Windows 10: New leaked screenshots reveal brand new UI for Settings; death of Control Panel?

[techbeck]

Assuming that this is real:

 

It looks like Control Panel hasn't been removed completely (probably for legacy reasons).

 

The new "Settings" is the "zPC Settings" from build 9879.

Have not had a change to load up that build yet. Will one of these days or a newer build

[+Warwagon MVC]

If real, I just wish they would keep Windows update it's own section and not put it inside update and recovery.

[BajiRav]

Wouldn't that make it less useful?

As someone who has prefers Category view over the flat listing mess of pre-Windows XP control panel, I don't know how to respond to your post. Category view is 100% more efficient than the flat listing. They just need to re-think the 2nd level nav links.

Just a thought: How about we make a venn diagram of people who prefer flat listed control panel and who hate start screen because there is no support for folders because they like to organize things? :laugh:

 

Assuming this is real, it's not like it's some big drastic change or anything, pretty much the same procedure as before, just fitting in with the new UI. This is bad how exactly?

I am curious to see if it handles third party control panel extensions though, again if it's even real.

but but...it is now called PC Settings instead of Control Panel! You don't know how many clueless customers I have to support. etc. etc. ;) :p

[coth]

I hope it's not fake. Looks pretty nice and will work nicely on everything (PC, tablet and phone).

Definitely not on PC. Looks too monotonous, too big, too fat with way too ineffective waste of space.

[BajiRav]

Definitely not on PC. Looks too monotonous, too big, too fat with way too ineffective waste of space.

ineffective waste of space? :laugh: compared to this, I don't see much difference besides WIP aesthetics.

[Mockingbird]

Is there any chance that the description underneath each icons are clickable?

 

For example, "Display", "notifications", "search", and "power" under System icon may be independently clickable.
 

[mdtaUK]

Is there any chance that the description underneath each icons are clickable?

 

For example, "Display", "notifications", "search", and "power" under System icon may be independently clickable.

 

More likely they are just there to give some indication as to what settings are listed in that category.   Windows Phone does something similar with their settings listing (although they are not grouped at the moment)

[remixedcat]

 

 

 

Category view is one of THE most asinine things they ever did, just give me a list, 90% of us actually know what we are looking for, category view ads unneeded steps to a simple process 

 

Agree. It's too cluttered and takes 3 steps instead of 1

 

I still love category view. List view is a mess on my eyes to browse through. It gets worse when most of the icons look the same.

 

it could be done but in the way of color coding groups of icons so you can easily find stuff.

[Studio384]

The best thing is that this might also be the end of the inconsitency. :)

[Studio384]

ok, I'm getting a good feeling from the icons. "IF" this is in fact, the new UI for settings, its a good start IMHO.

 

Added: What build is this supposedly from then?

Most likely late 989x series or early 990x.

[Mockingbird]

Now we know it's real.

[PUC_Snakeman]

You guys touting the "best way" to use Control Panel... are all wrong. :)

The BEST way (in terms of efficiency at least)...  is here (attached).

... and I hope they still allow me to do something similar when Windows 10 goes RTW!

[ViperAFK]

about time, the two separate controls panels in windows 8 was disjointed and a pia.

[Knife Party]

the new unified control panel is a good idea. the old one still opens options in pop up windows and also in the main control panel explorer which is inconsistent. unify settings, add functionality and let me pick my colour theme and i'm happy..

[Order_66]

Assuming this is real, it's not like it's some big drastic change or anything, pretty much the same procedure as before, just fitting in with the new UI. This is bad how exactly?

 

 

It shows the anti-consumer stance microsoft has by replacing things that actually work in favor of a more regressive, backwards thinking metro design for everything, starting with the destruction of the feature-rich and easy to use non-metro control panel.

[Max Norris]

It shows the anti-consumer stance microsoft has by replacing things that actually work in favor of a more regressive, backwards thinking metro design for everything, starting with the destruction of the feature-rich and easy to use non-metro control panel.

Uh-huh. Except that looking at this screenshot, I see a couple rows of categories in a single window. Looking at my 7's control panel, I see the exact same thing. Biggest difference being a lack of finalized icons as it's a WIP. Regressive? Destruction? Anti-consumer? It's practically the same, just stylized a little differently.. lay off the rhetoric a hair eh?

 

 

 

Yea, the consumer is doomed.  :rolleyes:

 

[Dot Matrix]

feature-rich and easy to use non-metro control panel.

So clicking through dozens of pop up boxes is "easy to use"?

[chrisj1968]

aside from the disagreements here, i'd say we're seeing some progress I'd think

[PGHammer]

Is there any chance that the description underneath each icons are clickable?

 

For example, "Display", "notifications", "search", and "power" under System icon may be independently clickable.

 

They are clickable - I'm running 9901 right now.

 

"Category view" is thus no different from what "Control Panel" or "PC Settings" were in older builds of the Technical Preview (or Windows 8.1 or earlier, for that matter).  "Category view" dates back to (believe it or not) Windows 2000 Professional - not XP, and it was the default - so the consumer is doomed "why"?  ("Category view" NOT being the default changed with - oddly enough - 8; I never kept it as default with any post-2000 OS, though.)  I strongly suspect new icons are still on the design board - hence the placeholders.

 

The very reason that there IS debate is why I've never been in favor of a single view over what will replace Control Panel any more than I was in favor of a single view for Control Panel itself - everyone has different preferences; adjustability FTW.

Most likely late 989x series or early 990x.

It's in 9901 (the latest leak) - I'm posting from it.

[Mockingbird]

They are clickable - I'm running 9901 right now.

 

"Category view" is thus no different from what "Control Panel" or "PC Settings" were in older builds of the Technical Preview (or Windows 8.1 or earlier, for that matter). 

 

 strongly suspect new icons are still on the design board - hence the placeholders.

 

The very reason that there IS debate is why I've never been in favor of a single view over what will replace Control Panel any more than I was in favor of a single view for Control Panel itself - everyone has different preferences; adjustability FTW.

It's in 9901 (the latest leak) - I'm posting from it.

 

That's what I thought too. Why have a list of things separated by comma if they are not clickable?

 

The cogs are definitely placeholders. There no way the setting menu would have nine cogs for icons.

 

Also, I am guessing that Control Panel is going to stay in the final OS. There're simply too many legacy things for Microsoft to redesign. Eg. Does anyone really think Microsoft is going to redesign Administrative Tools using the Modern UI?

 

[Max Norris]

There're simply too many legacy things for Microsoft to redesign. Eg. Does anyone really think Microsoft is going to redesign Administrative Tools using the Modern UI?

Always possible -- but there's backwards compatibility to consider as well. There are third party programs that add their own control panel items, have their own MMC snapins, etc. Redesigned launcher for them, sure, redesign the out-of-the-box items, maybe, but there'll still need to be a way to have third party stuff still work without having to be specifically written for 10, going to be some breakage otherwise.

[PGHammer]

That's what I thought too. Why have a list of things separated by comma if they are not clickable?

 

The cogs are definitely placeholders. There no way the setting menu would have nine cogs for icons.

 

Also, I am guessing that Control Panel is going to stay in the final OS. There're simply too many legacy things for Microsoft to redesign. Eg. Does anyone really think Microsoft is going to redesign Administrative Tools using the Modern UI?

 

Why would it (or should it)?

 

Right now, Settings does more than Control Panel does - even when you take Control Panel OUT of Category View (my normal default has not been Category View since it became the default); right now, you can't do that with Settings (it uses the tree/branch/twig view that Windows Phone does - which is incidentally shared with CP's Category View on older versions of Windows).  I get why you can't (Settings is still in flux); however, right now, Settings is far more adjustable than Control Panel has EVER been.

 

You can still get to Administrative Tools without going NEAR Settings (just as you could without going near Control Panel pre-8.x, for that matter) - type in the Runbox (or Search Bar/CortanaBox) services.msc. (I needed to do so to adjust the settings for the Windows Time Service, which was still in Manual Mode - this method has been usable since XP.)

[PGHammer]

Always possible -- but there's backwards compatibility to consider as well. There are third party programs that add their own control panel items, have their own MMC snapins, etc. Redesigned launcher for them, sure, redesign the out-of-the-box items, maybe, but there'll still need to be a way to have third party stuff still work without having to be specifically written for 10, going to be some breakage otherwise.

And what makes you think that (other than headers and icons) that Control Panel and Settings are NOT cross-compatible?  The only way that the AppScreen/StartScreen and the older Start menu are not cross-compatible is that restrictions got slapped on what got installed via installer wizards (mini-Start keeps those same restrictions).  I would THINK that the older zPC Settings was, in fact, aimed at OEMs to use as a template for third-party software (such as AMD's Catalyst Control Center/Vision Control Center or NVidia's GeForce Experience; I think that part of the problem is that too many OEMs ignored what Microsoft told them.

[chrisj1968]

I think the inherent issues with the category status of the settings can complicate things. not every user works in the modern UI workflow. some like myself use a mouse. MSFT I think realizes this.

[+Anarkii Subscriber²]

They need to release this to the public channels this is the build we are after and looks amazing :) 
Installing it now and hopefully wont be as buggy as other builds