[OFFICIAL] Windows 10 Insider Program

[BajiRav]

If you didn't cut my whole quote out it's obvious what I'm talking about. While touch monitors have arrived the mainstream has stayed as a screen to look at, not to physically interact with. Regardless of the resolution/colour/3D or analog/digital input, a mouse cursor still moves about the same way it has for decades. The screen remains a means to look at, the keyboard/mouse a means of interaction. Unlike on a phone/tablet where the screen acts as the basis for interaction as well.

well here is the thing. I am not old enough for this but I am pretty sure keyboard and mouse were not born together. Mouse is like 20 years younger to keyboard. So yes, the model has changed drastically over the years.

Touch is in the same phase that mouse was in the early 80s.

[Dot Matrix]

TODAY'S THE DAY!   :woot:          

[PGHammer]

well here is the thing. I am not old enough for this but I am pretty sure keyboard and mouse were not born together. Mouse is like 20 years younger to keyboard. So yes, the model has changed drastically over the years.

Touch is in the same phase that mouse was in the early 80s.

Touch is, in fact, where the mouse was with Windows 3.0 - just starting to come into its own.

 

Windows 1.0 and 1.1, in fact, didn't support mice at all.  (It took Windows/286 to rope in mouse support.)

 

Touch is coming into its own for the same reason mice (and other pointing devices) have - the cost of implementation (in terms of hardware) is dropping.

 

The cost of implementing a technology (any technology) is rather easily discoverable - take two items (preferably from the same OEM) - one with the tech in question, and one without. The cost of implementation is the difference minus the profit margin.

 

Look at the 23" LG ET83 multipoint touch display - http://www.microcenter.com/product/407353/ET83_23''_10-Finger_Multi-touch_IPS_LED_Monitor .  It's an odd duck in that it's IPS "and" multitouch - however, what is the price difference merely compared with similar IPS displays without touch?  (The ASUS PA248Q is two-thirds the price - however, some non-touch IPS monitors are actually more expensive than the ET83.)

 

Yes - we're more familiar with mice.  (I've never disputed that.)  However, why ignore new technology due to unfamiliarity?

 

Ignoring touch would be like ignoring mice - not something you want to do.  (Note that even Android and iOS - two niche OSes that have been pigeonholed as being "touch-first" - don't ignore mice - in fact, both SUPPORT mice.  In fact, they both support keyboards.)

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

A biased platform is a niche platform - do you, in fact, care?

 

Windows is moving away from mouse bias because the hardware on which Windows runs is ALSO moving away from it - should all the OEMs that are adding touch support - everywhere - no longer do so?

 

Touch support is becoming pervasive - and especially in new PCs.  It's not JUST smaller screens - though it is still more pervasive there than in larger ones.  Look at AIOs - what is THE big feature in the AIO space in the past two years?

 

Microsoft's dilemma is that traditional keyboards and mice are still around - and, as we both agree, STILL make up the majority usage case for users.  You can't really throw either under the bus, either - and it also MUST be elegant while treating both types of users equally.

 

"If it ain't broke, don't fix it." is what most desktop-application developers have been saying since 7, if not Vista - where are the new desktop applications? (That is the other side of Microsoft's dilemma - desktop-application development has gotten staid, if not downright dull.)

 

Also, you CAN have desktop applications that support touch - the most glaring example is, in fact, Office 2013.  However, it still supports keyboards and mice.  (So much for either/or.)

 

Too many users DO think that way - either/or.  I didn't say you did - however, a lot of folks on your side of the argument do.  I'm simply trying to make a case against either/or, by using my own data points to argue it.

 

Choice isn't the issue (at least not with me) - the insistence on either/or, however, is.

 

And I'm not arguing for either/or, I'm arguing for choice.

[deck]

The debate rages!

 

The fact of the matter is that you can't force a touch interface on a mouse/keyboard world.  And that was the big mistake with Windows 8, which lead to a page being taken from Apple - who got it mostly right on the first try.

 

Apple understood that the interface for using a PC is necessarily different from that of iOS.  They never tried to port the iOS interface to the Mac; instead they ported various features and streamlined interface cues like icons.  A person using an iOS device will feel comfortable on a Mac, because things are recognizable.  And Mac users can enjoy the efficiencies of the mouse and keyboard with an interface that is powerful and useful and more robust than iOS.

 

In Windows 8, the full power of Windows is still trapped in a desktop environment.  The Modern interface never worked comfortably on the PC.  It was clunky to navigate and I kept going to desktop mode just to do the basics.  However, the Modern interface makes a lot of sense on my tablets, which serve a different function, and I rarely need to go desktop to survive.

 

So for Windows 8 I, and many others, got a Start Menu replacement app and effectively disabled Modern on the PC; forcing things into desktop mode permanently.  On my PC, I very, very, VERY rarely used Modern.  I don't even use Modern apps.  The Modern UI doesn't make any sense.

 

On my tablets, I use the Modern interface and the related apps almost exclusively.  The interface makes sense and works really well.

 

Note:  I use Windows 8.1 on my PC, Lumia and my Surface tablets (Pro 3 and original RT).  And to add to some of the historical 'experience', my first PC ran DOS and Windows 3.1.  I also have experience with the old Windows CE interface, various versions of BlackBerry OS, Android and iOS.  I have strong opinions on each OS' UI.

[timbo_sf2]

they even jumps from 9926 to 10000

[Mugwump00]

 

 

Windows 1.0 and 1.1, in fact, didn't support mice at all.  (It took Windows/286 to rope in mouse support.)

 

 

Sorry, that's not true.  I remember using it  - although our peculiar mice required a special reflective mouse-pad.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_1.0

 

Reading this thread, I keep forgetting how damn hard it has been using Windows 8.x on a PC without a touch-screen - apparently, according to Neowin lore, it was impossible, as my productivity would have been destroyed by the Start Screen.  Odd, the things you forget....

 

Hope this thread gets back on track real soon.

[vcfan]

TODAY'S THE DAY!   :woot:       

[PGHammer]

Sorry, that's not true.  I remember using it  - although our peculiar mice required a special reflective mouse-pad.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_1.0

 

Reading this thread, I keep forgetting how damn hard it has been using Windows 8.x on a PC without a touch-screen - apparently, according to Neowin lore, it was impossible, as my productivity would have been destroyed by the Start Screen.  Odd, the things you forget....

 

Hope this thread gets back on track real soon.

Oddly enough, the only ones that find it hard are those that are pointing-device-biased - which is understandable.

 

The reason the thread went off-track is that the pointing-device-biased made the (mistaken) assumption that all those that use pointing devices think the same way.  While a lot do (and they have been heavily outspoken), not all do.  It's like the assumption about slave-owners in the South before the Civil War - not all of them followed the stereotype.

 

Such assumptions smack of "absolutism" - which reminds me, in a very bad way, of all other sorts of extremism.

 

"Keyboard and mouse world"?  Then explain other OSes that are quite capable of supporting multiple methods of interaction.  (Ubuntu, oddly enough, is a prime example - or weren't you aware that Ubuntu supports touch, in addition to keyboards and mice?  OS/2 - with a touch overlay - is STILL heavily used in ATMs.  I never denied that keyboards and mice are more prevalent - however, touch is gaining - looking simply at new hardware, of every sort, is plenty of data.)

 

It is why I compared the issue to "Jim Crow" - the pointing-device-biased are used to being the absolute majority, and want no change from that at all.  Should we go back in time to before the microwave oven?  Refrigeration?  The automobile?  The horse-drawn wagon?

[Mugwump00]

Snip...

 

Chap, I think we're in violent agreement.  The actual negative productivity impact of Windows 8's rather clumsy overhaul of the 'standard' Windows UI seems to have been stretched to absurd conclusions.  Sure, it required some time to accustomise to (depending on aptitude), but you could always largely ignore Modern elements, and it has been a great enabler of novel PC-based computing options.

 

I haven't had the opportunity to try it, but touch-enabled portable users (e.g. SP3) must find using an external monitor awkward (having to relocate the mouse), if you get used to the touch UI?  I think I would/will.

[Seketh]

What? monitors have changed drastically in those 20 years, what are you talking about? We went from mono to color, CRT to LCD/LED/3D, analog to digital. Their functions and technology have changed.

 

And everyone keeps forgetting that when the Start Menu was introduced, monitors had 800x600 or 1024x768 resolutions.

 

Now we're going for 3840

[PGHammer]

Chap, I think we're in violent agreement.  The actual negative productivity impact of Windows 8's rather clumsy overhaul of the 'standard' Windows UI seems to have been stretched to absurd conclusions.  Sure, it required some time to accustomise to (depending on aptitude), but you could always largely ignore Modern elements, and it has been a great enabler of novel PC-based computing options.

 

I haven't had the opportunity to try it, but touch-enabled portable users (e.g. SP3) must find using an external monitor awkward (having to relocate the mouse), if you get used to the touch UI?  I think I would/will.

That can be awkward - if you are USED to touch.  For them, the shoe would be on the other foot (migrating to a non-touch environment).

 

Still, touch has been a VERY small minority of Windows users - primarily because touch support came only via third parties prior to 8.

 

I mentioned before the issue the keyboard-driven faced with going from Windows 3.x (including Windows for Workgroups and Windows NT 3.x) to Windows 9x and NT4 - compared to 9x and NT4, 3.x/NT 3.x was more neutral.

 

And the run of the original Start menu was seventeen years - that sort of long-term bias existence is not going to be eliminated, let alone reduced, overnight.  (How long was slavery extant in the UK before it was legislated out of existence?  How long was it between merely the end of the War of 1812 and the end of the Civil War?  Between the end of the Great Depression and the passage of the Civil Rights Act?)

 

The attitude displayed by some (not all) of the pointing-device-biased was, in fact, quite common among those defending "Jim Crow" and pro-discriminatory laws - however, affirmative-action laws are ALSO discriminatory - reverse discrimination is STILL discrimination.  Why is neutrality (real equality) such a bad thing?

[Mugwump00]

Now we're going for 3840

[deck]

I'm not sure where my disconnect is in understanding the 'touch' argument going on with respect to Windows 8.

 

Windows 8 on the desktop needs a desktop interface.  People aren't going to reach over their desk to touch their monitor (mine is too far away and putting a 27inch screen 12inches away from me won't be fun) and the Modern interface with a mouse/keyboard doesn't work well at all.  One day, in the future, yes, we may do things all tough - but the technology for an appropriate interface and equipment isn't there yet.

 

Windows 8 on a tablet (or even touch enabled laptop) works well, as long as you use the Modern interface.

 

It's not complicated. 

 

Also, Microsoft's hope to streamline the backend of Windows, while keeping a UX that is appropriate for the type of computer in use, makes sense and will keep the desktop PC users happy with a functional OS, as well as the touch users happy with a more developed touch interface.

[Seketh]

Non sequitur - the limited amount of information any screen element contains should always be legible at all resolutions - that's a scaling issue.

 

My experience of 8.1 at 4K was awful (messy, fuzzy fonts etc.) - did the TP change anything?

 

Doesn't scaling result in wasted space, since screen elements were designed for an inferior resolution and don't adapt to increased resolution?

 

Never tried the TP on a 4k screen, but I did saw the Start Screen of Windows 8.1 on a 4K tv and it looked awesome. Maybe it was a driver issue?

 

Also, Microsoft's hope to streamline the backend of Windows, while keeping a UX that is appropriate for the type of computer in use, makes sense and will keep the desktop PC users happy with a functional OS, as well as the touch users happy with a more developed touch interface.

But many users were already happy with Windows 8.1. I think most, including me, will gladly admit that it was incomplete and that there is too much inconsistence.

 

But Windows 8 was far from being desktop unfriendly like "the internet" ranted. It's the same thing, just without the Start Menu, so better (for me).

[PGHammer]

And everyone keeps forgetting that when the Start Menu was introduced, monitors had 800x600 or 1024x768 resolutions.

 

Now we're going for 3840

[deck]

 

But many users were already happy with Windows 8.1. I think most, including me, will gladly admit that it was incomplete and that there is too much inconsistence.

 

But Windows 8 is far from being desktop unfriendly like "the internet" ranted. It's the same thing, just without the Start Menu, so better (for me).

 

And this is where I disagree. 

 

I think the return of the Start Menu in Windows 10 and the many Start Menu apps for Windows 8 is a clear indicator that most people didn't like the Modern UI with a mouse/keyboard interface.  It's not that it's unworkable, it's just cumbersome and clunky.  The switch between Modern and desktop UI's just to open an app is jarring. 

 

For my part, and I will lump myself in with the majority as I bought Start8 and argued in favour of the Start menu, I could not use Modern with a mouse and keyboard.  I tried for a few months and every day I would get more and more irritated. 

 

Windows 8.1 didn't help much, except to add the icon to the task bar which brings me to Modern - no thanks.  Moreover, the charm bar and the hot corners proved to be just as frustrating; they get in the way and slide open when I throw my cursor to a side of the screen while watching a movie or just to get ride of it.  Navigating open apps that way was also annoying because I couldn't easily navigate through multiple open windows of the same app.  The ability to pin and stack on the taskbar is extremely useful and lost if you stick with Modern.

 

Furthermore, with multiple monitors you have to be very deliberate about where your mouse is to use the charm bar, because the moment your cursor slips onto the next desktop, the bar goes away.

 

I tried the Modern UX with a mouse and keyboard; I've spoken to many colleagues about Windows 8.  I realize my small sample is not a definitive answer, but everyone (and I do mean everyone) who I have spoken to about Modern on the desktop have agreed that it was poorly executed and needlessly did away with a useful interface element. 

 

But really, to put another way, if the majority of users didn't miss the Start Menu, then why would Microsoft invest a lot of time and money in redeveloping it for Windows 8 (and then delaying the release to continue development for Windows 10)?  Also, if it's so useful, why would Microsoft excitedly reveal the Start Menu as an amends to uses (and the collective cheering from the audience at the return of the Start Menu).

[PGHammer]

I'm not sure where my disconnect is in understanding the 'touch' argument going on with respect to Windows 8.

 

Windows 8 on the desktop needs a desktop interface.  People aren't going to reach over their desk to touch their monitor (mine is too far away and putting a 27inch screen 12inches away from me won't be fun) and the Modern interface with a mouse/keyboard doesn't work well at all.  One day, in the future, yes, we may do things all tough - but the technology for an appropriate interface and equipment isn't there yet.

 

Windows 8 on a tablet (or even touch enabled laptop) works well, as long as you use the Modern interface.

 

It's not complicated. 

 

Also, Microsoft's hope to streamline the backend of Windows, while keeping a UX that is appropriate for the type of computer in use, makes sense and will keep the desktop PC users happy with a functional OS, as well as the touch users happy with a more developed touch interface.

Nobody said you had to; the issue with those that want a traditional interface (some of them - not all) is that they want that as an exclusive interface; this group is unwilling (or unable) to even remotely consider the reality that some features that were added could actually be of use to them.

 

That is, in fact, more of an adjustability issue.

 

The very reason I despise either/or is that there are features in ModernUI that I actually find useful - as a keyboard+mouse user.

 

That is why I defend ModernUI and MDL - as a keyboard+mouse user, I actually DO have use for some of the new features the new UI and design language brings to the table.

 

Windows 10 brings the adjustability that Windows 8 and 8.1 lacked - I've said as much.  However, that still has not stopped some people from continuing their clamor for an exclusive interface as the ONLY interface.

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

And this is where I disagree. 

 

I think the return of the Start Menu in Windows 10 and the many Start Menu apps for Windows 8 is a clear indicator that most people didn't like the Modern UI with a mouse/keyboard interface.  It's not that it's unworkable, it's just cumbersome and clunky.  The switch between Modern and desktop UI's just to open an app is jarring. 

 

For my part, and I will lump myself in with the majority as I bought Start8 and argued in favour of the Start menu, I could not use Modern with a mouse and keyboard.  I tried for a few months and every day I would get more and more irritated. 

 

Windows 8.1 didn't help much, except to add the icon to the task bar which brings me to Modern - no thanks.  Moreover, the charm bar and the hot corners proved to be just as frustrating; they get in the way and slide open when I throw my cursor to a side of the screen while watching a movie or just to get ride of it.  Navigating open apps that way was also annoying because I couldn't easily navigate through multiple open windows of the same app.  The ability to pin and stack on the taskbar is extremely useful and lost if you stick with Modern.

 

Furthermore, with multiple monitors you have to be very deliberate about where your mouse is to use the charm bar, because the moment your cursor slips onto the next desktop, the bar goes away.

 

I tried the Modern UX with a mouse and keyboard; I've spoken to many colleagues about Windows 8.  I realize my small sample is not a definitive answer, but everyone (and I do mean everyone) who I have spoken to about Modern on the desktop have agreed that it was poorly executed and needlessly did away with a useful interface element. 

 

But really, to put another way, if the majority of users didn't miss the Start Menu, then why would Microsoft invest a lot of time and money in redeveloping it for Windows 8 (and then delaying the release to continue development for Windows 10)?  Also, if it's so useful, why would Microsoft excitedly reveal the Start Menu as an amends to uses (and the collective cheering from the audience at the return of the Start Menu).

 

Because a massive part of the market want a start menu in their OS, and regardless of people trying to argue it's not needed, MS have felt they've received enough feedback to understand it has to come back

[PGHammer]

And this is where I disagree. 

 

I think the return of the Start Menu in Windows 10 and the many Start Menu apps for Windows 8 is a clear indicator that most people didn't like the Modern UI with a mouse/keyboard interface.  It's not that it's unworkable, it's just cumbersome and clunky.  The switch between Modern and desktop UI's just to open an app is jarring. 

 

For my part, and I will lump myself in with the majority as I bought Start8 and argued in favour of the Start menu, I could not use Modern with a mouse and keyboard.  I tried for a few months and every day I would get more and more irritated. 

 

Windows 8.1 didn't help much, except to add the icon to the task bar which brings me to Modern - no thanks.  Moreover, the charm bar and the hot corners proved to be just as frustrating; they get in the way and slide open when I throw my cursor to a side of the screen while watching a movie or just to get ride of it.  Navigating open apps that way was also annoying because I couldn't easily navigate through multiple open windows of the same app.  The ability to pin and stack on the taskbar is extremely useful and lost if you stick with Modern.

 

Furthermore, with multiple monitors you have to be very deliberate about where your mouse is to use the charm bar, because the moment your cursor slips onto the next desktop, the bar goes away.

 

I tried the Modern UX with a mouse and keyboard; I've spoken to many colleagues about Windows 8.  I realize my small sample is not a definitive answer, but everyone (and I do mean everyone) who I have spoken to about Modern on the desktop have agreed that it was poorly executed and needlessly did away with a useful interface element. 

 

But really, to put another way, if the majority of users didn't miss the Start Menu, then why would Microsoft invest a lot of time and money in redeveloping it for Windows 8 (and then delaying the release to continue development for Windows 10)?  Also, if it's so useful, why would Microsoft excitedly reveal the Start Menu as an amends to uses (and the collective cheering from the audience at the return of the Start Menu).

How is it lost?  You can pin from the StartScreen - in fact, you could with Windows 8.  (This is from all the Preview threads - it was a question asked in all of them. Use the Windows key to bring up the StartScreen; right-click the application icon or shortcut in question, select Pin to Taskbar.)  The cheers are entirely about a return of familiarity - they felt "at sea".  Given a choice between familiar and unfamiliar, familiar wins most of the time, and I haven't said otherwise.  Seeking a return to familiarity isn't - and never has been - the issue for those of us defending either ModernUI or MDL - the issue was the insistence (by some - not all) on exclusivity of the desktop UI - a complete and utter dismissal of ModernUI/MDL, including any possible benefits for mice.

[deck]

I have no problem with having both interfaces.  Continuum is probably one of the most important innovations in Windows 10 (which will be more useful on my Surface Pro 3, but still very welcome on my PC).

[PGHammer]

How is it lost?  You can pin from the StartScreen - in fact, you could with Windows 8.  (This is from all the Preview threads - it was a question asked in all of them. Use the Windows key to bring up the StartScreen; right-click the application icon or shortcut in question, select Pin to Taskbar.)  The cheers are entirely about a return of familiarity - they felt "at sea".  Given a choice between familiar and unfamiliar, familiar wins most of the time, and I haven't said otherwise.  Seeking a return to familiarity isn't - and never has been - the issue for those of us defending either ModernUI or MDL - the issue was the insistence (by some - not all) on exclusivity of the desktop UI - a complete and utter dismissal of ModernUI/MDL, including any possible benefits for mice.

You obviously didn't try to pin from the StartScreen or File Explorer, then.  You made an (incorrect) assumption that just because the Start menu went away, that Taskbar pinning also went away.  It didn't, and hasn't - in fact, Windows 10 (minus mini-Start) still supports it.  You're simply used to being able to pin from the Start menu - you never even remotely considered being able to pin from other places - which you could even in Windows 7.  Familiarity - period.

[deck]

How is it lost?  You can pin from the StartScreen - in fact, you could with Windows 8.  (This is from all the Preview threads - it was a question asked in all of them. Use the Windows key to bring up the StartScreen; right-click the application icon or shortcut in question, select Pin to Taskbar.)  The cheers are entirely about a return of familiarity - they felt "at sea".  Given a choice between familiar and unfamiliar, familiar wins most of the time, and I haven't said otherwise.  Seeking a return to familiarity isn't - and never has been - the issue for those of us defending either ModernUI or MDL - the issue was the insistence (by some - not all) on exclusivity of the desktop UI - a complete and utter dismissal of ModernUI/MDL, including any possible benefits for mice.

 

Try stacking using the app switcher on the left rather than the task bar. It's not useful.

 

The Start Menu is nice and familiar.  Great.  That's why they are upgrading and augmenting it with Windows 10.  They are evolving it, which is what should have been done in the first place.  I cheered not because the Start Menu is familiar; I cheered because I was seriously considering a Mac for my desktop PC because I hated using Modern with a mouse.  It was slow; it was confusing; it didn't do what I wanted it to do.  (I refer you to the Apple model; an iOS style interface with a mouse and keyboard won't work, but it's great for touch).

 

That said, and I repeat, the same Modern UI on my tablets does exactly what it's supposed to and is workable.  Because I can much more quickly navigate the Modern interface with my fingers than with a mouse.

[Guest]

The streaming Flash crap is REALLY BAD.

[George P Global Moderator]

If you guys want to talk Windows 8 and it's UI then there's a whole dedicated thread for it already. This topic is about the 10 preview, it's been said over and over already.