Windows Technical Preview  

1031 members have voted

  1. 1. On a scale of 1-5, 1 being worst, 5 being best. What do you think of Windows 10 from the leaks so far?

    • 5.Great, best OS ever
      156
    • 4. Pretty Good, needs a lot of minor tweaks
      409
    • 3. OK, Needs a few major improvements, some minor ones
      168
    • 2. Fine, Needs a lot of major improvements
      79
    • 1.Poor, Needs too many improvements, all hope is lost, never going to use it
      41
  2. 2. Based on the recent leaks by Neowin and Winfuture.de, my next OS upgrade will be?

    • Windows 10
      720
    • Windows 8
      20
    • Windows 7
      48
    • Sticking with XP
      3
    • OSX Yosemite
      35
    • Linux
      24
    • Sticking with OSX Mavericks
      3
  3. 3. Should Microsoft give away Windows 10 for free?

    • Yes for Windows 8.1 Users
      305
    • Yes for Windows 7 and above users
      227
    • Yes for Vista and above users
      31
    • Yes for XP and above users
      27
    • Yes for all Windows users
      192
    • No
      71


Recommended Posts

The new store is in it's basic form, it's missing things for sure. As with other things, it's a waiting game, waiting for newer versions.

 

One thing they have to do IMO is take the taskbar and folder options dialog windows and just put all of that into settings. I don't understand why these things have their settings split off from the rest of the OS.

Seems to be working fine for me. My only complaint is that MS is going backwards with the UI. I don't see anything appealing about the single color title bars and simple controls displayed with no button. Why did they take such a pleasing look from Windows 7 and ditch it? Also the icons look terrible, like they belong in Windows 95. I think a certain amount of visual flare in the OS makes it much more fun to use. I liked the Windows 7 window controls with their button look and glow. I'm not sure why people think it's a step forward to take a good looking OS and scrap it and come up with a flat monochrome design. Why would they take away from such nice looking effects like actual buttons on the title bar, translucency, etc?

 

331ocjm.jpg

Seems to be working fine for me. My only complaint is that MS is going backwards with the UI. I don't see anything appealing about the single color title bars and simple controls displayed with no button. Why did they take such a pleasing look from Windows 7 and ditch it? Also the icons look terrible, like they belong in Windows 95. I think a certain amount of visual flare in the OS makes it much more fun to use. I liked the Windows 7 window controls with their button look and glow. I'm not sure why people think it's a step forward to take a good looking OS and scrap it and come up with a flat monochrome design. Why would they take away from such nice looking effects like actual buttons on the title bar, translucency, etc?

 

331ocjm.jpg

 

that comparison makes it so clear why glass was killed, windows 10 looks so much better.

Windows 7 was good and no denying in that but I think its time to move forward and embrace Windows 10, though little less sharp icons + more control over customization like bringing back search in Start Menu and disable from taskbar would be great..

 

Installing latest build in VM, will test IE and try to find anything I can new they added.

The Windows 7 screenshot exemplifies why the 'modern' thinking came about.  The visual elements of that UI are busily competing (visually) with the real-world information present in the text and photos of actual things.   The glass chrome was pitched as lightening the UI so the user is focused on the content.  IMO it does the opposite.

 

Opinions obviously differ, but the 'Metro' ethos is sound and seems much better based thinking.  Imagine if real-world transits signs were all on translucent glossy tinted surfaces - :cry:

Thank you - worked perfectly! Feel like an idiot for not trying it myself.

Also, seems to persist between sessions (tried logging out and back in).  Time will tell if it stay there.

It wasn't removed per say, it was just reallocated. Try Settings -> System -> Notifications & actions -> Select which icons appear on the desktop.

Can anyone figure out how to add shortcuts to places on the start menu, it has three items, documents, file explorer and settings but I can't see how to remove or add things from there

Not currently implemented into the new Start system. Will be added in future updates.

At least this got fixed in latest Build, its goof up bug in Windows 8.1 (Deletion dialog is disabled by default and once can witness this only through Shift+Delete or enabling confirmation dialog).

 

Bug details - http://www.askvg.com/windows-8-1-bug-icons-look-distorted-in-delete-confirmation-dialog-box-and-send-to-menu/

 

- Notice large folder icon having black pixel around it on Windows 8.1.

 

O1HdU2i.png

The Vista UI/UX (and, to a lesser extent, the 7 UI/UX) was graphically taxing - great for desktops, and especially midrange and higher desktops, but lousy for lower-end desktops, laptops, and notebooks (it ate ergs like Reese's Pieces - not a good thing if you compute on the move).  OS X had the same issue with MacBooks; hence that UI going more graphically flat.  As I have said before, my wake-up call was getting a notebook myself - it woke me up to the woes that all portable users go through, especially those related to battery life.

The Vista UI/UX (and, to a lesser extent, the 7 UI/UX) was graphically taxing - great for desktops, and especially midrange and higher desktops, but lousy for lower-end desktops, laptops, and notebooks (it ate ergs like Reese's Pieces - not a good thing if you compute on the move).  OS X had the same issue with MacBooks; hence that UI going more graphically flat.   

(Once again,) no. For whatever reason OS X went 'more graphically flat' it had absolutely nothing to do with performance. In general, a 'flatter' UI isn't necessarily less graphically taxing. Specifically in the case of Yosemite it is more graphically taxing due to the new translucency effects they introduced (which, albeit optional, are enabled by default). 

The search bar in the taskbar can be disabled and the search bar reappears when you press start. So whoever was complaining about that, no need to. Its has already been rectified.

Even still, when you press Start, Search is awkwardly placed - It covers the All Apps link when you first click open Start.

Even still, when you press Start, Search is awkwardly placed - It covers the All Apps link when you first click open Start.

So you have to wait a second and it goes down to the taskbar and u can see the all apps list. It's unfinished software. Not a big deal

What the he** did they do to the Start Screen?  Everything is crammed into a tiny bar on the left? Why not take advantage of all the space in a modern monitor? This is just the worst elements of the 1995-era menu plastered full-screen!

 

The Start Menu stretched full-screen does not make it a proper Start Screen! Why do they have to destroy one to give back the other?

What the he** did they do to the Start Screen?  Everything is crammed into a tiny bar on the left? Why not take advantage of all the space in a modern monitor? This is just the worst elements of the 1995-era menu plastered full-screen!

 

BUT, WE WANTS START MENU!

What the he** did they do to the Start Screen?  Everything is crammed into a tiny bar on the left? Why not take advantage of all the space in a modern monitor? This is just the worst elements of the 1995-era menu plastered full-screen!

 

The Start Menu stretched full-screen does not make it a proper Start Screen! Why do they have to destroy one to give back the other?

 

You have 2 options to choose one from..  you can use either start menu while being on the desktop... or you can have full start screen.  If you want full screen, then you can keep that way.

 

Which you see the 4 arrows in upper right corner on the start menu on Warwagon's screenshot.

Rewriting the "menu" was done, I'm guessing, so that it's the same code between desktop and all the way down to phone. Things missing well be added back, just wait.

BUT, WE WANTS START MENU!

 

Not everyone. This is what I've always been afraid off - a fully retrograde design being forced on everyone, rather than a genuine choice. If Microsoft was able to give us both the Menu and Screen in earlier builds, why are they screwing us over now by trying to pass a full-screen version of the Menu off as the Screen?

You have 2 options to choose one from..  you can use either start menu while being on the desktop... or you can have full start screen.  If you want full screen, then you can keep that way.

 

Which you see the 4 arrows in upper right corner on the start menu on Warwagon's screenshot.

That's not the Start Screen - that's the Menu made full-screen. I want the intelligent use of space 8 gave us, not All Apps crammed in the corner! We don't have 640x480 screens anymore, so economy of space - packing everything in like sardines - is completely unnecessary!

  • Like 3

That's not the Start Screen - that's the Menu made full-screen. I want the intelligent use of space 8 gave us, not All Apps crammed in the corner! We don't have 640x480 screens anymore, so economy of space - packing everything in like sardines - is completely unnecessary!

 

I do think the Desktop/Files UI in the Start Menu/Start Screen should be a tile like everything else that you should be able to unpin.

Not everyone. This is what I've always been afraid off - a fully retrograde design being forced on everyone, rather than a genuine choice. If Microsoft was able to give us both the Menu and Screen in earlier builds, why are they screwing us over now by trying to pass a full-screen version of the Menu off as the Screen?

That's not the Start Screen - that's the Menu made full-screen. I want the intelligent use of space 8 gave us, not All Apps crammed in the corner! We don't have 640x480 screens anymore, so economy of space - packing everything in like sardines - is completely unnecessary!

 

Well, I am sorry..  if you don't like that, you might want to go back to Windows 8 for the time being.

 

Or just wait until third party developers will create better way to add all apps...   just like they did in the past versions of Windows since '95.

 

You might want to replace the menu with classic shell if you want.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Posts

    • Happens to the best of us, bro. 😛 
    • Thanks to some of the other recent Windows improvements, I'm optimistic about this one. My quick wishlist would be: perf like the older menu, merge both menus or at the very least, the older menu should be a flyout, not a simulated click to the old menu, and lastly, a customization window to let users move items from one menu to another, so I could bring Send To back to the main menu, and the OneDrive settings to the older.
    • This Gigabyte AMD RX 9070 XT is very good deal despite the launch of 9070 GRE by Sayan Sen Recently we reviewed AMD's latest 1440p gaming card, the Radeon RX 9070 GRE 12GB, for $549. The card is in stock too at that price, though if you want significantly better performance and don't mind spending a bit more, the Gigabyte Gaming model of RX 9070 XT is currently on sale for just $650 (purchase link under the specs table down below). The card employs Gigabyte's WINDFORCE cooling system which combines multiple design elements such as alternate-spinning Hawk fans, a vapor chamber, and composite heat pipes to manage heat dissipation. The Server-grade Thermal conductive gel further helps in this department. The inclusion of a semi-passive cooling mode allows the fans to remain inactive under low workloads, which allows for reduced noise operation during lighter usage. There is dual BIOS switch that allows toggling between performance and silent modes. The technical specifications of the Gigabyte Radeon RX 9070 XT GAMING OC 16G are given in the table below: Specification Value Core Clock Boost Clock: up to 3060 MHz Game Clock: up to 2520 MHz Stream Processors 4096 Memory Clock 20 Gbps Memory Size 16GB Memory Type GDDR6 Memory Bus 256-bit Card Bus Interface PCI Express 5.0 Maximum Resolution 7680 × 4320 Multi-View Support 4 displays Card Dimensions L=288 mm, W=132 mm, H=56 mm Recommended Power Supply 750W Power Connectors 3 × 8-pin Video Outputs 2 × DisplayPort 2.1a 2 × HDMI 2.1b Get it at the link below: GIGABYTE Radeon RX 9070 XT Gaming OC 16GB Graphics Card, GV-R9070XTGAMING OC: $649.99 (Sold and Shipped by Amazon US) (Was: $740) This Amazon deal is US-specific and not available in other regions unless specified. This is a first-party seller link (at the time of article publishing); ensure that you also purchase from a first-party seller link only. If you don't like it or want to look at more options, check out the previous deals that we have covered, OR you can also visit Amazon US deals page. Get Prime (SNAP), Prime Video, Audible Plus or Kindle / Music Unlimited. Free for 30 days. As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.
    • Why does this kind of tactic not surprise me?
    • They used AI based TOOLS to convert the JavaScript engine (the main rendering engine is still C++) and it was not fully automated but was human reviewed. Other subsystems will be looked into to also be converted to Rust in the future. I have no problem with any of that.
  • Recent Achievements

    • One Year In
      CHUNWEI earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Conversation Starter
      FBSPL earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • Week One Done
      I2D earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      Dr Jared Dental Studio earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      RG INVESTMENT GROUP earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      462
    2. 2
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      252
    3. 3
      Skyfrog
      80
    4. 4
      FloatingFatMan
      63
    5. 5
      Michael Scrip
      62
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!