desktop-again/?view=findpost&p=596737068

[DConnell Member]

Pot meet kettle much?

 

Excuse me? I try to avoid ridiculing another's point of view, even when baited. I may disagree strongly and argue passionately, but I generally try to keep it civil. There might be a couple occasions when I lose that composure (my initial response to your post came close) but it isn't often.

 

This was a reaction to Rickkins' refusal to back up his claim that the desktop was "supplanted". He was, in fact, acting as if his opinion was a self-evident truth, something which my own experience, which I drew on in my initial reply, doesn't support.

[PGHammer]

I didn't say that the feedback was invalid - it's when the feedback is complaints that it's not a previous OS (as opposed to a bug report about either compatibility OR usability) that such feedback is, in fact, less than useless.

 

Further I am not one of those insisting that a new OS act exactly like an older OS - that would be rather pointless.

 

If I am evaluating an OS - any OS - as a possible alternative or replacement for the OS I normally run, why would I insist on it acting exactly like what I'm looking to replace?  If I am going to do that, I'm not really looking to move, am I?

[Jim K Global Moderator]

No, because that would be pointless, and you know it. Sorry, but I have given up.

 

Gotcha. It's much easier to just state your opinions as if they're self-evident truth than to provide explanation.

 

Excuse me? I try to avoid ridiculing another's point of view, even when baited. I may disagree strongly and argue passionately, but I generally try to keep it civil. There might be a couple occasions when I lose that composure (my initial response to your post came close) but it isn't often.

 

Rickkins "claim" was his opinion/based on his views, he bowed out yet you attempted to "bait" him with your "  " .  Pot meet kettle.

 

He did not say Modern UI applications were supplanting w32 programs which you've alluded to: 

 

I could - and still can - run every desktop program in 8 that I ran in 7. All 8 did was change the launcher and add another program type to the mix, The desktop was pretty much the same.

 

If you look at the Desktop other than just a black (or wallpapered) background where programs run, I think you'd agree that many Modern UI elements have taken over the Windows Environment.  Thus, Modern UI has supplanted the typical "Desktop" by taking over many facets of said Environment.  This is how I interpreted Rickkins remarks.

 

Odd that you didn't comment on Dot Matrix's statement.  

[nekrosoft13]

I think people should learn to try it without Classic Shell as it sort-of defeats the purpose of testing the Tech Preview if you are not giving feedback to improve parts of the feature you dislike.

 

i tried its beyond horrible, this new bastardized start menu is even worse than before, bring back the real start menu.