Slashdot Mirror


Latest Windows 10 Preview Build Brings Slew of Enhancements

Deathspawner writes: Following its huge Windows 10 event last Wednesday, Microsoft released a brand-new preview build to the public, versioned 9926. We were told that it'd give us Cortana, Microsoft's AI assistant, as well as a revamped Start menu and updated notifications pane. But as it turns out, that's not even close to summing up all that's new with this build. In fact, 9926 is easily the most substantial update rolled out so far in the beta program, with some UI elements and integral Windows features seeing their first overhaul in multiple generations.

214 comments

  1. Wiped my Grub though. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    This update went through this morning with my morning coffee and broke my boot. I'm assuming it'll be as easy as booting a live disk, chrooting in, and running grub-install again but it's still a pain I haven't gone through in a fair while.

    1. Re:Wiped my Grub though. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      You're whining that an OS installer installed a boot sector. If you treasure your precious GRUB sector so much, next time use a virtual machine instead.

    2. Re:Wiped my Grub though. by ledow · · Score: 3, Informative

      "update"... I think he means he went from one to the other, I'm assuming MS put out Windows Updates to 10 just the same as anything else? But I could be wrong.

      However, even so, in the world of UEFI, GPT, etc. why the fuck does Windows still stomp over the boot sector as if it owns it? Add your partitions, mark yourself as active, put an entry in the UEFI if you find it. Otherwise, stop. You don't need to overwrite the boot sector if you've got that far because it worked well enough to boot your installer! And anyone installing non-standard boot sectors will be smart enough to just add your partition in as an option to boot from.

    3. Re:Wiped my Grub though. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not an update, it's a preview, and it's not in Windows Update, you have to download it and INSTALL it.

      Why in the holy fuck would anyone install a preview build of any OS in anything other than a VM?

    4. Re:Wiped my Grub though. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      To test it on equal footing with existing software? The existing OS runs on bare metal so to do a reasonable compare, the windows test build must also be installed on bare metal.

    5. Re:Wiped my Grub though. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just use a bare-metal hypervisor.

    6. Re:Wiped my Grub though. by LordLimecat · · Score: 1

      Because you're installing an operating system, and Microsoft does not make a multi-OS bootloader.

      More to the point, people installing an OS have an expectation that it will be virus free. How is Windows supposed to differentiate between a benign non-MS bootloader and a viral one?

    7. Re:Wiped my Grub though. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      and Microsoft does not make a multi-OS bootloader.

      Yes they do. They fully support multiple different Microsoft operating systems registered in their bootloader.

      How is Windows supposed to differentiate between a benign non-MS bootloader and a viral one?

      Digital signatures, AKA Secure Boot. Some Linux platforms support Secure Boot too, so checking the signature should be sufficient (assuming UEFI).

    8. Re:Wiped my Grub though. by richy+freeway · · Score: 2

      It's not an update, it's a preview, and it's not in Windows Update, you have to download it and INSTALL it.

      Can you explain this then?

      http://i.gyazo.com/c6741512c4e...

    9. Re:Wiped my Grub though. by bickerdyke · · Score: 2

      How about ASKING the user if an unknown bootloader is detected during install? "Hey, did you install this here on purpose?"

      --
      bickerdyke
    10. Re:Wiped my Grub though. by marky_boi · · Score: 1

      I tried the preview, yawned and reloaded my Fav linux distro, nothing much to see here. Win7 still seems to be the pinnacle at the moment...

    11. Re:Wiped my Grub though. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You don't even have to chroot in. grub-install has a nice option --root-directory (might be --boot-directory depending on the version of GRUB). Specifiy the location of the root directory, from whatever temporary folder it's mounted and of course where the bootloader should live and that's that.

      I do this mainly because I can't remember everything I need to mount in the correct way (proc,dev,sys) to do this the chroot way offline.

    12. Re:Wiped my Grub though. by RabidReindeer · · Score: 2

      Because you're installing an operating system, and Microsoft does not make a multi-OS bootloader.

      Sure they do. You can install and boot multiple Microsoft OS's.

    13. Re:Wiped my Grub though. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And how well does that work if you're testing by playing a 3D game?

    14. Re:Wiped my Grub though. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah... I got so pissed off about Windows always replacing the boot loader (and of update errors because it was not installed on the first partition) that I now keep Windows on its own hard drive and Linux on another. Both have (EFI) bootloaders not aware of the other and my boot menu is actually the computer's boot media menu. Since I'm in Linux 95% of the time, the windows drive doesn't bother anything and even goes to sleep from inactivity.

    15. Re:Wiped my Grub though. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can also boot other OSes from the ntldr if you set it up correctly. The easiest way to do it is to have the Windows bootloader aimed a grub and have grub do the magic for Linux, but there are others.

    16. Re:Wiped my Grub though. by hairyfeet · · Score: 4, Informative

      .Jesus Tap Dancing Christ on a damned cracker are the FOSSies on this site so dang ignorant that they are actually gonna bitch that when A NEW OS IS INSTALLED it actually gives you a motherfucking way to boot the damned thing? Really? Does Grub ask if you wanna keep the Windows bootloader? FUCK NO IT DOES NOT so have some damned common sense and realize when you install a new OS you need a fucking bootloader! For fuck's sake the FOSSies is getting as bad as the damned knee jerk partisan political hacks, rushing to cheer or fucking boo without even understanding WTF they are cheering FOR or booing AGAINST, its just "us VS them" with no damned brains involved!

      And FYI you are previewing a build of a CONSUMER OS, its NOT made for those that load custom bootloaders, ok? its NOT FOR YOU so don't bitch when an OS designed for the masses doesn't assume that you know about loading custom bootloaders and leaves you to deal with it, that is Linux way of leaving the user with their ass flailing about in the dark, NOT the Windows way, again don't like the Windows way? ubuntu is just a hop to your left, enjoy the biannual update deathmarch and drivers getting crapped on,the rest of us will be enjoying an OS with 10 years of free updates WITHOUT reinstalls (which now even Ubuntu advises you to do, even Canonical couldn't fix the clusterfuck that is the Linux update process) where the drivers work from RTM to EOL as my Hairyfeet Challenge has shown, now celebrating 8 years of FOSSie fail.

      Now for those that actually care about Windows 10 and isn't just here to bleat on about ubuntu prostituting porcupine or whatever the fuck the latest one is called, or the "new hotness" distro, Mint? Elementary? Who the hell knows, more damned distros than bad coffee in a food court these days, but back to Windows 10...for those that do not know the way I like to test a beta OS is as follows, which I think gives us the best idea how it will run, I call it the "If it can run on that" test as I take the weakest system I current have (oh and for the guy who didn't understand CPUs on the last Windows 10 article...a first gen Core 2 Duo is NOT, I repeat NOT slower than an AMD E350, the E350 was to compete with ATOM and gives the performance of the Atom+Nvidia ION chipset so even if you have the shitty Intel IGP when it comes to raw CPU power your C2D curbstomps an E350) so here is the specs followed by my impression..

      AMD E350, 8GB of RAM (the only thing that could be considered not below average, but fuck I scored 2 4GB sticks for $30, how could I pass that shit up? Does NOT affect the performance of the OS enough to consider it a major factor, as Win 10 is pretty RAM light) with a 320GB 5400 RPM drive, currently running the latest build, whatever the fuck that number is...Cortana...cute idea, pretty voice, SUCKS on accents, will probably not use if I can help it as it just doesn't seem to be there yet. Reminds me of Dragon Naturally Speaking as it seems like something you will have to "train" and I can type faster than I can train the damned thing. New Icons....OMFG will SOMEBODY pretty please hire somebody with damned taste to work on icons? It reminds me of a bastard child of KDE 3 and those tablety Windows Mist8ke flat shaded abominations, blech. I see an icon themepack for my netbook in the future, yep those be fugly.

      Now for the important shit...how does it run on hardware so slow? WOOOO HOOO YEAH!!!! Don't ask me how they did it but this thing boots crazy fast, it seriously gives my Windows 7 desktop which is several orders of magnitude a run for its money on boot time, battery life? Meh, I'd say its added maybe 20-30 minutes maybe with the new battery saver on, but its an old battery so really not surprising. When you are dealing with ULV SOC like Intel Atom and AMD E series they either idle or go full bore, not really much tweaking you can do there, would probably do better on one of the new mainstream lappys like a Haswell or Vishera chip.

      Control panel...I'm REALLY mixed on this one, as the default that comes

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    17. Re:Wiped my Grub though. by SpinyManiac · · Score: 1

      Why in the holy fuck would anyone install a preview build of any OS in anything other than a VM?

      Maybe they don't care about the hardware?

      I pulled a laptop from the junk pile at work and installed it on that. It runs OK on a 2008 vintage laptop, but I wouldn't want to use for anything serious.

      --
      It's never too late to have a happy childhood.
    18. Re:Wiped my Grub though. by LordLimecat · · Score: 1

      And that fits with the design experience MS goes for?

      Hey, 3 questions during install.
        * Whats your name?
        * Whats the computer name?
        * We detected a 438-byte bootsector on your storage device with SHA-1 c12e41289e4a294e6bd182ea7eef8a0cf50e329e and MD5 6f33616ed73ca29926ef69670e1a9880. Would you like to overwrite this with the Windows 7 bootloader, or would you prefer to start up a hex editor so that you can locate the sectors where your bootloader configuration is and manually edit in an entry to load the BOOTMGR at sector 41290?

      I look forward to this option being added in Windows 10. Its so much more reasonable than taking 2 minutes to reinstall the bootsector of your choice with a live CD!

    19. Re:Wiped my Grub though. by Shirley+Marquez · · Score: 1

      No, GRUB doesn't ask if you want to retain the Windows bootloader. But on most distributions it AUTOMATICALLY adds a boot entry to boot Windows that chains to the Windows bootloader from GRUB, unless you chose to overwrite the entire hard disk and wipe the Windows installation.

    20. Re:Wiped my Grub though. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      LIKE !!!
      kidding aside; nice take...
      and loved your opening line
      later

    21. Re:Wiped my Grub though. by toddestan · · Score: 1

      To test how well it works with various hardware? With that said, it's on its own dedicated box which is an old system that got retired when XP went EOL. It runs okay, but much slower than Windows 8 on the same hardware.

    22. Re:Wiped my Grub though. by toddestan · · Score: 2

      Actually, pretty much every Linux distribution I've ever played with (that comes with an installer) gives you the option of not installing a boot loader if you don't want to. Some will even make an alternate boot media for you to get into your Linux installation, such as a boot floppy or a USB stick, while others will leave it up to you to figure it out. And if you do choose to install Grub, they will almost always add an entry for any Windows installations it finds.

      Of course, there are the Linux distributions that come without installers, but if you're that hardcore you know what you're doing anyway.

    23. Re:Wiped my Grub though. by rdnetto · · Score: 1

      .Jesus Tap Dancing Christ on a damned cracker are the FOSSies on this site so dang ignorant that they are actually gonna bitch that when A NEW OS IS INSTALLED it actually gives you a motherfucking way to boot the damned thing? Really? Does Grub ask if you wanna keep the Windows bootloader?

      Pretty much every distro installer I've used asks whether you want to install the bootloader, and to which drives (usually right after the partitioning step).
      The Windows installer doesn't give you a choice - it just overwrites the boot sector on C:, which makes restoring the original bootloader a pain.
      The complaint is not that Windows installs a bootloader, it's that there is no way to prevent it from doing so. It's also worth noting it hasn't been just a consumer OS since XP - it's also an enterprise OS and the ability to load things like RAID drivers during the installation reflects that.

      --
      Most human behaviour can be explained in terms of identity.
  2. meh by McGiraf · · Score: 4, Informative

    meh

    1. Re:meh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's the best Windows review I've seen in a long time.

    2. Re:meh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      That's the best Windows review I've seen in a long time.

      Exactly. Much better than the typical review of Windows 8.x which is "HOLY FUCK WHAT IS THIS SHIT?!?!?!!".

  3. 9926 is so awesome by krkhan · · Score: 2

    We can't stop putting the same build on the front page.

    1. Re:9926 is so awesome by NoMaster · · Score: 1

      S.O.P. for the New Improved Slashdot (a subsidiary of Dice Holdings, Inc.).

      They've still got a couple of Win10 posts to go in this round - last time it was (IIRC) 5 separate posts in 6 days.

      --
      What part of "a well regulated militia" do you not understand?
    2. Re:9926 is so awesome by SomeoneFromBelgium · · Score: 1

      I could'nt understand why they didn't say which 'enhancements' were in this new superduper build.
      After I read the 'review' I knew: it's just a bit of eye candy.
      And no, we're still not getting our start menu back (despite 2 headlines on /. suggesting otherwise).
      Maybe the site should be rename C>
      (Sorry for that last sucker punch but I'm a bit disgusted with all the noise about a Windows version that's still more than 6 months off).

    3. Re:9926 is so awesome by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For all Snowden's genius (and I respect him a lot actually) he has screwed the pooch on us!!!

      Now everyone has learnt that it's best to "drip feed" your news items over a period of time to maintain sufficient "buzz" and "hype" in your BS.

    4. Re:9926 is so awesome by ray-auch · · Score: 1

      And no, we're still not getting our start menu back (despite 2 headlines on /. suggesting otherwise).

      Well we've sure as hell lost the start screen, I tried to like the start menu on previous build but reverted to start screen which I've always found much more efficient, now that option is gone - it's start menu only and search for applications is completely broken.

    5. Re:9926 is so awesome by SomeoneFromBelgium · · Score: 1

      Well, I was looking for a proper start menu (like in windows 7), not a smaller version of the start screen. And that is still out.

      I guess we will have to keep downloading all types of crap to get our start menu back.

  4. Change for change's sake by rossdee · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Because people have been using largely the same UI for the last 19 years, and are used to it. Thats a good enough reason the screw it up isn't it.

    1. Re:Change for change's sake by SeaFox · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Because people have been using largely the same UI for the last 19 years, and are used to it. Thats a good enough reason the screw it up isn't it.

      It is for Microsoft. If they don't make a new Windows release visually different in some significant way most people will see no reason to upgrade, which will make the product a commercial failure (or at least, not enough of a success to make Wall Street happy). Now, it's true, if Microsoft were do make a new version of Windows significantly faster performing and more secure then they might get a bunch of people on board even if it had the same interface as before, adding shiny to software is much less work than actually improving the product itself.

    2. Re:Change for change's sake by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That doesn't even make sense tho, nobody actually buys windows, it's just what comes with their computer. The only way people upgrade is buying a new computer with the new version because their old one is too slow or broken.

    3. Re:Change for change's sake by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >>Windows
      >>secure

      LOL. Good joke, brah.

    4. Re:Change for change's sake by PRMan · · Score: 0

      a new version of Windows significantly faster performing and more secure

      Then you'll LOVE Windows 10. Because it's mostly just Windows 7 faster and with more battery life.

      --
      Peter predicted that you would "deliberately forget" creation 2000 years ago...
    5. Re:Change for change's sake by bmajik · · Score: 1

      Have you tried using Windows XP on a touch device?

      --
      My opinions are my own, and do not necessarily represent those of my employer.
    6. Re:Change for change's sake by afidel · · Score: 5, Interesting

      The problem is the previous build was visually different while being MORE functional, this build is less functional if you have 19+ years of Windows experience. The previous build had the Windows 7 Start Menu with the addition of a live tiles dock area to the right, it added new useful functionality to the familiar and functional paradigm, the new build is basically a shrunk version of the Start Screen with all the crap that entails and which the majority of users have derided as being less functional on desktops (still the VAST, VAST majority of Windows machines). We had actually started plans for a Windows 10 rollout to our enterprise based on earlier tech preview builds, but those are now on hold and will be cancelled if they don't reverse the insanity. We can just keep using Windows 7 for the next 5 years.

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
    7. Re:Change for change's sake by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      For consumers, that's accurate for the majority. For businesses (specifically large ones), no, that's not accurate.

    8. Re: Change for change's sake by dunkelfalke · · Score: 2

      And fugly flat looks. Besides, what good is better battery life if you have no battery?

      --
      "It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
    9. Re:Change for change's sake by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Have you tried using Windows XP on a touch device?

      Yes on a waterjet (built 2009). The program/controller has oversized buttons but the touchscreen also works for regular window functions (browser, launching apps). The same getup is on a Windows 7 waterjet we have ... works the same as the XP machine!!!!

      If I was in charge of MSFT, my main adaptions for touchscreen would be a third way to input commands (keyboard, mouse, ... touchscreen). I wouldn't bother trying to replace the other two. Likely, some features would be made bigger or more geographically distinct (so that minimize and maximize commands are not directly adjacent - put some dead space in between).

      I believe 90% of the *UI* changes from Windows N-1 to Windows N is prompted by a desire to train users in MSFT-centric GUI and storage paradigms (which change every version, effing Xrist, that ought to be a clue here). I never used "Libraries" (the Vista/7 hotness) and already they are replaced in favor of "Quick Access" (Windows 10).

      How many times will you watch the "Folder" be reinvented/reimaged? You honestly think I want my thousands of business files arranged in any other manner? "Vendors", "Customers", "Plant", "ISO", "Forms", not "My Videos", "My Documents" (rarely are they 'mine'), et cetera.

      You're on a treadmill. Get off.

    10. Re:Change for change's sake by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, and a start menu that searches bing (and no way to disable it) and which by default takes up 1/3 of the taskbar, 2/3 of the start menu area is used for those shitty tiles no one wants of, 99% of software included is garbage metro apps, there's stupid huge letters in the start menu wasting space (can't have folders anymore seemingly), and tons of useless metro garbage all over the OS still (like the network connection thing), and tons more of this "white outline on an ugly color" graphics that makes us wish for an update to a CGA video card! Oh, and a new hilariously ugly settings app. They're still pushing their cloud garbage on us too, of course. Oh, but now I can ask my phone, err, desktop for directions or something. Siri is already barely useful on my iphone, and only because there's no keyboard. Cortana is of zero value at best (I bet it'll be about as good as bing too, which is not very much).

      So far it's worse than Windows 8 and that's a HUGE accomplishment!

      I was looking forward to an OS that somehow improves. That solves some of its problems, that does something better. Here all they're doing is further destroying the UI. The only positive thing about it is that they'll have a 4th browser (along with IE, IE 64 bit and IE Metro) which will finally have extensions like we've had with Firefox for 15 years... But I'll be using Chrome and Firefox anyway.

    11. Re: Change for change's sake by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      I like the flat look except for one massive flaw - buttons have no outline. Look at the screenshot of the calculator in TFA. What part of the window is a clickable button and what isn't? Not knowing means my brain automatically lines the cursor up with the small numbers, which is much more effort than just getting somewhere over the button which is probably quite large.

      The rest of it looks fine. The icons are a bit "1987 made-in-Deluxe-Paint for a PD library" design, with thin and awkward looking lines in places, but generally quite acceptable.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    12. Re:Change for change's sake by ray-auch · · Score: 1

      a new version of Windows significantly faster performing and more secure

      Then you'll LOVE Windows 10. Because it's mostly just Windows 7 faster and with more battery life.

      So was Windows 8...

    13. Re:Change for change's sake by ray-auch · · Score: 1

      The new menu is both less functional than the old menu AND less functional than the old start screen (see my post http://tech.slashdot.org/comme... below), and there is now no choice.

    14. Re:Change for change's sake by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      not true, i used a powershell script from another article that someone had posted and it brought back the start menu from the previous build. I thought the start menu took a step back in the most recent build, but overall i thought the new build felt more stable, and cleaner, my only other complaint was that by removing windows update from control panel and putting it in pc setting i can no longer hide a driver update that i don't want, so i have to hide all recommended, and cannot hide just that one.

      heres the script if your inclined, thanks to whoever posted this originally, made my day, thanks:

      Set-ItemProperty HKCU:\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Explorer\Advanced -Name "EnableXamlStartMenu" -Value 0 -Type DWord
      Get-AppxProvisionedPackage -Online | Remove-AppxProvisionedPackage -Online
      Get-AppxPackage | Remove-AppxPackage
      logoff # logs you off so you can log back in to see the effect

    15. Re:Change for change's sake by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      just to clarify: "not true" is in regard to there not being a choice, not "not true" in regards to the new menu being less functional.

    16. Re:Change for change's sake by darkmeridian · · Score: 1

      Microsoft is being audacious in unifying the tablet and PC operating systems. The changes in Windows 8/Windows 10 is necessary to this end. Windows 7/Vista are painful with a touchscreen. I think we should recognize what Microsoft is trying to do is very daring. I don't see Android trying to reach the desktop (other than through the browser) and I don't see Apple unifying iOS and MacOS.

      I won't be surprised if we're all running full-blown Windows on our phones within five years. Processors keep getting smaller, more powerful, and more power efficient. Phones are also getting bigger. By the end of 2016, Intel is supposed to have Skylake matured, which is a 14 nm processor with a system on chip option. By 2020, we'll see Intel going to a 10 nm or even 7 nm. Similar trends are being paralleled with regard to SSDs and RAM.

      At the same time, all the major players are trying to make the PC wireless. Intel's Skylake is supposed to move the ball forward on wireless docking. We have a wireless recharging standard already. So by next year, we'll see devices being docked without wires. Once that technology matures, we'll have phones powerful enough to run Windows and MS Office that we can dock without any wires.

      The vision of the future that Microsoft envisions is one where we carry around a phone that is powerful enough to be a desktop replacement for most office users. If all you do is word process and check your email, then you can be on the go all the time. Android and iOS should be concerned because Microsoft may be getting into mobile in a very big way should this vision come to pass, and that's why Microsoft is willing to take a risk on Windows 8, Windows 10, and other attempts to bring Windows onto mobile.

      --
      A NYC lawyer blogs. http://www.chuangblog.com/
    17. Re:Change for change's sake by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      works fine..

    18. Re:Change for change's sake by epyT-R · · Score: 1

      The main complaints about windows 8+ comes from people using desktop/laptop computers to make the content used on touch devices. Touch/mobile interfaces don't work well for this at all. Who wants interfaces riddled with full screen 24pt font modal dialog boxes and tons of wasted whitespace? Who wants fingerprints on their monitors?

    19. Re:Change for change's sake by cheesybagel · · Score: 1

      I skipped Windows 8 and at this rate i'll skip Windows 10 as well.

      I was one of the guys who used Windows 2000 and Windows Vista. Still I just don't see what is the point of these changes. Windows 2000 had increased system stability with the NT kernel and Vista at least had proper 64-bit architecture support. Windows 7 is Vista without the warts. But Windows 10 seems like a pointless waste of time on a desktop.

      Smartphone processors are probably going to hit a brick wall on the next year. Apple and Qualcomm are already using all the capacity TSMC can spare which means NVIDIA and AMD can't manufacture their GPUs at the latest node. Battery tech keeps moving at a snail's pace. Intel is the only company with better manufacturing technology for the next couple of years.

  5. Re:Fuck Winders by walterbyrd · · Score: 1

    Linux + systemd = MS-Windows.

  6. Full Screen Start Menu! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    To make explicit the concept that the Start Screen is nothing more than a full screen Start Menu, a maximize button on the Start Menu transforms it into the Start Screen. Finally, the vertical Start Menu users can shut the fuck up about it!

    1. Re:Full Screen Start Menu! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      To make explicit the concept that the Start Screen is nothing more than a full screen Start Menu, a maximize button on the Start Menu transforms it into the Start Screen. Finally, the vertical Start Menu users can shut the fuck up about it!

      There's still a UXtard in Redmond who needs to be shot for making the resizable start screen nonresizable in 9926. The 9879 build was resizable, so you could make the useful part of it (the list of things on the left, even with the atrocious waste of vertical whitespace) taller. 9926 gives you two options: scroll like a motherfucker or fullscreen shit,.

      The start menu of 9926 can be *FORCED* to be as resizable as it was in 9879 as follows: Create a DWORD32 named EnableXamlStartMenu in HKEY_CURRENT_USER>Software>Microsoft>Windows>CurrentVersion>Explorer>Advanced and leave (or set, if it already exists) its value to 0.

      Now if only there were a way to restore the wasted vertical space in the task manager. Sigh. The W10 task manager is good, it's just utterly wasteful on space. On W7 I can see damn near everything running. On W10, the UXtard with the vertical whitespace fetish won the debate. For fuck's sake, we gave up the Status Bar in Firefox 4.0 because 10 pixels was too much space to waste... and we got this shit - in Firefox, in ribbons, in Win8/10, and even in goddamn Google's Material Design / Android - in return.

    2. Re:Full Screen Start Menu! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The "All Apps" menu is more sucky. Alphabetized with folders intermixed and no apparent way to change it. Takes up WAY to much space and have to scroll a long ways to get to the bottom. Just another way to waste users time I guess.

    3. Re:Full Screen Start Menu! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The restrictive user experience (RUX) started in Win7 but has finally reach full speed insanity in Win10.

      My two small examples from Win7 are:

        - The power manager selection menu is made to appear by clicking the power icon in the bottom right system tray. This menu helpfully shows you the last two power configurations, including the one you are using. So it's a 1-level menu and can not be expanded. For laptop users this is completely useless. Another series of clicks is required to bring up the full control panel window that shows all of the power plans.

        - The WiFi network menu is made to appear by clicking the WiFi icon in the bottom right system tray. This menu is height restricted and can only show about 8 or so WiFi networks. The fact that this menu height is hard coded, with no way to enlarge it (even temporarily) is a classic example of RUX. ...and to think people were paid good money (I assume) to make these decisions!

    4. Re:Full Screen Start Menu! by ray-auch · · Score: 1

      It's not the start screen though - it's a crippled version of it, with all-apps in a long list instead of over the whole screen. So rather than have everything shown by scrolling over two screenfuls, I have to scroll down over 5 screenfuls and then expand the ones that are hidden in folders. Some applications are randomly in a folder of one item, which has to be expanded before you can click on it. To cap it all they've crippled the search so that you have to click a search bar (it loses focus for no reason), it only shows one result when searching incrementally for applications, and that looks exactly the same as no results - no change if it is clickable (try search for "reg" and "regedit" - exactly the same look but one is a non clickable non result and one gives a clickable result).

      It's almost as though they want to make it as difficult as possible to find what's installed on your machine - possibly because so much is metro crap.

  7. Not that great of a preview by Trax3001BBS · · Score: 1

    "This is a full build, and it will be installed as an in-place upgrade, so you’ll go through those colorful “installing your apps” screens again. This is because your account is being re-provisioned after the upgrade."

    So you lose your current OS, not being able to install it elsewhere.

    "You’ll notice that there is not a separate “Check Now” button here. This is because the button to check for WU updates now also checks for new builds."

    I don't see any problems here... Unless your still able to select your updates. Else a future /. article will be of a bad update that took out all participants.

    1. Re:Not that great of a preview by Richard_at_work · · Score: 1

      Take a backup if you are so precious about your current OS, it even tells you how in the Insider documentation - enough has changed that they have to migrate the user account stuff, so that gives an indication of how different things are now.

      And yes, you can select your updates, just like before.

    2. Re:Not that great of a preview by Trax3001BBS · · Score: 1

      Take a backup if you are so precious about your current OS, it even tells you how in the Insider documentation - enough has changed that they have to migrate the user account stuff, so that gives an indication of how different things are now.

      And yes, you can select your updates, just like before.

      I don't wish to be "stuck" with Win10 as it's going subscription after a year free. I'm used to dual booting always have, it allows a choice.

      Should be a way do this (EasyBCD), I'll figure it out (not asking).

      Thanks for the update on the updates. :)

    3. Re:Not that great of a preview by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Take a backup if you are so precious about your current OS, it even tells you how in the Insider documentation - enough has changed that they have to migrate the user account stuff, so that gives an indication of how different things are now.

      And yes, you can select your updates, just like before.

      I don't wish to be "stuck" with Win10 as it's going subscription after a year free. I'm used to dual booting always have, it allows a choice.

      Should be a way do this (EasyBCD), I'll figure it out (not asking).

      Thanks for the update on the updates. :)

      It should be noted that if you upgrade within the first year of its release, its free for the life Windows 10. So its not a subscription but rather a limited time offer.

    4. Re:Not that great of a preview by exomondo · · Score: 1

      I don't wish to be "stuck" with Win10 as it's going subscription after a year free.

      Where did you get that information from? I saw they are going to charge for it after the first year and that they will obviously charge OEMs for it so they can make money but I didn't see anything about "subscription".

    5. Re:Not that great of a preview by Trax3001BBS · · Score: 1

      Take a backup if you are so precious about your current OS, it even tells you how in the Insider documentation - enough has changed that they have to migrate the user account stuff, so that gives an indication of how different things are now.

      And yes, you can select your updates, just like before.

      I don't wish to be "stuck" with Win10 as it's going subscription after a year free. I'm used to dual booting always have, it allows a choice.

      Should be a way do this (EasyBCD), I'll figure it out (not asking).

      Thanks for the update on the updates. :)

      It should be noted that if you upgrade within the first year of its release, its free for the life Windows 10. So its not a subscription but rather a limited time offer.

      Second reply, different day.

      I'm going to try it out, I was loaned a brand new Acer Aspire 64 bit laptop. It's Win8, so I've been prepping it for Win8.1 then thought hell, might as well go on to Win10. I had much more to add but after reading the agreement it's best left unsaid, and the tape over the web cam stays.

      But may disable mobile phones permanently? That's harsh.

      Had a hell of a scare, hotmail.com is my e-mail address, https://account.live.com/ kept verifying me by sending E-mail that said if it's really me don't do anything, wrong. This went on for over an hour, the account itself in jeopardy.

      The scare? I rarely log into MS yet most of my E-mail goes to hotmail.com (https://account.live.com ?) then forwarded elsewhere. Been like that for a very long time, they now have a second e-mail address to verify me by; but hell they've been forwarding to it for just as long... Wonder how Bing is holding up...

      * Hotmail didn't have POP3, the other address did, I download all of my E-mail to read with Forte's Agent 6.

    6. Re:Not that great of a preview by Trax3001BBS · · Score: 1

      I don't wish to be "stuck" with Win10 as it's going subscription after a year free.

      Where did you get that information from? I saw they are going to charge for it after the first year and that they will obviously charge OEMs for it so they can make money but I didn't see anything about "subscription".

      It was an on /. a week ago http://tech.slashdot.org/story... but there has been a correction to the article it linked to:

      "Correction: Windows 10 will be a one-time upgrade, free for the first year of release, and there will not be a subscription model attached, as this post initially reported."
      http://mashable.com/2015/01/21...

  8. Eye candy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Dicking around with greyed out icons on the status bar, a new start menu, and a fancier control panel do not a better OS make.

    Why do I need this upgrade?

    1. Re:Eye candy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You don't. Microsoft and Winders are irrelevant. Just use Linux and stop being a proprietard.

      Linux has been going for decades and still nobody wants it, you cant even give it away on the desktop. Not because it is necessarily bad but because no decent applications run on it and now it is going backwards thanks to the systemd infestation. Linux failed when MS stumbled with Windows Me, it failed when MS stumbled with Vista and it failed when MS stumbled with 8.

      A good operating system is one that runs the applications a user needs to get their work done, and by this metric Linux on the desktop is *not* a good operating system. For technical merit, absolutely, but for actually doing things that desktop users need to do, no.

    2. Re:Eye candy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've used Linux for years, and still have to have Windows in at least a VM because some of the software I use has no Linux-compatible alternative and Wine is far from perfect.

    3. Re:Eye candy by mark-t · · Score: 1

      A good operating system is one that runs the applications a user needs to get their work done

      So what ultimately makes an OS a good one is when end-user application developers write applications for it?

      Consider that the lack of applications for Linux is merely the result of design decisions made by software developers who simply feel that Linux's meager overall usage on the desktop does not make it worth their time to make any extra effort to support. So in reality, by your measurement, what actually makes an OS good is when enough people use it that it creates a measurable greed incentive to drive such application development.

    4. Re:Eye candy by FlyHelicopters · · Score: 1

      Linux has been going for decades and still nobody wants it, you cant even give it away on the desktop.

      This is SO the truth...

      Lord, I've been waiting for Linux on the Desktop for 20 years now... installed Linux on a 486 nearly 20 years ago...

      It is a great server OS, it is never going to be a widely adopted desktop OS.

    5. Re:Eye candy by JackieBrown · · Score: 1

      Lord, I've been waiting for Linux on the Desktop for 20 years now... installed Linux on a 486 nearly 20 years ago...

      It is a great server OS, it is never going to be a widely adopted desktop OS.

      Let me guess.... Linux sucks for you because it won't run Microsoft Office and other Windows applications?

    6. Re:Eye candy by FlyHelicopters · · Score: 1

      Let me guess.... Linux sucks for you because it won't run Microsoft Office and other Windows applications?

      That is a common reply that I see...

      First, yes... Microsoft Office is indeed important... for people who share documents, spreadsheets, etc. with the outside world, using the standard does matter. OpenOffice doesn't convert them perfectly and small errors creep when you try.

      Second, yes... other windows applications do matter, many such as Quickbooks are important for many businesses. It is what their CPA uses, so keeping your accounting files in the same format that allows you to easily upload your data to your CPA, they can do their thing, and send them back, is more important than what OS you run.

      Finally, Windows just works. XP was "good enough" and killed off most further interest in Linux on the desktop. Windows 7 took it further and torpedoed the rest of it... Windows 8 got a lot of flack, 8.1 fixed much of that mess... You install Windows 8.1 on almost anything made in the past 6 years and it runs very, very well.

      ---

      As a side note, if the reason you want Linux is because it is "not Windows", that will never be enough of a reason. You need a reason beyond that to get the bulk of the people to care.

      Apple OS X has three times the Linux marketshare (if not more), and it is one of the most expensive options you can pick. That more than anything else should pour cold water on the Linux Desktop idea...

      ---

      For servers? Wonderful, totally wonderful, I get that it does have a bright future there.

    7. Re:Eye candy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So what ultimately makes an OS a good one is when end-user application developers write applications for it?

      Obviously to some degree yes. The job of an operating system is to run applications, it is pretty useless if it has no applications to run.

      Consider that the lack of applications for Linux is merely the result of design decisions made by software developers who simply feel that Linux's meager overall usage on the desktop does not make it worth their time to make any extra effort to support.

      No, it is a chicken and egg problem. You cannot solve that without being disruptive.
      Linux on the server (where it competes with Windows) dominates because it provides admins and server folks with real tangible advantages over Windows when it comes to management and squeezing the last drop of performance out of their systems.
      Linux on mobile (where it competes with Windows and iOS) has come to dominate (and even topple the incumbents) by being disruptive and providing advantageous features, compatibility with new form factors and interaction mechanisms that users found compelling enough to abandon their existing devices.
      Linux on the desktop fails to do these things, there is no disruptive distro, it is always just copying whatever Windows and OSX are doing. No distro provides any sort of "wow factor" that appeals to desktop users en-masse. That is the reason it is a failure, it dominates in other areas where it competes with Microsoft and Apple but not on desktop.

      So in reality, by your measurement, what actually makes an OS good is when enough people use it that it creates a measurable greed incentive to drive such application development.

      Greed incentive? No. Linux on the desktop is just not good enough to warrant an investment of time for anybody. Something that is late to the game needs to be disruptive and provide the user real tangible advantages and Linux on the desktop does not do that, Linux distros are just me-too products with a couple of niche features for niche markets and that's fine but don't expect it to get more than a couple percent marketshare with that strategy.

    8. Re:Eye candy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and other Windows applications?

      Why do you think that is? It isn't just Windows either, it is also OSX. Developers support these operating systems because they are backed by large companies that continue huge investments in the platforms from the developer level to the user level to the hardware and OEM manufacturers whereas Linux (for the desktop anyway) is more a hackers' (in the coding sense, not the security-breaking sense) operating system. There are hundreds of desktop distros servicing many many niche markets, hardware support is getting better but still isn't brilliant, there is no cohesive user experience across the distros (and yes I know that is kind of the point) which creates a fragmented environment for "desktop Linux" from the user perspective and there is no decent hardware channel either.

      But this is not the fault of Linux in general, it is the lack of innovation from desktop Linux OS makers. Take a look at how Linux transformed the server and supercomputer markets with its lightweight, scalability and administration features. Or how Google took Linux, wrapped it in Android and created a feature-rich, innovative and disruptive entry to the smartphone market.

      If people want Windows they use Windows and if they want a well-supported and feature-rich Unix-like OS they use OSX rather than the me-too Linux-based Mint or Ubuntu.

    9. Re:Eye candy by mark-t · · Score: 1

      Linux on the desktop is just not good enough...

      Except that by the aforementioned definition, what makes something "good enough" is an availability of applications in the first place.

      The technical merits of an operating system are not sufficient to drive mainstream application creation.... what ultimately drives it is nothing more or less than human greed, and the desire to get a piece of the action.

      Linux was not late to the game at all... it actually predates Windows 95.

    10. Re:Eye candy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except that by the aforementioned definition, what makes something "good enough" is an availability of applications in the first place.

      And if Linux on the desktop were innovative or disruptive or in some way more useful to end users than the incumbents then application developers would flock to it. Just as they did with Android when it supplanted Windows Mobile and Blackberry. The fact is Linux desktop developers are uninspired, lack innovative thought and have ultimately produced a lackluster me-too product and excuse it by blaming everybody they can from the users, to the application developers to Microsoft because they don't want to admit their own failure. RedHat did it in the server space and Google did it in the mobile consumer space. Stop being an apologist for shitty developers, Linux is a brilliant kernel and the shoddy attempts at creating a desktop OS out of it do it a great disservice.

      The technical merits of an operating system are not sufficient to drive mainstream application creation....

      Because those technical merits are mediocre at best and of no tangible advantage to end users.

      what ultimately drives it is nothing more or less than human greed, and the desire to get a piece of the action.

      No it is driven by making something disruptive and useful, but desktop distro devs and their apologists like you just desperately want to blame somebody other than themselves. You want to frame it as "greed" on behalf of the developers because they don't waste time on your shitty platform and you think that excuses the failure of distro makers but the fact is developers will expend time when people like Google come along and do a Linux operating system right ala Android.

      This failure of the desktop Linux community to produce innovative products gets rightfully punished by users and developers, nobody should prop up shit just because some group of uninspired people produced it. You want developers and users? Make something innovative!

      Linux was not late to the game at all... it actually predates Windows 95.

      Linux is just a kernel. Linux desktop distributions in any usable form most certainly were late to the game.

    11. Re:Eye candy by mark-t · · Score: 1

      Linux desktop distributions in any usable form most certainly were late to the game.

      No [application development] is driven by making something disruptive and useful,

      I'm going to assume that you genuinely believe that and are not deliberately trolling... your assumption, however, is mistaken. The number one motivating factor in application development, by far, is the human instinct of selfishness and greed. I would challenge you to find any study which shows that this is *not* the case. While certainly there is no lack of applications developed with more altruistic motivations, mainstream application development is almost invariably motivated by some sort of commercial incentive... which does not necessarily mean that the software itself will cost any money, but that in some way the development of the application will provide an increase in revenue.

    12. Re:Eye candy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The number one motivating factor in application development, by far, is the human instinct of selfishness and greed. I would challenge you to find any study which shows that this is *not* the case.

      False. I challenge you to find a study which backs your assertion, however you are wrong so you will find no such evidence. But you are a religious idiot who will believe anything just because it cannot be disproven.

      While certainly there is no lack of applications developed with more altruistic motivations, mainstream application development is almost invariably motivated by some sort of commercial incentive...

      Commercial incentive != selfishness and/or greed. So you lose again. What do you do for a job? I'll be you get paid, so by your (incorrect) definition you do it purely for selfishness and greed.

      It is just more attempts at pathetic excuses for the failings of the Linux desktop developers, more desperation to place the blame on other people. Just stop lying to yourself or you will always be a failure, you should strive to be something more but you have to first stop blaming everybody else.

    13. Re:Eye candy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The number one motivating factor in application development, by far, is the human instinct of selfishness and greed.

      No it is for the exact same reason anybody does any job. The exact same reason you do whatever it is you do for a job. Define it as "selfishness and greed" if you like but you are just a very selfish and greedy person too then.

      So believe that if you want, it doesn't make any difference to me or anybody else because ultimately the fact remains that Linux on the desktop is a failure because of its own lack of innovation and imagination. Excuse it however you want if it helps you sleep, but that only makes you feel better about the failure it, sorry but it doesnt change the facts. Desktop Linux distributions are copy-cat operating systems playing catchup with the incumbents, while innovators pioneered new features, new products and new form-factors the desktop Linux distributions languished, which is why you still cant even give it away.

    14. Re:Eye candy by mark-t · · Score: 1

      I would challenge you to find a study which backs the alternative. The human tendency to prefer choices that positively benefit oneself is almost axiomatic, and I would suspect you would actually need to give ample evidence that this is actually *not* the case. Practically every commercial game ever made, killer productivity appliications like spreadsheets and paint software, and even operating systems like Windows itself... the single greatest driving force behind them is nothing more or less than simple greed.

      Of course, it's also greed that makes most of us get up every morning and go to work.... since we have to keep a roof over our heads. My point being that this is such a primal and instinctive characteristic of human nature that to thing that merely being a disruptive technology could overcome it is extremely naive. As was already said above, on technical merits alone, Linux easily meets the criteria of being such a disruptive technology, but because not enough people use it, there isn't an abundance of commercial application development for it, which in turn leaves the OS as feeling less useful to people who necessarily need or expect such applications to be available on their computer.

    15. Re:Eye candy by mark-t · · Score: 1

      Linux on the desktop is a failure because of its own lack of innovation and imagination.

      Really? Because other than the availability of applications for it, can you name even one thing that Linux itself actually lacks? I'm betting that you can't. Can you further explain how the lack of applications being developed for Linux is anything other than a reflection of the fact that not many people use it in the first place, which itself is a direct consequence of the fact that the applications that people want aren't found on it? Of course, it's a vicious cycle... but that's not the operating system's fault. Before Visicalc came out, for instance, there was almost no practical reason whatsoever for any non hobbyist or professional computer programmer or computer scientist to ever own one of these new-fangled home computers. Visicalc's success was not because of any technical merits of the computing platform it was developed for, it was because it was software that did what people actually wanted, and so people went and bought it.

  9. Windows 7 v2.0 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I think Windows 10 will be the new 7 (or XP for some). If they don't make everything "in your face" as they did with Windows 8 then this should be a huge win for everyone.

    I couldn't help but notice, as I use a Mac at work, that some of the elements were borrowed from OS X and were heavily modified, I for one applaud them for doing this! Not because I'm a mac "fanboy", far from it, but because the UI in some instances looks so much cleaner as well. My 2 cents on that.

  10. Ugly as it can be? by cpotoso · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Ugly as it can be? All decoration gone? Why does everybody have to copy Apple? I understand copying when it is beautiful, but apple is now engaged in making computer graphics look like an X11 system from the 1980s and everybody else is following suit. Awful... truly awful.

    1. Re:Ugly as it can be? by Pentium100 · · Score: 2

      Yea, at least give an option of having either the classic look or the Windows 7 basic look. But then it wouldn't look like a tablet interface and not as modern. The look the primary reason for my hatred of Windows 8. I can get Start menu by using classic shell, I cannot get a proper interface though.

    2. Re:Ugly as it can be? by ChunderDownunder · · Score: 1

      It's creating a common skin for phone, tablet and workstation.

      modern day ARM GPUs have enough 3D acceleration for eye candy. Simpler rendering conserves battery life, perhaps.

    3. Re:Ugly as it can be? by bondsbw · · Score: 2

      If you can't see the difference between X11 and Yosemite, I'm just going to ignore the rest of what you have to say on the subject of graphics.

      --
      All my liberal friends think I'm a conservative, all my conservative friends think I'm a liberal.
    4. Re:Ugly as it can be? by Dutch+Gun · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Sigh... I absolutely agree about the conclusion. But it's a stretch to say this trend is copying Apple. Windows 8 came out long before Apple's new "flat" look came out, unless I'm aware of a trend that started before that in the Apple camp.

      Seriously, though, I'm already completely sick of this "flat, clean, simple" trend. But more importantly, the usability is often worse, sacrificed on the alter of the new aesthetic. In the new design language, button borders are uncool, so they've simply done away with them in many cases, and don't offer any indications of what you can click, or where clickable regions are. Windows 8 was particularly bad with this, so we'll see if Windows 10 does any better, despite using the same basic theme. I understand that aesthetics are important, but they should always, always, always take a back seat to functionality and usability.

      With any luck, after a few years, when everyone else gets sick of flat, uninspired graphics, someone will create a new, "retro" look and start adding some bevels, gradients, gloss, and transparency back into the UI.

      --
      Irony: Agile development has too much intertia to be abandoned now.
    5. Re:Ugly as it can be? by Dutch+Gun · · Score: 2

      They made that argument for Windows 8, and one could conceivably buy that argument for the Metro UI running on very low-powered devices, as MS phones often are. However, there's no conceivable reason to skin your traditional Windows applications in the same way, which are obviously going to be running on desktops and laptops. For a modern GPU, whether or not they're rendering a transparent windows or rounding a border isn't even remotely a concern in terms of efficiency.

      No, I think this is an aesthetic decision through and through. I think the "efficiency" angle was probably just an argument made to help sell it. I'm really hoping the "flat, boring, and ugly" trend dies a fiery death soon.

      --
      Irony: Agile development has too much intertia to be abandoned now.
    6. Re:Ugly as it can be? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      its easier to draw a straight line than a curved angle with a shadow. lol

    7. Re:Ugly as it can be? by Dutchmaan · · Score: 3, Informative

      "Why does everybody have to copy Apple?"

      As far as UI goes, Apple has been taking cues from Android for years. Remember Apple was all about glossy rounded icons before Android's flat and efficient become trendy.

    8. Re:Ugly as it can be? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh i see a difference all right. The X11 one is WAY more readable and that Yosemite is just some gray flat somethings...

    9. Re:Ugly as it can be? by houghi · · Score: 1

      I like it. Beauty is very personal. What they should do is have many different themes and easy to select, so people can choose what they want it to look like.

      My issue, and this is not limited to Windows, is the use of the Toolbar. That think is almost always empty. e.g. this oneA pictogram, the name and three small things I can click. The image and the name is not something I need. That leaves the three buttons.

      I rather use that space for something else. Lower the Minimize, Maximize and Close button and you have more space.

      Again: Not only a Windows issue.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    10. Re:Ugly as it can be? by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      I think Google started it. Makes sense for web stuff because instead of wasting bandwidth on a button image you just have a flat shaded HTML element. At any rate, Google's web apps started going that way long before either Apple or Windows 8 did.

      I think it's mostly fine, the only big issue being that some designers don't make buttons stand out enough. The calculator app in TFA is the worst, with no indication of where the buttons are except for their captions. Apple made Yosemite look very washed out too which doesn't help. Google is a mixture - they use a lot of bold, primary colours with loads of contrast but then also use some very low contrast elements too sometimes.

      Star Trek's LCARS had the right idea. Loads of contrast, simple flat look. Could have done with some more colour.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    11. Re:Ugly as it can be? by itsdapead · · Score: 2

      But it's a stretch to say this trend is copying Apple. Windows 8 came out long before Apple's new "flat" look came out, unless I'm aware of a trend that started before that in the Apple camp.

      Nah - I think the "skeuomorphism considered harmful" movement comes from form-over-function graphic design numpties who were tired of actual content, meaning or useful visual cues for functionality polluting their minimalist design and stealing valuable screen area that could be used for whitespace, irrelevant generic images of shiny happy people or corporate identity guff. It was showing up on websites etc. (Slashdot's Bucking Feta was fairly late to the party) long before Apple went flat. Google have been going down the same route for some time, too.

      Apple didn't help by coming up with some appallingly bad skeuomorphic UIs shortly before they went flat: someone had completely forgotten that the point of making something look like, say, a physical book is to suggest to the user that it works like a physical book (e.g. with data arranged in pages). Apps like Contacts and Calendars looked like books, or flip-over calendars, but didn't work remotely like such things, leaving the user with a load of totally misleading visual cues. (Subsequently copying them from iOS to OSX, where the mouse-based interface made them work even less like the physical object didn't help, either). Now, the baby has been thrown out with the bathwater, and we're left with "mystery meat" UIs with nothing to distinguish the controls from the content.

      --
      In a survey of 100 programmers, 111111 thought that duck-typing was a good idea.
    12. Re:Ugly as it can be? by cpotoso · · Score: 1

      Indeed, Yosemite is a lot worse. A colorful background and then buttons that can't be distinguished from other UI elements, grey letters over grey background? Sure... give me X11 any time.

    13. Re:Ugly as it can be? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      While I also never saw a performance problem with the "aero" effects, there are some considerable compatibility problems. Some old applications can't handle it at all, and almost no applications behave correctly when going between RDP and real in-person sessions with these effects enabled.

      Ironically I think some of these effects are working better with Windows 8.1, but they are so much simpler that it's hard to notice.

    14. Re:Ugly as it can be? by bondsbw · · Score: 1

      Wait, you said they look alike. Now you are touting the differences. Which is it?

      --
      All my liberal friends think I'm a conservative, all my conservative friends think I'm a liberal.
    15. Re:Ugly as it can be? by bondsbw · · Score: 1

      buttons that can't be distinguished from other UI elements

      In the X11 graphic, I see at least 4 different button visuals:

              - thin border with shadow
              - bold border with no shadow
              - 3D-style border
              - buttons without any border (menu buttons)

      And text entry uses a 3D-style border just like some of the buttons.

      How exactly is this better?

      --
      All my liberal friends think I'm a conservative, all my conservative friends think I'm a liberal.
    16. Re:Ugly as it can be? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I like it. Beauty is very personal. What they should do is have many different themes and easy to select, so people can choose what they want it to look like.

      My issue, and this is not limited to Windows, is the use of the Toolbar. That think is almost always empty. e.g. this oneA pictogram, the name and three small things I can click. The image and the name is not something I need. That leaves the three buttons.

      I rather use that space for something else. Lower the Minimize, Maximize and Close button and you have more space.

      Again: Not only a Windows issue.

      I assume you're talking about the title bar? That empty space is the handle by which you can click and drag around the window. This is actually one of my biggest pet peeves with Chrome and the new Firefox. So often I find myself needing to move around the browser window (to my other monitor, for example) and when I go to click and drag, I accidentally hit the top of one of the browser tabs and drag it out into a new window instead of moving the original window.

    17. Re:Ugly as it can be? by iampiti · · Score: 1

      I pray to the gods that the Windows UI designers read your comment and decide to undo this madness. Microsoft are determined to have a unified interface between desktop, tablet and phone and will cause the desktop to be less useful and harder to use if necessary.

    18. Re:Ugly as it can be? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This. If I had mod points, I would give all of them to you.

    19. Re:Ugly as it can be? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      LCARS is like gnome 3.0. It looks nice at first glance but it is utterly useless for productivity.

    20. Re:Ugly as it can be? by MrL0G1C · · Score: 1

      Windows 7 !!! I want the Windows 2000 functionality and I have it with Classic start menu.

      --
      Waterfox - a Firefox fork with legacy extension support, security updates and better privacy by default.
    21. Re:Ugly as it can be? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bah. Spoken like someone who's never commanded a Galaxy-class.

    22. Re:Ugly as it can be? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      With any luck, after a few years, when everyone else gets sick of flat, uninspired graphics, someone will create a new, "retro" look and start adding some bevels, gradients, gloss, and transparency back into the UI.

      He wants Windows Vista! BURN HIM!

      Captcha: atrocity. Oh my god you couldn't make this shit up!

  11. Looks Great! by dark.nebulae · · Score: 2

    I'll stick with linux, however.

  12. Re:Fuck Winders by Columcille · · Score: 1

    Somewhat ironic that you would post this the same day another critical bug is announced in Linux. Time to spend tomorrow updating glibc! As for viruses, it's been a while since I had to deal with any in Windows.

    --
    I love my sig.
  13. Have some! by Sir_Substance · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I see the ~cloud~ is mandatory again.

    The ability to remove skydrive has vanished since the previous, despite being the most requested feature on the feedback app, and cortana is now stapled to your startbar, taking up 50% of the space with no apparent way to remove it.

    Creating a local account rather than logging in with a microsoft account has been made more confusing by making the UI components for creating a new microsoft account bigger, so that the "log in without a microsoft account" button is pushed off the bottom of the page. Microsoft really wants your grandmother confused and scared so she makes an account without understanding what she's doing.

    1. Re:Have some! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, the One Drive is a big disappointment. I guess I'll have to check out Google's NSA/FBI Drive.

    2. Re:Have some! by corrosive_nf · · Score: 5, Informative

      Right click on the task bar.
      Select the "Search" option.
      You'll now see three new options for what to do. To make it go away altogether hit "Disabled."

    3. Re:Have some! by Sir_Substance · · Score: 1

      That's handy I guess. Any way to uninstall it? My uninstall list shows up blank and it's not in the windows components list either.

    4. Re:Have some! by PRMan · · Score: 2

      I upgraded from Windows 7 and I didn't put cloud info in at all and it's working just fine.

      --
      Peter predicted that you would "deliberately forget" creation 2000 years ago...
    5. Re:Have some! by PRMan · · Score: 1

      Thanks for this. I couldn't find any way to remove it. I never thought to look in the in-retrospect-obviously-named Search option.

      --
      Peter predicted that you would "deliberately forget" creation 2000 years ago...
    6. Re:Have some! by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      When you install Windows 8, if the machine is connected to the internet it will ask for a Microsoft ID. You can't seem to skip it either, or at least I couldn't find a way to. You can remove it later, or just disconnect from the internet when booting for the first time.

      I have not tried Windows 10 so I don't know if you can skip it now, or if you have to disconnect still.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    7. Re:Have some! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Agreed, putting it in "search" is fucking stupid.

      Reduced User Experience (RUX) for eva!!!

    8. Re:Have some! by Sir_Substance · · Score: 1

      You have to go "create new microsoft account", and then select "skip creating a microsoft account" at the bottom of that page.

      It is a deliberately hidden option, and as you say is only presented to the user if they are not connected to the internet. I have used the windows insider feedback tool to scold microsoft for this, I think it would be fantastic for others to do the same.

    9. Re:Have some! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why you even care?

    10. Re:Have some! by Quirkz · · Score: 1

      You have to go "create new microsoft account", and then select "skip creating a microsoft account" at the bottom of that page.

      Brought to you by the people who invented "click start to shut down." I like it.

    11. Re:Have some! by spire3661 · · Score: 1

      Yep MS always pushes the option they dont want you to take below a scroll. They did the EXACT same thing with Games for Windows Live. If you wanted to make a local account, you had to scroll to see it.

      --
      Good-bye
    12. Re:Have some! by spire3661 · · Score: 1

      Yes, but MS makes it hard to even make a local account by deliberately hiding the button under a scroll. This isnt the first time they have discouraged users from making local accounts. At least in Win 8 the option was visible without scrolling.

      --
      Good-bye
    13. Re:Have some! by spire3661 · · Score: 1

      They hid it beneath a scroll bar. You have t o click the 'make an account' where it looks like yo uare going ot enter your MS info. If you scroll down that page, it will offer how to make a local account. Its so fucking shady.

      --
      Good-bye
    14. Re:Have some! by spire3661 · · Score: 1

      Its not going to change, they did the EXACT same shit with Games for Windows Live local accounts. Hide the option below a scroll.

      --
      Good-bye
    15. Re:Have some! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Use an email with an invalid password, it gives you an option to create a local account instead

    16. Re:Have some! by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Thanks, I'll look for it next time I install.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    17. Re:Have some! by Cro+Magnon · · Score: 1

      Yeah, the One Drive is a big disappointment. I guess I'll have to check out Google's NSA/FBI Drive.

      Which is clearly better than Microsoft's One NSA/FBI/keylogged Drive.

      --
      Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
    18. Re:Have some! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Try disconnecting from the internet when you install, I didn't enter my WiFi details during setup and it didn't ask me to log into a microsoft account.

  14. Re:Fuck Winders by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Somewhat ironic that you would post this the same day another critical bug is announced in Linux. Time to spend tomorrow updating glibc!

    Still better than the multiple 0 day exploits in Winders that are still not fixed by Microsoft even 90 days after being alerted to it.

  15. Nice by denisbergeron · · Score: 2

    Now we have Google Now and Google design in windows without the quality of Google search.

    --
    Ceci n'est pas une Signature !
    1. Re:Nice by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      even google search doesn't have the quality of google search anymore.

    2. Re:Nice by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did you just say Google Search was quality?
      Ha. Hahahaha.

  16. God, what drivel ... by gstoddart · · Score: 4, Insightful

    We were told that it'd give us Cortana, Microsoft's AI assistant

    OK, I'll preface this with a "get off my lawn" to get it out of the way.

    But I have to say, I have precisely zero interest in this. The more I read TFA, the more I cringe.

    After setting Cortana up, which involves telling her your name, and adjusting some other minor settings, sheâ(TM)ll be good to go. If the respective option is enabled, sheâ(TM)ll always listen out for âoeHey, Cortanaâ, at which point your question can be asked. In the example below, I asked, âoeHey, Cortana. Could you please show me the weather?â, at which point she queried the Internet and spit back the accurate info â" without me having to state a specific location.

    Talking to Cortana is finicky at best. After stating âoeHey, Cortanaâ, Iâ(TM)ve found that Iâ(TM)ve either had to keep talking right away to be heard, or have her say, âoeHey, Robâ and then me have to click the microphone icon again to speak. It seems some thresholds need to be adjusted, because in the current implementation, itâ(TM)s easier to avoid potential hassle and just go find such information online.

    I don't want my fucking computer to feel like it's on a first name basis with me. I don't want to talk to it. I don't want my computer constantly listening to and parsing everything I say. I sure as shit don't want that crap integrated with an ad platform.

    If I want to see the weather, I'll go to the tab I keep open with the weather.

    This is a bunch of dreck I can't see myself wanting to use, which is mostly a "make pretend" version of AI which is at best a shortcut to search. I don't see the value in voice commands -- in fact, I see great nuisance in it (like in Offices, or just everywhere).

    This sounds like an OS which is heavily focused on "teh social" integration with XBox, with the new lame-ass crayon interfaces Microsoft seems partial to, and a bunch of dorky features which seem like they're trying too damned hard.

    I don't see any of these features being useful, I see them as being pointless eye candy, which is full of gimmicks I don't see myself using in the long run -- in fact, I see me disabling as many as possible.

    I'm afraid Microsoft's "vision of the future" is a glimpse into hell. At least half of those features sound like shit which will slow down the machine and add zero benefit.

    Now, seriously, get the fuck off my damned lawn.

    --
    Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    1. Re:God, what drivel ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can disable her.

    2. Re:God, what drivel ... by Harlequin80 · · Score: 1

      I've never ever ever got on with voice commands. Whether it is on a desktop or my phone. If we take this one "Hey Cortana", firstly I never say Hey to anyone. It is just not a work I use so that feels bad enough. But next, how do you pronounce Cortana.

      Just no.

      As an aside - why is everything so flat these days?

    3. Re:God, what drivel ... by FlyHelicopters · · Score: 1

      I don't want my fucking computer to feel like it's on a first name basis with me. I don't want to talk to it. I don't want my computer constantly listening to and parsing everything I say. I sure as shit don't want that crap integrated with an ad platform.

      While I get it, and I understand... it is the future...

      Just not in the current version...

      I've played around with Siri on my iPhone, it works, sort of, most of the time...

      It needs to work all the time and be smarter... but it will get better...

      The "vision" is the way people talk to the computer on Star Trek: TNG. It won't happen in 5 or 10 years, but I think we'll see that within our lifetimes...

    4. Re:God, what drivel ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just set the spoken name to something else.

      My phone says 'sir' and my computer just says 'user'.

    5. Re:God, what drivel ... by bmajik · · Score: 2

      You know, you're right. Nobody should ever try anything new with voice interaction. We should leave that shit off because its buggy or only knows how to do web searches based on bad guesses.

      We shouldn't spend any time putting this stuff in front of users and learning what works well, what doesn't work, what people like, what they don't like. God forbid we try and see if there are ways to integrate it with how people currently use computers.

      Instead, what we should do is wait until the 23rd century, when we have starships. Even though we've done no incremental work between now and then, in the distant future, voice recognition and natural language processing is just going to be really, really good, because The Future. It's just going to build itself, and when we are bald and say "COMPUTER" to our starship, its going to listen and then do exactly the right thing, and nobody is going to ask why the bridge has so many buttons and levers and consoles and shit if there is a ship-wide computer with unlimited power and perfect human voice recognition. And we're going to gloss right over how a near-Ai level of natural language understanding still needs us to say COMPUTER first before it figure out who we're talking to, as if anyone else on the bridge could execute the command we're asking when we're staring off into nowhere instead of at another human in the same room...

      Anyway, I'm running 9926 on two machines - neither of which are touch-enabled. I've never talked to the thing yet. It appears to run faster than 8.0/8.1. The start menu behavior is better, and you can flip back and forth between little-menu-on-desktop or "big screen of metro" with a simple gesture.

      The UI feels positively snappy. The paradigm has been reversed entirely from 8 - now, metro apps run on your desktop - instead of your desktop is some weird bad neighborhood nobody wants you to go to.

      I think a lot of people will like Windows 10.

      --
      My opinions are my own, and do not necessarily represent those of my employer.
    6. Re:God, what drivel ... by Chas · · Score: 1

      You can disable her.

      But I want to butt fuck her...

      You two need to take your date-rapey roofie fantasies elsewhere.

      --


      Chas - The one, the only.
      THANK GOD!!!
    7. Re:God, what drivel ... by dave420 · · Score: 1

      No one is forcing you to use it. Don't use it, and then you won't feel compelled to complain about an option you can easily ignore.

    8. Re:God, what drivel ... by jones_supa · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You can disable her.

      But why get an OS of which you have to disable half of the features? I don't want Modern UI, I don't want to send information to Microsoft to help to improve my computing experience, I don't want a Windows Live Account, I don't want SkyDrive, I don't want Cortana.

      Me no want anything! Waaah!

    9. Re:God, what drivel ... by Megol · · Score: 1

      But why would anyone want a Star Trek system? It is just something that looks good, not something that is efficient or practical for the real world.

      Voice control and dictating etc. have valid uses but only for a few specific cases. General computer use isn't one of them.

    10. Re:God, what drivel ... by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Sounds like you want a really cut down Linux system. Perhaps Gentoo? Otherwise you are inevitably going to get stuff you don't want in the default install of every commercial OS. When you start up MacOS or iOS you have to tell Apple to fuck off I don't want an account fuck you very much, and ditto with Android and a Google Account. Ubuntu comes with all kinds of crap installed by default, including sending searches to Amazon.

      It's annoying but it's apparently what most people seem to want.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    11. Re:God, what drivel ... by FlyHelicopters · · Score: 1

      :) You have to think bigger... to when computers are smarter and we no longer need to sit in from of them as often...

      Like I said, we aren't there, and we won't be in 5-10 years... This is long term stuff...

      Consider... The Apple Newton was really just a VERY early iPad... But it flopped because the technology and supporting infrastructure wasn't there yet. 15 years later and it was... It needed Wi-Fi, flash memory, Internet everywhere, touch screens, new batteries, low power CPUs, etc.

    12. Re:God, what drivel ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Agreed, there needs to be a big honking "Make mine vanilla" install button and an "Are you sure you want to enable all that useless crap?" confirmation when the default install button is pressed.
      Turn off ALL animations, live tiles, uninstall/skip install of "weather" et al tiles and other eyecatching distractions. Turn of all Austin Powers hipster gradients (i.g. just plain solid colors like v3.1-style.

    13. Re:God, what drivel ... by Cro+Magnon · · Score: 1

      How sensitive is this? Will it come on if I'm watching TV and a MS ad comes on where they say "Hey Cortana"?

      --
      Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
    14. Re:God, what drivel ... by cheesybagel · · Score: 1

      Don't know about that. PDAs sold pretty well back then. They basically got subsumed into the smartphone market but they were not a flop.

      Also one of the first things Steve Jobs did when he got back into Apple was to kill the Newton. NIH Syndrome.

    15. Re:God, what drivel ... by FlyHelicopters · · Score: 1

      How many PDAs were sold in the 90s? How many iPads did Apple sell last MONTH?

      How many Android tablets were sold last WEEK?

      The Newton was a nice idea, but the wrong product at the wrong time. 13 years later, it was ready... called the iPad, and a wild success...

      And to be clear, the smartphone and the tablet are really the same thing, in different sizes...

    16. Re:God, what drivel ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't want my fucking computer to feel like it's on a first name basis with me. Me either unless there is a set of vibaritating lips connected to it through USB.

      Hey Cortana can you hum "Anchors Away!"???

  17. still awful by slashmydots · · Score: 1

    It's still a EUFI-using, Bing-infested, hybrid online/offline account nightmare from the depths of hell though. I don't give a flying fuck about some UI enhancements until that BS is dealt with.

    1. Re:still awful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's still a EUFI-using

      It is UEFI, and what problem are you experiencing with it?
      There is nothing inherently bad about UEFI, perhaps you are thinking of the SecureBoot feature? It is mandatory that this be able to be turned off, it is very simple for even the most novice computer user.

      Bing-infested

      So change your search engine to google and turn off the virtual assistant. Really not that difficult.

      hybrid online/offline account nightmare

      Just create an offline account if you want one, it isnt that hard.

      I don't give a flying fuck about some UI enhancements until that BS is dealt with.

      You are on the wrong website, go somewhere where people dont know anything about computers and where if it isn't a huge button staring them in the face they dont know what to do. If you are getting that angry at the computer simply because you dont understand it and there is a setting you need to change to make it work like you want it then a more remedial computer community is where you belong.

      You can whine and complain about how things arent exactly how you like it out of the box but customization is only a few button presses away and there are many online communities out there that can help you.

    2. Re:still awful by jones_supa · · Score: 1

      It's still a EUFI-using

      Even Linux Mint performs an UEFI installation (with an amateurish boot entry called "ubuntu" in lowercase letters).

    3. Re:still awful by epyT-R · · Score: 1

      There's just no need for 99% of the features UEFI offers, like those silly UIs and built in apps that exist only because phoenix/AM are desperate to stay relevant and visible. Really all the firmware needs to do is get the hardware into a stable state, boot a kernel or chainload a system specific bootloader that handles preboot setup for that os, and then get the hell out of the way. Having the os call back into firmware code for hardware specific features sounds nice until you realize a lot of that bios code is completely broken on a lot of hardware. The old MBR standard has size limitations but it is far nicer to deal with than incomprehensible GUIDs. The latter is bad enough in windows.

      Secure boot is only optional on x86 laptops/desktops. On other platforms it is used to block user-installed os. How long do you think it will be before that 'mandatory' option is simply not mandatory anymore?

    4. Re:still awful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's just no need for 99% of the features UEFI offers

      So use a motherboard with a BIOS instead. Complaining that the operating system supports the motherboards that hardware manufacturers are making is really grasping at straws for things to complain about.

      Secure boot is only optional on x86 laptops/desktops. On other platforms it is used to block user-installed os.

      Actually it is only necessary for it to be optional on Windows-based laptops and desktops. But this complaint that Windows is bad because it supports UEFI because UEFI has Secure Boot which is not necessarily optional except on Windows systems where it must be optional is another real stretch of criticism.

      How long do you think it will be before that 'mandatory' option is simply not mandatory anymore?

      When anti-trust laws are repealed globally and/or Microsoft ceases to have a monopoly. iOS and many Android manufacturers have already set the trend in locking bootloaders and they get away with it because they dont monopolize the market, but they are normalizing that behavior.

  18. Re:Fuck Winders by Trax3001BBS · · Score: 1

    Why would anyone still run virus-infested Winders in this day and age? Just use Linux you retards.

    I run Windows because of the games I play, sometimes up till 6 AM.

    I also have problems installing Linux or to be exact it's placement, three hard drives, and a 2TB USB UEFI drive which pretty much does what it wants to under a bios system.

    I create three partitions meant to be swap, main, and storage; formatted in advanced to be such. I get one partition being used and a swap file created elsewhere.

    There's more but it doesn't bode well for me or my abilities (which I consider to be, well able) to mention.

    I've just said the heck with it and use CyWin64.

  19. Re:Butt FUCKING UGLY by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wake up sheeple! Xenu is upon us!!!

  20. Windows XP is good enough for me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm piece-of-shit-ready til 2019, yeah. Who needs the new shit, I still got the old shit. Gimme more crusty old shit for free.

  21. still crashes less than linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Go windows go!

  22. Cortana is annoying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why aren't you using Internet Explorer? Why aren't you using a Microsoft Account? Why? Why? Why?

    Shut. Up.

  23. Re:Butt FUCKING UGLY by Neo-Rio-101 · · Score: 1

    Well you can always join their insider program, and then bitchmoan to them personally. ...but if you can't be bothered, I'll understand :)

    --
    READY.
    PRINT ""+-0
  24. They ruined it again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Start menu in the previous build was glorious. This is is attrocious, they just took the big modern start menu and shoved it in a tiny window on the side, with all the alphabet and no divide between folders and apps...
    Then there's the fact that they are pretty much forcing tablet users to use "tablet mode", highly limited junk that shouldn't exist, because they decided to disable Automatic Touch Keyboard pop-up in "Desktop Mode", meaning you have to touch the keyboard button whenever you want to write something.. and hope it doesn't take you out of the writing field.

  25. Re:Butt FUCKING UGLY by PRMan · · Score: 1

    How is 10 ugly? Except for the live tiles in the Start Menu (which you can easily remove), it looks EXACTLY like Windows 7. (And believe me, I hated Windows 8's Fisher Price color scheme.)

    --
    Peter predicted that you would "deliberately forget" creation 2000 years ago...
  26. Re:Fuck Winders by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You seem to be of low IQ. Whether you like it or not it's spelled, "Windows" not "Winders". You seem intent on making you and your fellow Linux people look so inferior to us BSD people that it's unbelievable.

  27. Re:Butt FUCKING UGLY by Lunix+Nutcase · · Score: 1

    it looks EXACTLY like Windows 7

    That is patently false. No Aero Glass in 10 so it does NOT look exactly the same. That's before we get to the icon changes, extraneous whitespace that 7 doesn't have, etc. They look more similar but "exactly the same" they do not look.

  28. Not the review I wanted. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    What I want to know about is performance. I don't care about the changes in explorer, taskbar, or start menu. I don't need them I use Directory Opus.

    Here is what I'd like to know about.

    CPU Usage of system processes 7/8 vs 10
    Memory usage 7/8 vs 10
    Services performance 7/8 vs 10
    Load times
    Thread performance/handling/optimization
    Memory leaks
    Page file performance
    Virtual memory management upgrades?
    Indexing performance

    I feel like I visited an art gallery, but instead of talking about the pictures they talk about the plumbing. Well in reverse at least O_o..

    1. Re:Not the review I wanted. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Sadly, Windows Kernel improvements are usually not discussed in public. The general hands-on feeling that I get from upgrading from 7 to 8, and then from 8 to 10, is that the performance has gradually been improving with each version.

    2. Re:Not the review I wanted. by DoofusOfDeath · · Score: 1

      I feel like I visited an art gallery, but instead of talking about the pictures they talk about the plumbing. Well in reverse at least O_o..

      So, could we say it's like you visited a plumbing store, and they only wanted to discuss the pictures on the wall?

    3. Re:Not the review I wanted. by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      Until there's at least a beta (better yet, RC), such comparisons are rather meaningless.

  29. Start Menu Metro buttons waste too much space. by Chas · · Score: 1

    Seriously. Are mostly-empty SQUARES *really* the best way to organize program launchers in a desktop menu system?

    I'd be MUCH happier if they implemented the ability to convert the launchers to bars (see example image, note, I know it's just a crude mockup).

    http://www.evilnet.net/Windows...

    I'd be able to pack more useful programs into the launcher window and have less wasted screen real estate. Seriously, with those Duplo squares, you have an icon, a little text, and roughly 60+% space wastage.

    Why? This start menu is supposed to be for the DESKTOP crowd? Why constrain them with something stupid meant to augment a touch interface? You're still going to have the Start Screen for tablet interfaces. So it makes SENSE to use squares there. Just, not for the desktop interface.

    --


    Chas - The one, the only.
    THANK GOD!!!
  30. Re:Butt FUCKING UGLY by Billly+Gates · · Score: 1

    Yes there will be aero in future builds as evident in that screenshot.

    Not too much of a biggie as long as the colors are not too bright or pastelish. It seems that is toned down in 10.

  31. Wow so negative here by Billly+Gates · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Yes this is a Linux oriented site yada yada.

    But why so strong resistance to change on a technology site of all places? Does anyone else find this weird? Never in my wildest dreams would I picture slashdot turn into +5 comments with "CHANGE FOR THE SAKE OF CHANGE etc" I ask because I am curious and wonder if I am alone? You would not expect to see comments in a fashion oriented blog like "NEW LOOK FOR THE SAKE OF NEW LOOKS" be posted as an example.

    It kind of saddens me a little bit as we computer geeks came here because we love technology and like to have new new things. Now that is uncool and I have seen it become more prevalent in other articles. Is it age or just scarred from experience?

    What happened?

    Anyway my unbiased 2 cents ...

    I think this would be a good upgrade for a notebook or tablet. Much improved battery life and the ability to run Netflix and Hulu on the road is really cool. As long as the applets are not like Windows 8 and I can do work too I am fine if they can integrate.

    For the desktop? I see little reason to upgrade. Windows 7 works fine. However for those reading my previous paragraphs I do not hate 10. I just think it offers little value besides enhanced security over 7. I probably will upgrade next fall after it stabilizes since the upgrade is free.Now if I bought a new computer with it on it I would not downgrade it. Can't say the same with Windows 8.1 though :-)

    On my i7 4770k I have to say I find it faster and more responsive than 7. It was surprisingly stable with just 1 bug with nvidia if I do the dual screen 4k hack to stretch it. A MUST if you already ahve 8.

    It is nice modest upgrade for desktop users and a BIG upgrade for mobile users.

    1. Re:Wow so negative here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Old people don't like change ....

    2. Re:Wow so negative here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because Microsoft shills such as you makes us sick.

      Windows 10 will still be a flop for mobile... no one will care about Windows phones and tablets.

      You'll gain some upgrades from consumer desktop users and enterprise users, but that's all.

    3. Re:Wow so negative here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You know that "shill" means that the person is paid by the associated company? Do you have any proof that he is actually paid by Microsoft? Liking something does not automatically make one a shill.

    4. Re:Wow so negative here by Sir_Substance · · Score: 1, Insightful

      The problem is with the PC being turned into a toy out of the box, making peoples lives hard in the process.

      The thing to remember is that your operating system is actually not made for the end user. It is made for the developer, and it lets developers do useful things like pretend a USB drive is exactly the same as a network share magnetic drive.

      What you see on the desktop isn't the OS, it's a graphical file manager. That's useful, I'm happy to have that preinstalled. I'll take a browser as well, so I can use it to bootstrap to the browser I want to use and then remove it.

      The problem is that now I also have to take a voice assistant and a cloud sync drive and weather and finance apps and a media player and this and that and the other. Half of them can no longer be uninstalled. The rest I have to spend 15 minutes removing before I can download the browser, media player and p2p sync tool I use.

      A lot of people here are sysadmins, which means they are responsible for securing corporate or government information. It isn't possible to uninstall skydrive or cortana, which means these people cannot guarantee that the PC isn't listening to everything in a cabinet meeting, and cannot guarantee it isn't sending every document offsite. The capability to do so lurks in the operating system itself, like an uninvited friend of a friend who can't take a hint.

    5. Re:Wow so negative here by serviscope_minor · · Score: 3, Insightful

      What happened?

      I'm guessing that people got fed up with churn and started to realise that change for its own sake is annoying. Getting irritated at having to get used to a new system AGAIN that does things worse in many cases is not unreasonable. Being fed up with churn is not the same as fearing change.

      Personally, I like to see "change" actually make things better, because if it doesn't then why bother with the change? And if it makes things worse, then WTF?

      A lot is just uninspiring and meh. Going from flat to bevelled to bulbousd and back to flat (hello Athena!) user interface elements is just a huge meh. I mean sure, now they're coloured and antialiased and with nice fonts and whetever, but I really can't feel myself getting excited about "flat" design. Actually, personally I think it's a bit of a usability regression becase it's harder to explain to people which the active user interface elements are.

      Change where it's an improvement I like. I like large, high res screens. I like running a modern kernel with all the new power saving features and better, newer filesystems and so on and so forth. I tend to run recentl builds of tools I like like vim and mplayer because the changes make them better than the old version. I keep promising myself I'll finally switch from Xterm to Terminology, but I can't get some of the features to work properly at the moment.

      All those things, all those changes have made stuff better. On the other hand, I still run FVWM2. I've tried more modern things, but they all seem to make things worse in interesting ways. I've still adopted some changes, however which make it more modern.

      I think there are quite a few people here with similar opinions to me. Another example: the reason that tablet stuff coming to laptops is bad is because a lot of the UI stuff is designed around single, non cooperating, full screen apps. I don't want that, not because I fear change, it's because I changed AWAY from it in the 90s and I have no desire to go back to the bad old days. I remember what it was like all too well (and my phone just keeps on reminding me). What I fear is being dragged back to something I know from experience is inferior.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    6. Re:Wow so negative here by Billly+Gates · · Score: 1

      I kind of look at an OS as a whole environment.

      As a desktop I can see your point. I do like Skydrive as a backup tool and access to share data between my computers and my phone.

      These things you hate I kind of would like in a mobile platform on the road for weather as an example or asking it for directions for someplace. I love Google cards on my phone. It tells when I get up how long my commute to work is. It knows I am traveling and always giving an ETA to the airport. It even checks slashdot so I can browse the news.

      On a netbook this would be cool. Maybe not so much on a desktop. Do I think Cortana is going to spy on me when I do not use it? Not really. Not anymore than my phone could in my pocket with Google Now.

      This is what I dreamed computers would do when I watched Star Trek the next generation as a kid. If I can minimize the apps I would not mind youtube or last.fm playing music while I work. But different strokes for different folks right?

    7. Re:Wow so negative here by Sir_Substance · · Score: 1

      The fantastic thing about a general purpose computer is that if you want these features, you can simply install them. There is no need to ship them as if we are reading the OS off a reel to reel tape that has to seek through 20m of tape to find the new software. You've been able to get voice assistants for windows for years.

      Microsoft has even done this in the past with things like the media bonus pack. Why not just have the "cloud bonus pack", bundle it on the CD and offer (but not mandate) it's install along with the rest of the OS, plus have it for download if people want to install it later?

      The answer, I suspect, is that microsoft smells the death of their business model, and wants to move to a profiles-and-ads model like google. That's why they want you to have an account on your desktop OS, that's why they want you uploading your documents unencrypted, and that's why they want you using a voice assistant.

      They want a firehose of data on you so they can funnel "relevant ads" at you as fast as they can find purchasers.

      The problem is, I don't want that. Unfortunately, the choice is often taken away from me. Earlier this year, I was told by my new employer to make a google account so I could access company google docs. I told them I didn't want a google account, and was told "tough, it's company policy".

      Does my boss have the legal right to force me to make a contractual agreement with an unrelated third party? I'm betting no, but this is the real world and I couldn't afford to be fired.

      Imagine how I will feel in 5 years time when my boss insists I use windows 10. This isn't star trek, it's ENCOM from the start of TRON:Legacy.

    8. Re:Wow so negative here by DoofusOfDeath · · Score: 1

      This is what I dreamed computers would do when I watched Star Trek the next generation as a kid.

      Seriously? You had a TV show with both Holodecks and Diana Troy, you you were dreaming of voice commands???

    9. Re:Wow so negative here by hackertourist · · Score: 1

      I, for one, like new things if, and only if, they are an improvement over the old things. That's why I use a computer in the first place: to improve my life and make things easier. Anything that gets in the way of that gets the vitriol poured on.

      For something as fundamental as the UI, I have a substantial investment in the old way of doing things. Throwing that away means I have to start learning again, and it'll take a while to get up to the same speed I had with the old UI. This is all wasted time, so the new UI has to be a lot better than the old one to make a switch worthwhile.
      Many of the UI changes in Windows have not been improvements at all. Instead MS seemingly randomly moved things around (Control Panel), or they removed functionality (Start screen). So yes, we consider this change for change's sake. I, for one, would welcome some actual improvements instead.

      There's also the alienation factor. A new UI feels as if people have broken into my home and rearranged things.

    10. Re:Wow so negative here by epyT-R · · Score: 1

      Perhaps you never realized that the 'old' 'new stuff is cool' attitude came with an implied expectation/judgment of sensible/objective improvement, that, for the most part, products were passing (except for stuff like msbob). That hasn't changed. What has changed is the hierarchy of priorities within major software firms. Around 2000, the engineers were told to go to the back of the bus while the 'user experience designers' took over, targeting the soccer mom instead of the intelligent user. They prettyed everything up with lots of white space, oversized fonts, wordy and unmemorable phrases in place of single terms, and reduced the functionality and flexibility to something morons could comprehend. Oh, and then they slapped search boxes on everything to compensate for this braindead nonsense. Instead of knowing where things are in sensibly named and organized layouts, the user has to know the magic incantation search to bring up each. Welcome to the future.

    11. Re:Wow so negative here by LordLucless · · Score: 1

      But why so strong resistance to change on a technology site of all places? Does anyone else find this weird? Never in my wildest dreams would I picture slashdot turn into +5 comments with "CHANGE FOR THE SAKE OF CHANGE etc" I ask because I am curious and wonder if I am alone? You would not expect to see comments in a fashion oriented blog like "NEW LOOK FOR THE SAKE OF NEW LOOKS" be posted as an example.

      Probably because this is a technology site, and not a fashion site. Fashion love change for change's sake - that's why they parade around on catwalks with ridiculously impractical things like dresses made of cutlery, and someone who wears a side of beef to an event is the centre of attention.

      Technology isn't about change, it's about progress. Progress involves change, but just because it's change doesn't make it progress. Change for change's sake is inane. Tell us how the change makes things *better* and we'll be all for it.

      --
      Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean there isn't an invisible demon about to eat your face
    12. Re:Wow so negative here by exomondo · · Score: 1

      Search is a great feature! Having a mouse and clicking around a GUI browsing for files was the most gimmicky, mouth-breather way of launching programs that added nothing for users. If you want something then just type it, it's faster than hunting through and clicking ever-expanding menus trying to reveal what you're looking for. Not only that but I don't need to rely on different operating systems having all the items in the same place, for example if I need mouse settings I just search for it and whether it's Windows 7, Windows 8 or OS X it gives me all the mouse-related items. I can do it with programs too so I don't need to worry that somebody may have organized their programs or files differently to me if I use their computer.

      This also works on phones, I know where I put Safari on my iPhone but I don't know where it is on somebody elses so instead of hunting for it the more efficient way is to search. I could just browse for it but search is quicker.

      Power users can go further than search and do things like scripts that copy lnk files from the start menu folder (yes it is what drives the start screen in Windows 8 too) to a directory that you add to your PATH variable so you can just launch any applications directly from the command line without having to remember where they are. This is great for when you have to work on a different system where things aren't where you expect them to be.

      You can still put things in sensibly named and organised layouts if you prefer, and you can create shortcuts to things you need and place them in the most appropriate locations. I'm not sure where you get the idea that you cannot do that anymore.

    13. Re:Wow so negative here by hackertourist · · Score: 1

      Having a mouse and clicking around a GUI browsing for files was the most gimmicky, mouth-breather way of launching programs that added nothing for users. If you want something then just type it, it's faster than hunting ...

      Sure, it's faster for the programs you use often enough that you remember their name. That's maybe 20 out of the 200 programs I've installed. Many of those I need twice a year, and searching them by name doesn't work because I can't remember what they're called. I do know I filed them somewhere in Programs->XML tools (or one of a few categories I've set up and that make sense for me). Accessible via one click and a bit of moving the mouse around (in XP or with Classic Start Menu installed), or more clicking and scrolling (in Windows 7). Windows 7 was a regression in this regard, and Windows 8 threw my method under the bus.

      Different strokes for different folks. I like the Search option, but for the love of God don't make it the only option.

    14. Re:Wow so negative here by exomondo · · Score: 1

      Sure, it's faster for the programs you use often enough that you remember their name. That's maybe 20 out of the 200 programs I've installed.

      If you don't know their name then are you just reading them all and hoping on jogs your memory?

      I do know I filed them somewhere in Programs->XML tools (or one of a few categories I've set up and that make sense for me).

      Easy, just go to C:\ProgramData\Microsoft\Windows\Start Menu\Programs in Explorer just like you would on a Mac through Finder or on Linux through Nautilus, Konquerer or whatever. How exactly do you go about this on other platforms currently?

    15. Re:Wow so negative here by hackertourist · · Score: 1

      If you don't know their name then are you just reading them all and hoping on jogs your memory?

      Yes. Categories help, and once I see the name, recognition is usually instant.

      How exactly do you go about this on other platforms currently?

      In OS X, the Applications folder is one click away. Not ideal, I'd rather have a menu with all of my applications (and I used to have that in OS 9).

      You're forgetting that there's not just one Start Menu folder in Windows, there are two: one user-specific and one for all users. So two locations to scan. Are you seriously suggesting this is a good replacement for the Start menu?

    16. Re:Wow so negative here by exomondo · · Score: 1

      In OS X, the Applications folder is one click away. Not ideal, I'd rather have a menu with all of my applications (and I used to have that in OS 9).

      Because it is pinned to the dock, which you can do with the taskbar in Windows.

      You're forgetting that there's not just one Start Menu folder in Windows, there are two: one user-specific and one for all users. So two locations to scan.

      Just like how in OSX and Linux not everything executable is in an "Applications" folder, Windows users simply do not understand this which is one of the reasons Windows still dominates the desktop space.

      Are you seriously suggesting this is a good replacement for the Start menu?

      No i'm saying between that, the taskbar, the desktop and search the start menu is pretty pointless. That is why there is no start menu on OSX.

      The times when the start menu is actually useful (when you don't even know what you're trying to find) is so rare that if you have to look in 2 places it's no big deal, same as on OSX where just because it is an executable program doesn't mean it is in the Applications folder.

  32. Merlin on NEC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Speaking of assisted AI, anybody remember Merlin on an NEC?

  33. Re:Fuck Winders by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why would anyone still run virus-infested Winders in this day and age? Just use Linux you retards.

    The chances of getting a virus-infested Windows installation is next to zero if you don't knowingly install spurious software.

    Windows has improved tremendously over the last few years anyway. Hop on the Windows Insider Program with the rest of us, grab your free copy of W10TP, and see how it feels. Every übergeek follows what is happening on the other side too. :)

  34. Fuck Winders by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    That's right, we couldn't.
    Because we use hardware that's less than five years old.

  35. wxwidgets? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeah, it looks like someone at Apple discovered wxwidgets and misread, thinking that it is new.

  36. Must login to a Microsoft account to use Cortana by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That is reason enough to stay the hell away.

    The Halo nerds out there will be enticed.

  37. Re:Butt FUCKING UGLY by jones_supa · · Score: 1

    Aero is more than just translucency. In the Aero theme there's rounded corners, a small touch of color here and there, some pixel art, gradients, and white background for Start Menu.

  38. Polishing the brass on the Titanic by Art3x · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Cortana is probably a new and better Clippy. But besides that, the rest seems like polishing the brass on the Titanic.

    New folder icons? I remember visiting gnome-look.org for the first time ten years ago and being blown away: page after page of themes, icon sets, etc.

    Start menu tweaked again? Why is this so hard? And it still looks awkward to me. Program names are inside squares, instead of just being text items in a list. Or small squares at least, like the launcher in Chrome OS.

    I've used Mac since 1984, Windows since 95, and Linux since '05. I've either not minded or actually liked all of the iterations of program launching in Mac and Linux. But I have never, never, like the Windows Start menu.

    Let's start with the word Start, which is where you go to Shut Down. Makes sense. And while it was a little more straightforward than today's shenanigans, it wasn't exactly pleasant to dig through. Plus, I was always stymied by why Windows took several seconds sometimes to me just trying to open the submenu --- not launch a program, just open a folder within the Start menu to see what's in there. It's like Windows was going to the bathroom, and I had to wait for it to finish even to answer a simple question.

    And then there was the My everything fiasco, where Documents became My Documents, Computer became My Computer, and so on.

    There is the trash can that they still won't default to the bottom right, because if you ever resize the screen, it messes up the position, since Windows calculates everything as the number of pixels from the top left, apparently. So they put the trash can in the top left. This never looked right to me. A trashy-looking thing like a trash can should be in a minor part of the screen (bottom right) even if they call it a Recycle Bin. The Macintosh somehow figured out how to do this 30 years ago.

    1. Re:Polishing the brass on the Titanic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I remember visiting gnome-look.org for the first time ten years ago and being blown away: page after page of themes, icon sets, etc.

      You might have been "blown away", others like myself look at that armature crap and can't imagine anyone actually wanting to use such icons.

      Let's start with the word Start, which is where you go to Shut Down. Makes sense.

      Idiot. "Start" refers to the starting point where you make your next choose to either start a program, change some settings, log on/off, and all other operations. I guess simple minded people assumed it only meant "Start a program."

      I was always stymied by why Windows took several seconds sometimes to me just trying to open the submenu --- not launch a program, just open a folder within the Start menu to see what's in there.

      This shows a couple of things. First, you evidently have a lot of shit running in the background chewing up resources. Second, you never bothered to organize your start menu by creating custom folders and deleting icons that you didn't need. If your Start Menu is organized to your needs then you don't need to wade through a sea of folders to find what you need.

      And then there was the My everything fiasco, where Documents became My Documents, Computer became My Computer, and so on.

      So? These are intended for novice users to organize their files. If you don't like these folders, don't use them. I certainly don't.

      if you ever resize the screen, it messes up the position

      Are you serious? First of all, why are you constantly changing your screen resolution? Even back in the days of CRTs, why would you ever change your desktop resolution to anything other than the optimum setting? I run my screen at 2560x1600 and put the recycle bin the in lower right. I just tested it. When I lower the resolution, it stayed on the right. It's either a case of something that was rectified long ago or you had the auto arrange setting turned on. Definitely seems like a DFO error, though.

    2. Re:Polishing the brass on the Titanic by reboot246 · · Score: 1

      The "My" thing has spread to websites and it's fucking annoying, e.g. mypillow.com. My, oh, my!!

    3. Re:Polishing the brass on the Titanic by DoofusOfDeath · · Score: 1

      Even back in the days of CRTs, why would you ever change your desktop resolution to anything other than the optimum setting?

      IIRC, some of my monitors didn't have a uniquely optimum resolution. Very high resolutions could force a lower refresh rate, causing unpleasant visual artifacts. Very high resolutions could also be blurry, if the dot pitch wasn't fine enough. Some refresh rate (or was it resolution? I forget) caused a high-pitch whine that bothered me. Higher resolutions could have interference issues if the VGA cable was insufficiently shielded. Etc.

      I'm very happy that we now use LCD's with digital signalling.

  39. Re:Butt FUCKING UGLY by Billly+Gates · · Score: 1

    We will see.

    I hated the sterile look of 8.1 and I find 10 does bring darker colors in. It is not finished yet. You can have minimalism and still have color. The art professors who are pioneering this new way mention more emphasis on video and color. Not all blinding white like office 2013.

    Rounded corners are gone. You can thank Apple for owning a patent on it for that as it is expensive to license the idea of using a shape. gradients and shine like the WIndows 7 bar? That looks to be gone. It may not be too bad.

    MacOSX Yosemite does this new look rather well with a little translucency left where it does not look like glass and still has plenty of color.

  40. Re:Fuck Winders by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Probably because Teh Linux doesn't run many of the programs people require. It if fine for folks whose needs it meets (and it does meet the needs of many people). But stop pretending that it is right for everyone. Just like there are multiple brands and models of vehicles from bikes, scooters, two seaters, EVs, hybrids, sedans, SUVs, etc., there are multiple operating systems and you need to choose the correct tool for what you want to do. Most people still choose Windows - mostly because of either inertia or applications. Some people choose Mac OSX, some few choose Linux. That's cool - it is good to have choice.

  41. Re:MSFT down 10% today! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I feel like I'm living in bizzarroland, where the shittiest, most customer-hostile companies are somehow the most profitable.

  42. It still isn't fixed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    About that Start menu. Seriously? That's really not an improvement. Add to that the fact that after a little bit it just stops working all together. What a craptastic feature.

    Moving right along...

    Not everyone is connected to the fscking internet. If I wanted to add features there should be an option to pull it from the source disk. Not a mile long command required to deviate from the way Microsoft thinks I ought to obtain software. Some of us run in environments where Internet connectivity is neither adviseable or desirable.
    I go to install the .net 3.5 framework and it's damn near impossible. I go download the stand alone install thinking that would do the trick. Guess what it does? It invokes the stupid add features applet and attempts to go download it from the Internet. So I have to do searching around until I find this:

    Dism /online /enable-feature /featurename:NetFX3 /All /Source:D:\sources\sxs /LimitAccess

    Oh. Is that all? ..|.. Microsoft.

  43. Re:Butt FUCKING UGLY by cheesybagel · · Score: 1

    The new control panel is all white with gray icons on top. It makes the X Athena Widgets interface seem user friendly in comparison.

  44. Re:MSFT down 10% today! by ConceptJunkie · · Score: 1

    I feel like I'm living in bizzarroland, where the shittiest, most customer-hostile companies are somehow the most profitable.

    I can't remember when it wasn't like this.

    --
    You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
  45. Re:Fuck Winders by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Most installers for Linux distros are able to modify partitions for you and generally don't need you to create them in advance, if you want something custom then you'll need to choose the advanced setup, if you have problems with exactly how you should do this then you will probably be best off asking how on the relevant distro's forums. Once you get past that issue of installing it where you want, and so long as it doesn't take exception to your particular hardware you don't need any great skill/abillity to use one of the newbie friendly distros. But I imagine you aren't terribly interested in solving that problem, and since you need Windows for your gaming I understand that.

  46. Re:Butt FUCKING UGLY by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you think it looks exactly like 7 you need you eyes tested. In terms of look, 7 is my favourite Windows, but I think 8/8.1/10 looks worse than 2000. This is of course, entirely subjective, but I wish there was an easy way to change it to look like 7 without installing extra crap.

    And as for removing the stupid live tiles from the start menu being easy, it isn't. It isn't easy if you have to look it up, which is why I came back to this story because I remember someone mentioning how to remove them by changing a registry entry.

  47. Re:Fuck Winders by Trax3001BBS · · Score: 1

    Most installers for Linux distros are able to modify partitions for you and generally don't need you to create them in advance,

    My "fear" is that it will take the wrong hard drive or partition. I know I can just remove the drives so waiting until I install my new motherboard. I do want access to Linux on my system as more of what I'm involving myself in is best done with Linux.