How do you like windows 10


Recommended Posts

I think it is pretty great. Edge still needs some major improvements (extensions, and a way to right click and save as - how did they miss that one?), and the Mail client has trouble connecting to my work Exchange server. Also hope they'd finally evolve Groove Music into an actual music manager application so I can organize and rate stuff.

Other than that, everything works really well and fast. Love the new start menu on desktop and the Xbox integration. Also the multiple desktops is pretty nice, even though I know Windows was late to the party on having that built in to the OS. Also, some of the universal apps that have come out since launch are also promising.

Haven't used Cortana much yet but plan to use that more on my Surface. Would also like some more control and explanation of privacy options.

I like it, but I'm not crazy about the whole data mining stuff coming to a desktop OS, though. The stuff they want you to allow for the express settings is troubling. I hooked up a webcam, tried out Cortana and disabled her shortly afterward. The whole thing just gave me the creeps. Too much data sent to MS and "trusted partners". If I could just ask her things related to my PC and have her research data online WITHOUT data collection/retention, then I'd use her. I'm tired of being a product to companies in exchange for services. Google no longer gets much traffic from me because of this.

As for problems related to upgrading. My desktop had network connectivity problems until a driver update and my HTPC upgraded with no issues. A Toshiba laptop I upgraded for a friend finished and worked great until the second reboot, upon which it would no longer boot. Windows recovery disc couldn't fix it. Ended up performing a rest, only keeping files. Had to re-install some stuff, but I think it worked out or the best as its much faster/leaner now without all the extra crap installed.

  • Like 1

'What inconsistent mess?  Just making a statement without any backup is just that a inconsistent statement.  If you are able please explain in greater detail. . .:)

if you used it you'd know the inconsistencies..... everything from an unfinished settings to 6 different type of window chromes depending on what you are doing, to a very UI inconstant Edge browser that doesn't even follow the OS UI design (one fast example: double wide borders for dialogs compared to the single wide border in the OS for the same exact element)... to font differences across the OS for the same elements... the list goes on and on... isometric icons for some things but not others... monochrome icons for some but not others of the same type.... I could make a pretty long list if I had time

Then why was it released? My coworkers laughed at me when I told them how aweful 10 was with a reply back saying yeah like MS would release a buggy OS. Well joke is now on them. 

Windows 7 was more stable beta1 than 10 RTM with only 1 real bug in 2009 with indexing mp3 files. It is the best OS. 8.1 too has issues with corrupted updates so it is not perfect. 10 in it's present state was unusable on my main workstation. I feel the press is praising it but in reality it is another WindowsME. It works or man it is messed up kind of scenario. 

The OS should not have been released to make back to school. It was not quality a RTM should be.

Windows ME was an unstable mess.

You are whining about colors. Clearly it doesn't suffer the problems ME did. 

 

10s on all my boxes and I have few complaints.  An Edge/consent UI glitch where if I tell it to run a download it just stops accepting input, and an audio driver glitch with the included Music app.  Some NVIDIA users are having issues with the vidcard drivers at the moment apparently?  I wouldn't know.

Overall it's very worthwhile, but if you want a problem free experience you might wait a few months.

 

if you used it you'd know the inconsistencies..... everything from an unfinished settings to 6 different type of window chromes depending on what you are doing, to a very UI inconstant Edge browser that doesn't even follow the OS UI design (one fast example: double wide borders for dialogs compared to the single wide border in the OS for the same exact element)... to font differences across the OS for the same elements... the list goes on and on... isometric icons for some things but not others... monochrome icons for some but not others of the same type.... I could make a pretty long list if I had time

 

One of the weird ones is how Universal apps are missing some window related animations, like the lack of an opening fade in, while the old (Win32?) apps do.

For example, open File Explorer, then a ModernUI app like Weather, and note the difference.

Windows ME was an unstable mess.

You are whining about colors. Clearly it doesn't suffer the problems ME did. 

 

Since the UI team and the Kernel / base OS team are completely different I'd say it's fine for people to whine about UI elements since the UI team wont be working on system stability and vise versa... the kernel team seems to be doing a great job with the past view versions... the UI team though, lacking...

Since the UI team and the Kernel / base OS team are completely different I'd say it's fine for people to whine about UI elements since the UI team wont be working on system stability and vise versa... the kernel team seems to be doing a great job with the past view versions... the UI team though, lacking...

Please re-read what I said.

You cannot draw parallels between UI inconsistency and outright instability and call them the same to suit an agenda.  That is what sinetheo is doing (check the post prior).

 

It is fine for him to whine about whatever he wants, but he should at least be accurate in accusations.  He can't even tell us what is so unusable about Windows 10.

Edited by adrynalyne

Then why was it released? My coworkers laughed at me when I told them how aweful 10 was with a reply back saying yeah like MS would release a buggy OS. Well joke is now on them. 

Windows 7 was more stable beta1 than 10 RTM with only 1 real bug in 2009 with indexing mp3 files. It is the best OS. 8.1 too has issues with corrupted updates so it is not perfect. 10 in it's present state was unusable on my main workstation. I feel the press is praising it but in reality it is another WindowsME. It works or man it is messed up kind of scenario. 

The OS should not have been released to make back to school. It was not quality a RTM should be.

 

Because there are no major bugs that are forcing them to delay the release!

Delaying it because of some colors and borders inconsistent? delaying it because few percentage of people have problems with the upgrade? it doesn't make sense!

 

Because there are no major bugs that are forcing them to delay the release!

Delaying it because of some colors and borders inconsistent? delaying it because few percentage of people have problems with the upgrade? it doesn't make sense!

But but, those colors and borders make it unstable for him!

You can't make  fair judgment by comparing between 3 years old OS stability and fresh OS stability

Windows 10 isn't new, it's no more new than Windows 8.1 was at release. It's a revision of a 3 year old system, which was a revision of another 3 year old system which was a revision of another older system etc. Windows 8 was very polished when it was released, as was Windows 8.1, while Windows 10 is not. 

I can indeed make a fair judgement on the state of Windows 10 at release compared to the other systems at release. I can also express my disappointment that Microsoft didn't take their time to polish this system further before release. I also wrote that Windows 10 will probably be very well polished in a year's time. But it isn't today. That's fair to say.

  • Like 2

Windows 10 isn't new, it's no more new than Windows 8.1 was at release. It's a revision of a 3 year old system, which was a revision of another 3 year old system which was a revision of another older system etc. Windows 8 was very polished when it was released, as was Windows 8.1, while Windows 10 is not. 

I can indeed make a fair judgement on the state of Windows 10 at release compared to the other systems at release. I can also express my disappointment that Microsoft didn't take their time to polish this system further before release. I also wrote that Windows 10 will probably be very well polished in a year's time. But it isn't today. That's fair to say.

You say they were polished, but plenty of people said otherwise when they came out. 

You can't make  fair judgment by comparing between 3 years old OS stability and fresh OS stability

Of course you can if you are going to swap one for the other. Windows 8 was more stable from the first Consumer Preview than Windows 10 is right now. As I type this, for example, my Bluetooth drops out for the thousandth time (second time this morning, and I only switched it on 10 minutes ago) and my screen goes black for two seconds, then flickers back into life (which is a new one I haven't encountered before). It is hardly the kind of experience that is going to have everyone flocking back to Windows, is it?

Microsoft never learn - W10 needed to be the most stable, reliable, slick version ever and it just isn't. Don't get me wrong, it is still better than OS X or Linux, it's just not better than Windows 8, nor likely to be for some considerable time, I'm afraid. That's why I am not going to upgrade either of the PCs I rely on every day, just this throw-away tablet I bought for the purpose of testing W10.

Edited by MotorMouth

'What inconsistent mess?  Just making a statement without any backup is just that a inconsistent statement.  If you are able please explain in greater detail. . .:)

1. They still haven't finished porting everything from Control Panel to Settings. They have had three years since W8 launched and Control Panel is still there. At this rate, we will have to put up with both for at least another five years.

2. They are using at least four different style of icons in different places, from the new outline icons in Settings through to the uglier full colour icons in Explorer. They need to pick a single icon style and use it everywhere.

3. They are still using some dialog boxes that have been around since Windows 95, e.g. "Sounds" and most other driver dialogs, with tiny little windows and half-a-dozen tabs because when they first introducrd them, the average screen res was 800 x 600. Then there are dialogs from the VIsta/Win7 era, like Control Panel, as well as newer, slicker looking windows like Settings. They need to get rid of all the old style and give Windows 10 a consistent look and feel.

Overall it makes the whole OS feel half-finished and gives the very distinct impression that Microsoft just doesn't give a ###### about the user experience. OS X may look boring but at least it looks designed, not just thrown together.

I liked 7 from the day it was released.  Still like 7.  I think since win10 will be an ever-evolving creature - it will become good.  Right now, its almost OK.

I disliked 7 from the day it was released. It didn't fix any of the issues I had with Vista but managed to introduce new ones. I think it is the worst version of Windows I've ever used, until now, in that it didn't feel like an upgrade from Vista in any meaningful way. It was more like Vista SP3, which we didn't need because Vista SP2 was actually fine.

I think Windows 10 is the same. It may be better than Windows 8 was on the day it was released, at least in some ways, but it is definitely not as good as the current version of Windows 8 and doesn't really address any of the issues I have with Windows 8 anyway. If anything, it has made those things worse. e.g. Incsistent UI elements. Microsoft haven't improved anything, they have simply swapped one set of problems for another and the way they have rushed the release gives it all an air of desperation, shuffling deckchairs on the Titanic. I'd prefer that they had waited until it was ready, not released it in the condition it is, which is no better than the very first Dev Preview version of Windows 8 was, 6 months before release.

Again, don't get me wrong, it is not terrible, it just isn't as good as I think it needs to be to do what Microsoft want it to do for them. It certainly isn't good enough that I'd even consider installing it over W8 on either of the PCs I rely on every day, and won't be until it has a usable touch experience and a browser that offers a similar UX to the Metro version of IE11.

Everything in general seems to work great after taking the update route. as a gamer, windows 10 is great due to the Dx12 stack. I just miss some of the past windows version features.

the control panel is dumbed down or missing features. It's almost as if there's a fight between Settings and control panel. Though, the settings seem to be the focal point of the issue.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Indeed. But note that this has Wifi7, HDMI 2.1, BlueTooth 5.4, and 5G Ethernet, so even in the additional features list this bundle blows the Steam Machine away. And, with the money saved, one could improve this dramatically.
    • One of the strangest galaxies in our Universe could help answer some long overdue questions by Sayan Sen Image by Pixabay via Pexels | Not representative An international team of astronomers led by the Department of Astronomy at Tsinghua University has discovered an unusually metal-poor galaxy that may contain signs of first-generation star formation. The galaxy, named Metal-Pristine Galaxy COSMOS Redshift 3 (MPG-CR3), or CR3, was identified using observations from the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST), the Very Large Telescope (VLT), and the Subaru Telescope. The findings, published in The Astrophysical Journal Letters, describe CR3 as the most metal-poor galaxy known from the period known as "cosmic noon," around 11.5 billion years ago. Cosmic noon refers to a period when the universe was producing stars at its highest rate and galaxies were growing rapidly. In astronomy, "metals" refers to all elements heavier than helium, including oxygen, carbon, and iron. Because CR3 contains so few of these heavier elements, researchers say it closely resembles what scientists expect the earliest galaxies in the universe may have looked like. The discovery is significant because it could offer clues about Population III (Pop III) stars, the first generation of stars thought to have formed after the Big Bang. These stars are believed to have formed from gas made almost entirely of hydrogen and helium, before heavier elements were created inside stars and spread across the universe through supernova explosions. Hence this is why CR3 has been referred to as a "living fossil." Scientists have long believed that Population III stars existed only in the very early universe. As more generations of stars formed and died, they enriched surrounding gas with heavier elements, making the conditions needed for metal-free star formation increasingly rare. Because of this, researchers expected the formation of such stars to have largely ended after the epoch of reionization, a period when radiation from the first stars and galaxies transformed the neutral hydrogen filling the universe and made it largely transparent to ultraviolet light. CR3 appears to challenge that idea. The galaxy was observed at a redshift of z = 3.193 ± 0.016. Redshift measures how much light from a distant object has been stretched as the universe expands and helps astronomers determine how far back in time they are looking. In this case, the redshift corresponds to roughly 11.5 billion years ago during cosmic noon. Although the universe was already several billion years old by that point, CR3 shows characteristics more commonly associated with much earlier galaxies. Observations revealed exceptionally strong emissions from hydrogen and helium, including Lyα, Hα, and He I λ10830. Lyα, or Lyman-alpha emission, is a specific wavelength of light produced by hydrogen and is widely used to study distant galaxies. Hα emission is another hydrogen signature commonly used to trace active star formation, while He I λ10830 is produced by helium and can indicate the presence of very hot, young stars. The measured equivalent widths of EW₀(Lyα) = 822 ± 101 Å and EW₀(Hα) = 2814 ± 327 Å are among the highest ever observed in star-forming galaxies. Equivalent width is a measure of the strength of an emission line relative to the surrounding light, and such large values are typically associated with intense and very recent star formation. At the same time, researchers found no statistically significant detections of metal emission lines, including [O III] λλ4959, 5007 and C IV λλ1548, 1550. Emission lines act as chemical fingerprints that reveal which elements are present in a galaxy. Oxygen and carbon lines are commonly seen in galaxies that have already undergone significant chemical enrichment. Their absence in CR3 suggests an unusually pristine environment. Using abundance calibration methods developed with JWST observations, the team placed a 2σ upper limit on the galaxy's gas-phase metallicity of 12+log(O/H)<6.52, corresponding to less than 0.7% of the Sun's metallicity (Z < 7 × 10⁻³ Z⊙). Gas-phase metallicity measures the abundance of heavy elements in a galaxy's gas. A 2σ upper limit indicates that the true value is very unlikely to be higher than the quoted threshold. Even when accounting for uncertainties in the calibration methods, the most conservative limit remains 12+log(O/H)<6.95, making CR3 the most metal-poor galaxy identified at cosmic noon. The galaxy also appears to contain very little dust. Researchers measured a Lyα/Hα flux ratio of 13.9 ± 2.5, a result that suggests negligible dust attenuation, meaning very little of the galaxy's light is being absorbed or scattered by cosmic dust. Because dust is usually produced by earlier generations of stars, this finding further supports the idea that CR3 has experienced very little chemical enrichment. Further analysis using spectral energy distribution modelling, a technique that compares observed light with theoretical models, suggests that CR3 contains an extremely young stellar population only around 2 million years old. The modelling, which used Population III stellar templates, also indicates the galaxy has a stellar mass of approximately 6.1 × 10⁵ M⊙. The symbol M⊙ represents one solar mass, or the mass of the Sun. One of the key questions raised by the discovery is how such a chemically primitive galaxy could exist in a universe that had already spent billions of years producing heavier elements. To investigate this, the researchers examined CR3's surroundings. Their analysis suggests the galaxy may lie in a slightly underdense environment, with a density contrast of roughly δ ≈ −0.12. An underdense region contains less matter and fewer galaxies than average. The team suggests that this relative isolation may have helped preserve pockets of pristine gas. Metal-rich material expelled from nearby galaxies may never have reached CR3, while the lower rate of galaxy mergers and interactions could have slowed the mixing of enriched gas into the system. If future observations confirm these findings, CR3 could provide some of the strongest evidence yet that first-generation star formation continued well after the epoch of reionization. Such a result would challenge the conventional view that pristine star formation ended by z ≳ 6 and suggest that small pockets of metal-free gas survived much longer than previously thought. Researchers stress that more observations will be needed to determine the galaxy's true nature. Future spectroscopic studies with higher resolution and better signal quality could help confirm whether CR3 is genuinely hosting Population III star formation. The discovery is also expected to encourage searches for other similar galaxies, which could help astronomers better understand how the first stars formed and how galaxies evolved in the early universe. Source: Tsinghua University, IOPscience This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.
    • "I think in the immediate absence of a partner to apply relief" In the words of Sterling Archer... "Phrasing!"
    • For me, the fundamental problems with these "smartglasses" is that they really don't work well for people with significant prescriptions and massively up the price if you use attached lenses if they have displays, and if they don't, then they're not actually "smart" anything, rather just connecting to your phone and relaying voice to an AI. In a few cases like this, they throw in small cameras to feed video to the AI. All around, these feel like both a solution looking for a problem, and the problems it tries to solve seem more easily solved by different approaches and designs. Oddly, if the rumours are true, Apple may actually have invented something for once and it kind of does this right: put cameras in ear buds and manage the interface to AI exactly as most of us do: tapping on an ear bud and saying "Hey Google" or "Hey Siri." That makes them compatible with almost everyone, can double up as a hearing assist device, an impaired vision assist device, a "smart" device... and answer your phone and play music. That just seems like a better solution all around.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Dedicated
      HidekoYamamoto94 earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • One Month Later
      timbobit earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • One Month Later
      nates earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Almohandis earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Rookie
      dorf went up a rank
      Rookie
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      454
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      161
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      107
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      84
    5. 5
      Steven P.
      71
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!