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

[Quillz]

I'd prefer that over what Control Panel became in 95 on.

 

Maybe that's why I like 8.x so much and am cautiously optimistic about 10. Its a reversion to the sensible design concepts of Windows 3.x, with a 21st Century look.

I don't necessarily think Win3x always made use of "sensible" design, nor was it a highlight of ease of use, but I do think certain aspects of it are sorely missed in Windows. File Manager, for example, is something that worked extremely well, and even had some functionality/behavior that was never restored in Windows Explorer. (There are even recreations of File Manager available for modern Windows releases).

 

It will be interesting to see what Win10 ultimately does with things like Explorer, Settings, etc. It would be nice to have a static set of icons that do not hide functionality, but I doubt this will be the case.

[dvb2000]

 

 What are your thoughts on new UI changes?

 

wow, how butt ugly!. Every icon is exactly the same yucky purple cog wheel - they may as well leave them out altogether.

 

I'll stick with a proper, multi coloured and dimensional control panel thanks.

 

[nosense]

wow, how butt ugly!. Every icon is exactly the same yucky purple cog wheel - they may as well leave them out altogether.

 

I'll stick with a proper, multi coloured and dimensional control panel thanks.

 

LEAK BUILD............

[neo1911]

Even if there were icons that can be used as visual indicators (I'm sure they will be flat and ugly) the user will have to click through menus in windows 10 instead of using the modern windows 7 method of cascade menus taking the user directly to the settings they want.

100% agree. It's up to such a ridiculous level that aesthetics and pleasing colours are thrown down the gutter. Fugly and 1 tone icons are the new in-thing the hipsters at Microsoft care about.

Even the newer icon set we are starting to see in newer builds looks so old and tired. Pretty sure they are not placeholder icons. At most, they will be slightly tweaked before RTM.

Aesthetics and UI sexiness has never been Microsoft's fort?.

[Dot Matrix]

Even the newer icon set we are starting to see in newer builds looks so old and tired. Pretty sure they are not placeholder icons. At most, they will be slightly tweaked before RTM.

 Good grief. They are placeholders!

[ViperAFK]

wow, how butt ugly!. Every icon is exactly the same yucky purple cog wheel - they may as well leave them out altogether.

 

I'll stick with a proper, multi coloured and dimensional control panel thanks.

 

The cog icons are almost certainly placeholders...

[PotatoAlchemist]

The cog icons are almost certainly placeholders...

Especially since it's not even a public tech preview either. However they HAD to put something there, for the purpose of representation, even if it's very basic, that is the role of placeholders. It's the process, not the destination yet.

[PotatoAlchemist]

wow, how butt ugly!. Every icon is exactly the same yucky purple cog wheel - they may as well leave them out altogether.

 

I'll stick with a proper, multi coloured and dimensional control panel thanks.

 

First of all, skeuomorphism is practically outdated for the good duration of time. As Windows is solely not the only one who opted for this design choice. Secondly, just because the icons get to be flat, doesn't mean it can't be dimensional. Although more or less instead of going for a perspective representation, it mostly goes with an isometric one, but almost all times it's facing forward.

[Alex I.]

I think it is right to ditch the Control Panel for the new Settings. Common guys, this just looks a lot better, and fits the OS nicely. You have an integrated search for finding a setting fast. I am pretty sure the UI is not final and the cogs are just place holders for the work in progress icons. Some people just like to whine about everything, don't forget that ###### build isn't even officially released by MS.

[neufuse Veteran]

I find it funny everyone is all up on the cog wheel icon..... heck I've seen the same reaction to Win32 programs in the past where MS uses a black 8 ball icon as a filler and people say "OMG THIS BETTER NOT BE THE FINAL ICON!!!!!" they have place holder icons, they will be replaced at some point... graphics team works independent of the UI team but at some point they merge their work together.

 

 

http://blogs.msdn.com/b/jensenh/archive/2006/01/10/511202.aspx

[PGHammer]

I can see your point, but, really, I just want things to work. See below.

I don't see what's so bad with the Control Panel.  At least everything is there.  Unlike the bastard child that is in Windows 8.x.  I really wish they would fixed the search feature in Windows 8.1.  It was nice that it includes "Everything", but not everything shows up, lol.  When I search for Windows Update, I'll "maybe" get the desktop Windows Update.  The Metro Windows Update doesn't give me what I need.

 

Also, I was searching for Mouse today to change the pointer speed and never could get the desktop one that actually has the correct settings I need, so back to the Control Panel and Mouse.

 

I haven't tried Win10, yet, but hopefully they'll actually flesh it out this time.

I can see one rather major reason - this OS will not be unique to PCs.

 

Your own comment has - whether you realize it or not -- illustrated rather tellingly the biggest issue we have with Windows since XP - as much as hardware on which Windows is installed has changed and IS changing, how we SEE Windows - as users - has not.

 

Despite all the comments - from multiple sources, including Microsoft itself - that Windows 10 WILL be multiplatform - we have insisted on holding on to the old, platform-biased, way of thinking in terms of the OS and everything in the way of software on it.

[Order_66]

wow, how butt ugly!. Every icon is exactly the same yucky purple cog wheel - they may as well leave them out altogether.

 

I'll stick with a proper, multi coloured and dimensional control panel thanks.

 

 

Absolutely, and to make it better a user can simply select to view large or small icons and have a cascade menu for all control panel settings inside the start menu for even faster access, the windows 10 metro version will never be as feature-rich, good to look at or as powerful as the truly modern windows 7 control panel neither in appearance or functionality.

 

And this is the whole problem with the direction microsoft is going with windows 10 along with their arrogant, elitist and condescending attitudes towards consumers in general, they are going backwards, removing features, accessibility, dumbing down the visual appearance, not exactly a plan for success but they have the cash to throw around and monopoly to back it up in order to force it down everyones throat whether they want it or not.

[PGHammer]

Absolutely, and to make it better a user can simply select to view large or small icons and have a cascade menu for all control panel settings inside the start menu for even faster access, the windows 10 metro version will never be as feature-rich, good to look at or as powerful as the truly modern windows 7 control panel neither in appearance or functionality.

 

And this is the whole problem with the direction microsoft is going with windows 10 along with their arrogant, elitist and condescending attitudes towards consumers in general, they are going backwards, removing features, accessibility, dumbing down the visual appearance, not exactly a plan for success but they have the cash to throw around and monopoly to back it up in order to force it down everyones throat whether they want it or not.

And you have driven home that the REAL issue is that Windows has expanded beyond where you use it - not that it is unusable where you have it.  If Windows is not biased in your favor, you want no part of it.

 

Never mind that Windows is more adjustable than ever - you want NON-adjustability by default.

[Order_66]

And you have driven home that the REAL issue is that Windows has expanded beyond where you use it - not that it is unusable where you have it.  If Windows is not biased in your favor, you want no part of it.

 

Never mind that Windows is more adjustable than ever - you want NON-adjustability by default.

 

OSX has remained very similar from one version to the next all the way up to Yosemite, why can't microsoft use windows 7 and simply improve it without destroying what works in favor of something that 'kinda' works?

 

Apple didn't dumb down their version of the control panel, they didn't try to shove ugly tiles into anyones face, they took the ugly, flat look from microsoft and made it far more visually appealing, they also brought platform unification to OSX without resorting to some hideous design similar to continuum.

 

 

Why can't microsoft do something similar with windows 7?

[Dot Matrix]

OSX has remained very similar from one version to the next all the way up to Yosemite, why can't microsoft use windows 7 and simply improve it without destroying what works in favor of something that 'kinda' works?

Apple didn't dumb down their version of the control panel, they didn't try to shove ugly tiles into anyones face, they took the ugly, flat look from microsoft and made it far more visually appealing, they also brought platform unification to OSX without resorting to some hideous design similar to continuum.

Why can't microsoft do something similar with windows 7?

Because Windows 8 includes features that don't deserve to be ignored. Live tiles are a more useful feature than dull icons. And a responsive design is a better design than a static OS that doesn't scale, and requires two separate code bases to run on different devices.

And please, stop with the "dumbed down" nonsense.

[Kazama Levi]

What build is this supposedly from then?

I'd say it's from the leaked 9901 build. 9900+ is the new fbl-awesome series:

https://www.neowin.net/news/what-is-windows-10-fbl_awesome-youll-find-out-in-january

 

I'm fine with them adding a Metro way to do the control panel, but for the love of god leave the old one alone. At least till you have something that will be FULLY functional, which being Metro, will likely be never, and always be missing stuff.

I still use the small-icon control panel. It has everything. It's a nice central place for people who know what they are doing to get to the settings they want. Without the Vista UI that likes to bury stuff.

As I said, fine with a more friendly UI for the average joe, but leave the original interface till it's been replaced properly, or there's a reason it needs to be removed.

This, pretty much. Leave the original CP until you have a complete replacement, instead of replacing just bits and pieces here and there and having settings all over the place, with some stuff being "deprecated", other stuff having all the same icons... (useless, just omit them until you have the full set of icons). Doing it like this doesn't leave a good impression. This is what happened with Vista, they just changed bits and pieces here and there for no apparent reason, and the result was a half-baked mess.

Besides, I don't see what's wrong with the original CP, it always worked fine for me. This looks like a change for the sake of change for me.

 

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.

Indeed. This whole Metro thing was a very bad idea? to begin with, and further metro-izing stuff is an asinine thing to do. You'd think that by now they'd realized from the massive unpopularity of Windows 8 and Windows 8 phones how universally hated Metro and tiles are :rofl:

 

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.

"Some"? I'd say that 98% of all desktop users are using a mouse as their main input device.

 

Meanwhile, it takes maybe 2 seconds to switch to large or small icons, after that it is clear to any normal person that the control panel is far easier and more feature rich than the shamelessly regressive 1990's style metro "control panel".

Absolutely anti-consumer, anti-power user, extremely regressive in every way by comparison, metro is pure 100% backwards thinking regressive 1990's garbage no matter how you look at it.

1990? Not quite. The metro tiles as well as the flat, monochromatic icons etc. are lifted from their Windows 1.0 release from 1985.

I've made a comparison image: (click for large image)

[Dot Matrix]

I'd say it's from the leaked 9901 build. 9900+ is the new fbl-awesome series:

https://www.neowin.net/news/what-is-windows-10-fbl_awesome-youll-find-out-in-january

This, pretty much. Leave the original CP until you have a complete replacement, instead of replacing just bits and pieces here and there and having settings all over the place, with some stuff being "deprecated", other stuff having all the same icons... (useless, just omit them until you have the full set of icons). Doing it like this doesn't leave a good impression. This is what happened with Vista, they just changed bits and pieces here and there for no apparent reason, and the result was a half-baked mess.

Besides, I don't see what's wrong with the original CP, it always worked fine for me. This looks like a change for the sake of change for me.

Indeed. This whole Metro thing was a very bad idea? to begin with, and further metro-izing stuff is an asinine thing to do. You'd think that by now they'd realized from the massive unpopularity of Windows 8 and Windows 8 phones how universally hated Metro and tiles are :rofl:

"Some"? I'd say that 98% of all desktop users are using a mouse as their main input device.

1990? Not quite. The metro tiles as well as the flat, monochromatic icons etc. are lifted from their Windows 1.0 release from 1985.

I've made a comparison image: (click for large image)

They're changing the control panel because any post Windows 8 options weren't added to the legacy code, and because it will scale down to phone and tablet without loss of feature parity.

[Order_66]

Because Windows 8 includes features that don't deserve to be ignored. Live tiles are a more useful feature than dull icons. And a responsive design is a better design than a static OS that doesn't scale, and requires two separate code bases to run on different devices.

And please, stop with the "dumbed down" nonsense.

 

Then by all means, add whatever is necessary for windows 8.x, I'm not against adding to the control panel, not at all.

 

Live tiles are a documented failure, I am not against replacing icons with something else but replacing icons with something from the metro family isn't going to do it.

 

Anything and everything to do with metro is backwards and 'dumbed down', like it or not that is a simple fact.

[vcfan]

everything about that UI is sexy as hell, from the aspect ratio/orientation scaling, to the metro controls.

[Order_66]

 

1990? Not quite. The metro tiles as well as the flat, monochromatic icons etc. are lifted from their Windows 1.0 release from 1985.

I've made a comparison image: (click for large image)

 

1980's  :rofl:  I didn't realize it was that long ago lol

[Dot Matrix]

Then by all means, add whatever is necessary for windows 8.x, I'm not against adding to the control panel, not at all.

Live tiles are a documented failure, I am not against replacing icons with something else but replacing icons with something from the metro family isn't going to do it.

Anything and everything to do with metro is backwards and 'dumbed down', like it or not that is a simple fact.

Live tiles are not a "documented failure". Quit the nonsense.

[Order_66]

Live tiles are not a "documented failure". Quit the nonsense.

 

Live tiles are 100% documented failure, they have been blamed as the primary reason for the failure of windows 8.x with consumers.

 

As I have said, I am definitely not against changing icons for something else or even getting rid of them completely, but metro is certainly not the answer and never will be the answer.

[Kazama Levi]

1980's  :rofl:  I didn't realize it was that long ago lol

 

Note how even the window logos for Windows 1 and Windows 8 are very similar, down to the color :laugh:

(Although I still like the one from Windows 1 a bit better.)

 

Live tiles are not a "documented failure". Quit the nonsense.

 

Au contraire, mon ami. Tiles are a very massive failure, and except for a few people with weird tastes, no one likes them. To realize this, you don't even need to read any of the countless complaints about metro and tiles that are all over the internet. Just a look a the Global Web Stats from W3Counter. The stats are from November 2014, 2 1/2 years after the introduction of Windows 8:

 

Windows 7     40.57%

Windows XP     8.29%

Windows 8.1     8.13%

Windows 8     3.46%

Windows Vista     2.12%

 

Even though you are forced to buy Windows 8 with every new PC, laptop or other device (e.g. Surface), people still prefer the old Windows XP over it, even over the greatly improved Windows 8.1. Let's better not talk about the original Windows 8, which isn't much more popular than Windows Vista :rofl:

 

It's even worse with the Windows phones. The first Windows phone was introduced in 2010. As with Windows 8, despite multi-million ad campaigns, the Windows phones remain massively unpopular. According to IDC, their current market share in the third quarter of 2014 is just 2.9% :laugh:

That's not because of the hardware. Current Windows phones often have pretty good hardware. It's because no one can stand the metro tiles crap that's running on the Windows phones. Peoples disgust of the tiles junk is even growing. Windows phone share is on a clear downward trend, down from 3.6% one year ago -  that is, they have already lost one fifth of their already very meager market share during the year :rofl:

[nosense]

 

Note how even the window logos for Windows 1 and Windows 8 are very similar, down to the color :laugh:

(Although I still like the one from Windows 1 a bit better.)

 

 

Au contraire, mon ami. Tiles are a very massive failure, and except for a few people with weird tastes, no one likes them. To realize this, you don't even need to read any of the countless complaints about metro and tiles that are all over the internet. Just a look a the Global Web Stats from W3Counter. The stats are from November 2014, 2 1/2 years after the introduction of Windows 8:

 

Windows 7     40.57%

Windows XP     8.29%

Windows 8.1     8.13%

Windows 8     3.46%

Windows Vista     2.12%

 

Even though you are forced to buy Windows 8 with every new PC, laptop or other device (e.g. Surface), people still prefer the old Windows XP over it, even over the greatly improved Windows 8.1. Let's better not talk about the original Windows 8, which isn't much more popular than Windows Vista :rofl:

 

It's even worse with the Windows phones. The first Windows phone was introduced in 2010. As with Windows 8, despite multi-million ad campaigns, the Windows phones remain massively unpopular. According to IDC, their current market share in the third quarter of 2014 is just 2.9% :laugh:

That's not because of the hardware. Current Windows phones often have pretty good hardware. It's because no one can stand the metro tiles crap that's running on the Windows phones. Peoples disgust of the tiles junk is even growing. Windows phone share is on a clear downward trend, down from 3.6% one year ago -  that is, they have already lost one fifth of their already very meager market share during the year

 

Netmarketshare and wikiapadia shows different stats.

[blerk]

 

Note how even the window logos for Windows 1 and Windows 8 are very similar, down to the color :laugh:

(Although I still like the one from Windows 1 a bit better.)

 

Logo for product made by company remains similar over the years. Colour me surprised.  

 

Au contraire, mon ami. Tiles are a very massive failure, and except for a few people with weird tastes, no one likes them. To realize this, you don't even need to read any of the countless complaints about metro and tiles that are all over the internet. Just a look a the Global Web Stats from W3Counter. The stats are from November 2014, 2 1/2 years after the introduction of Windows 8:

 

Windows 7     40.57%

Windows XP     8.29%

Windows 8.1     8.13%

Windows 8     3.46%

Windows Vista     2.12%

 

Even though you are forced to buy Windows 8 with every new PC, laptop or other device (e.g. Surface), people still prefer the old Windows XP over it, even over the greatly improved Windows 8.1. Let's better not talk about the original Windows 8, which isn't much more popular than Windows Vista  :rofl:

 

 

Metro ? tiles. To place the relative failure of W8 entirely on live tiles is silly. I'd wager that people like the live tiles but don't like the modern UI half-heartedly plastered over the entire OS.  

 

 

 

That's not because of the hardware. Current Windows phones often have pretty good hardware. It's because no one can stand the metro tiles crap that's running on the Windows phones. Peoples disgust of the tiles junk is even growing. Windows phone share is on a clear downward trend, down from 3.6% one year ago -  that is, they have already lost one fifth of their already very meager market share during the year  :rofl:

 

 

 

There is little to no relevance of the "tiles junk"(a UI paradigm - along with the rest of metro - that has been widely praised) to the failure of Windows Phone in the market.  

 

Ineffectual ad campaigns + poor mindshare, lack of apps, a lack of true differentiating features and half-assed support from manufacturers are more plausible explanations for the lack of success than a single UI feature that is well received.