Is Microsoft ignoring the desktop again?

[DConnell Member]

In the entire show they never mentioned the desktop or legacy PC users once, it was the same old 'hybrid, mobile, touch is the future, Windows now works across ALL your devices'. You know what, my PC and my laptops are still devices.

 

Some people on Neowin forums have suggested that 'the desktop is done' and that its 'good enough', I couldn't disagree more.

 

The entire focus of the Technical Preview was the desktop UI and traditional machines. I'm quite pleased that we're finally seeing what else MS has in store.

 

We've had a few months of little else but focus on traditional PCs, apart from leaks. Now its time for a little love for everything else. Including what MS is going to do for those of us who like traditional PCs, but aren't married to the desktop UI.

[PGHammer]

I though desktop is all about mouse, keyboard, and large monitor.

In other words, a very limited view of desktop computing (and it also throws all portables,  including laptops and notebooks, under the bus).

 

There have been two problems with portable computing to date - due to issues with trackpad/touchpad drivers, it has threatened to be as big a space-eater as desktop computing, due to the need for a place to rest the mouse/mousing surface - the other problem is that, by and large, the OEMs and OHVs haven't cared - why is it that it took until the Windows 10 Preview to get trackpad drivers right?

 

Touch solves the trackpad/touchpad problem, and it also attacks the space problem - that is why it is showing up in portables in droves (and is helping to re-define the AIO space - space is not unlimited, even in terms of desktop computing; remember, the first AIOs were aimed at the business, not home, space).

 

The problem that Microsoft has faced is that desktop-application software is, to put things bluntly, in a development rut.  (Be honest - what has been new OR exciting in terms of desktop-application software since even XP?  Office has been upgrade after upgrade - none of which moved the needle any in terms of software requirements.  That is a problem for Windows AND for their development-tools business - which is almost entirely focused ON Windows; how do you deal with it?)

 

You tackle the entire problem - not just parts of it.  You add touch capability to the OS - but without taking away support for the bread-and-butter desktop applications or games.  As much as some folks hate the idea, Windows 8+ did that.

You add support for new APIs (and different operating systems) to your development tools - breaking out of the single OS box.  Visual Studio 2013 (pre-Community) was the start, and 2013 Community accomplished the rest, with the forthcoming Visual Studio 2015 going even further.  (Dropping the price to zero certainly doesn't hurt any.)

 

Your limited view of desktop computing hasn't existed  - even for Windows users - since the launch of Windows NT - NT 3.1, to be precise.  (Quite a few of the early luggables could run NT 3.5, and more portables AND luggables could run NT4.)

[Dot Matrix]

they neglected the desktop. yes. long gone are the pleasures of installing custom icons, themes, which included color schemes and taskbar and start button customizations.

 

Now we are in a generation of playskool colors and icons. hard blue and red icons and the fat ugly search bar.

 

the ONLY reason for my upgrading is for specifically DX12! I'll only be concerned with the gaming side. now MSFT is in effect dividing up the customer base. OEM owners like me can keep our old OS's and install, reinstall with impunity. then if my current 8.1 install and activate with a phone call for the code goes away, I'll dump windows all together for a flavor of linux. I use steam for most of my gaming anyway. I'll bid my desktop games farewell and never look back.

Also long gone are static icons, and static desktop themes. This isn't meant to punish users, this is just Microsoft ready to move on to new and exciting things, which add more functionality to the OS.

 

Live tiles > Static icons

Metro/Continuum > Static themes

[DeadEndAccount]

How is the desktop being neglected? the whole desktop is being refreshed with a consistent look and feel; new Settings application, bundled applications being re-written using WinRT which will be more memory and power efficient not to mention hardware accelerated, the move to WDDM 2.0/DirectX 12 which will benefit everyone and not just hardcore gamers, the new Spartan browser, notifications, live tiles in the start menu, improved optimisation on entry level devices such as the HP Stream laptop, better integration with OneDrive, Email, Calendaring and Contacts, refining the Music application, better Hi-DPI support which comes as a by product of moving to WinRT/XAML. Really, all I've seen here is people here moaning, "dah, I can't install my custom desktop themes therefore Windows sucks" - yes, because when I think of important improvements to the desktop I instantly conclude that the lack of me being able to make my desktop gaudy puts the final nail in the coffin for Windows 10.

[Jim K Global Moderator]

Most of that functionality can be duplicated elsewhere, and already is in the Ribbon UI in Explorer.

 

Still doesn't beat right clicking > bam > done.

 

Context menus are quick, simple and to the point instead of finding it "elsewhere".

[swanlee]

If anything it seems they are nurfing tablet mode to further pease desktop users. Thier is no way a static taskbar should be stuck to the bottom of an 8 inch tablet in tablet mode like they should in the conference.

[Rickkins]

I'm thinking tho that at the very least I'm a gonna wait and see how the integration of metro with the desktop pans out. It is at least possible that it will enhance the overall experience. True, for my needs, much of it will be irrelevant,  but there may well some stuff that I will find interesting.

[patseguin Global Moderator]

It seems a step in the right direction for desktops from Windows 8.x. I am perplexed at the dumbing down of the UI personally. Windows Vista introduced what I considered to be a very aesthetically pleasing UI with it's glowing buttons, etc. Now for some unknown reason everyone seems to think it's cool to have 1 color flat graphics with basic X, -, square controls. Even the OS icons seem like they are reverting back to 1995. Why does everyone think it is so cool to "go flat"? I think it is ugly and a step about 20 years in the wrong direction. Give me the Windows 7 style graphics any day. And don't give me crap about battery life. My desktop doesn't use a battery, not to mention that just changing colors of something doesn't impact battery life.

[onewarmslime]

patseguin, on 24 Jan 2015 - 14:48, said:patseguin, on 24 Jan 2015 - 14:48, said:

It seems a step in the right direction for desktops from Windows 8.x. I am perplexed at the dumbing down of the UI personally. Windows Vista introduced what I considered to be a very aesthetically pleasing UI with it's glowing buttons, etc. Now for some unknown reason everyone seems to think it's cool to have 1 color flat graphics with basic X, -, square controls. Even the OS icons seem like they are reverting back to 1995. Why does everyone think it is so cool to "go flat"? I think it is ugly and a step about 20 years in the wrong direction. Give me the Windows 7 style graphics any day. And don't give me crap about battery life. My desktop doesn't use a battery, not to mention that just changing colors of something doesn't impact battery life.

 

I don't think the flat look is ugly, in fact I prefer it to 7/Vista's looks. Not sure about the new icons though...

[PGHammer]

patseguin - not everyone has a powerful graphics chipset in their computer - and I'm not talking even necessarily tablets and slates.  Look at the lower end of the Windows 7 or Vista hardware requirements (all of this hardware can STILL upgrade to Windows 10 - my notebook is in this category).  One reason Vista bombed (this is according to most of the critics of Vista on Neowin) was that it was overly taxing on low-end GPUs, and especially on notebooks and laptops - in short, the price paid for fancier UX was too high, and especially in terms of battery life.  7 (compared to Vista) was indeed more graphically flat, and all the successors to 7 flattened out even more.  It's not just Windows - look at OS X (home of the MacBook) - flat and getting flatter (from Lion to Yosemite).  If you don't have a portable computer, of COURSE you would not have much (if any) understanding of the travails those of us that DO go through - especially in terms of dealing with battery life; I didn't, despite working on them back practically to their beginning.  (My MOM got her legacy laptop before I got my legacy notebook, for example.)  That is what owning such a notebook has taught me.

[patseguin Global Moderator]

You don't need a powerful graphics chip to run Windows 7.

[bandit_liberty_rumble]

 the lack of me being able to make my desktop gaudy puts the final nail in the coffin for Windows 10. [ /s ]

He he! 

 

To be fair, that's still possible...

[Knife Party]

You don't need a powerful graphics chip to run Windows 7.

exactly. Aero wasn't taxing on the GPU and its been proven a few times over. PGHammer's comment makes no sense. The problem I too see is how MS can just throw away Aero, instead of possibly merging it more with flat 'metro' elements. Window borders should have an option to turn transparency on, give it a metro esque touch if they want to; but there is no reason not to offer it, or even argue that Metro is distinct and therefore somehow doesn't mix well together, which is absurd.

[patseguin Global Moderator]

exactly. Aero wasn't taxing on the GPU and its been proven a few times over. PGHammer's comment makes no sense. The problem I too see is how MS can just throw away Aero, instead of possibly merging it more with flat 'metro' elements. Window borders should have an option to turn transparency on, give it a metro esque touch if they want to; but there is no reason not to offer it, or even argue that Metro is distinct and therefore somehow doesn't mix well together, which is absurd.

How taxing really is a UI on a GPU that can push millions of pixels per second? I use some computers at my business that are 8 years old and just have integtrated graphics and they run Aero fine. I agree with your assessment that they could have at least offered some options to spruce up the UI such as transparency and other eye candy effects. To me, an OS should be fun to use and pleasing to look at. While I am excited about Windows 10's features, I don't find it the least bit exciting visually. Why can't they offer customizable interface elements like KDE and Gnome do?

[Max Norris]

While I am excited about Windows 10's features, I don't find it the least bit exciting visually. Why can't they offer customizable interface elements like KDE and Gnome do?

They are customizable.  I've replaced the visual style and icons on every OS I've installed for the past few decades, Windows included.  It's just an out-of-the-box default which every OS has, and frankly most every desktop OOTB I don't much care for to begin with, KDE and Gnome included.  Regardless if it's Windows or KDE or Cinnamon, after I get the thing up and running I'm typically hitting a third party skin site looking for ways to spruce it up. There's even several third party options for glass if you like that stuff, personally I'm glad to see it gone, didn't like it in Vista or 7 either and one of the first things I edited out in my own visual styles but *shrug* you've got options, just don't expect them to bloat up the OS with a gazillion things, "just in case some people want it."

[patseguin Global Moderator]

They are customizable. I've replaced the visual style and icons on every OS I've installed for the past few decades, Windows included. It's just an out-of-the-box default which every OS has, and frankly most every desktop OOTB I don't much care for to begin with, KDE and Gnome included. Regardless if it's Windows or KDE or Cinnamon, after I get the thing up and running I'm typically hitting a third party skin site looking for ways to spruce it up. There's even several third party options for glass if you like that stuff, personally I'm glad to see it gone, didn't like it in Vista or 7 either and one of the first things I edited out in my own visual styles but *shrug* you've got options, just don't expect them to bloat up the OS with a gazillion things, "just in case some people want it."

Hmm I haven't used Stardock software in a long time. I never care for it as it felt like a hack but maybe I'll check it out again.

[HawkMan]

You can keep repeating the word 'pointless', it doesn't make it so.

 

The whole idea of an OS is to provide services to apps. e..g OSX has Spotlight which lots of apps use. They have Time Machine as a service which other apps can hook into and thus get benefits. If you think that providing a system level data management service with a rich API and relationships is 'pointless', you have no idea what you are talking about. It is pretty much the holy grail in many areas. It was cancelled due to budget, marketing/political reasons, who knows.

 

e.g. before there was DirectX, every game used its own native code. With WinFS as an app developer you no longer would have to worry about how to store data, how to access it, search it etc. It was HUGE.

 

except

1. it didn't work

2. no one would use it. heck they can't even get game developers to store save games and game data in the correct place, even when they had certification on them...

[Max Norris]

Hmm I haven't used Stardock software in a long time. I never care for it as it felt like a hack but maybe I'll check it out again.

That's one option sure, but same, I haven't used their stuff in a long time either.. maybe the stability's gotten better but *shrug* I personally just edit the visual styles themselves and go from there, or for a pre-built just toss on UXStyle, find the theme you want and go, zero cost/effort.  I do miss ObjectBar but seems to be a dead product unfortunately, that one was kinda neat.  

[patseguin Global Moderator]

Uxstyle won't install on 9926 for me.

[Max Norris]

Uxstyle won't install on 9926 for me.

There's a version for the older preview, but *shrug* I wouldn't count on it until RTM, very few people are actually going to support pre-release OS's, a lot's probably going to change between now and then.  Never know though, since they did one for the older preview they may make another for this one, give it time it's only a couple days old.  I do wish MS would do away with the signed file check though.. are there even any known exploits for the theme engine?  

[ffMathy]

Erhm, didn't read all the replies in this thread...

 

But isn't the fact that they are adding multiple desktops a huge improvement for desktop users and power users for that matter?

 

Just because they put focus on one thing doesn't mean they aren't focusing on other things at the same time. I see plenty of improvements. Windows 10 is a refinement. What Windows 8 started now finally comes together. I am sure Windows 10.1 will be all about desktop features again.

[PGHammer]

Where HAS the desktop development been since XP?  So far, nobody that has criticized Microsoft's approach has explained the utter LACK of desktop-application development (other than upgrades).

An operating environment without ongoing NEW application development can be summed up in one word - FLAT.

 

Yes - Windows needs more developers, AND it needs more applications;  I have not - now or ever - disputed any of it.  However, it is just as plain they cannot rely entirely on desktop-focused developers - or even desktop-focused applications.

[Defcon]

Erhm, didn't read all the replies in this thread...

 

But isn't the fact that they are adding multiple desktops a huge improvement for desktop users and power users for that matter?

 

Just because they put focus on one thing doesn't mean they aren't focusing on other things at the same time. I see plenty of improvements. Windows 10 is a refinement. What Windows 8 started now finally comes together. I am sure Windows 10.1 will be all about desktop features again.

Little known fact - Windows has had multiple desktop support for a decade. It's there in the Win32 API plain as day. It was just never a part of Explorer shell. There ar many other feature like this.

[HawkMan]

Little known fact - Windows has had multiple desktop support for a decade. It's there in the Win32 API plain as day. It was just never a part of Explorer shell. There ar many other feature like this.

 

Depends on whether this feature now is actual multi desktop or a really large desktop virtually divided into multiple parts like the past.

 

either way, it's a fairly stupid feature, it's only purpose is to have a work desktop and a fun desktop at work so you can pretend to work. other than that, it's useless for actual works as it adds another step/layer to your multitasking. 

[simplezz]

The desktop isn't a priorty for Microsoft and hasn't been for years. It's a means to an end in order to push its mobile agenda. That was made abundantly clear with Windows 8. Satya's mantra of "Mobile first, cloud first" should give a clear indication that this won't be changing in the near future.