What could the old start menu do that the start screen cannot do? Why not challenge yourself to get used to the start screen and then see if launching apps is not actually faster using the new start screen. Same with organising your apps.
As for looking for the name of control panel apps, how is that different to windows 7? At least windows 8 provides the ability to search. Your complaint applies to all previous versions of windows too.
You say MS crippled the UI, but now you need to give examples of how the start screen offers less functionality than what you had before. I can think of how it offers more functionality (ie. search), but not less.
I'm not interested in metro apps - and you're replying to my post which was all about how you could use windows 8 just like windows 7 with no regressions in functionality nor ease of use.
the start MENU has been changed into the start SCREEN.
It is more in line with OSX launchpad and gnome shell's launcher. Whether that's a good or bad thing is a matter of opinion and preference.
Personally I decided that there wasn't a lot I could do about it, and might as well just get used to it. I tried a start menu replacement app and it was terrible.
Nowadays I actually don't mind the start screen - it is a quicker way to launch my often-used apps than trying to hunt through menus to find them. It's not perfect, but I don't really care.
Worrying about stuff like that just makes your life negative for no good reason. Just live with it and move on. There's always more important things to worry about.
I got used to the new start screen - it's not _that_ bad, no worse than hunting through menus to find what you're looking for, and actually better in that you can just start typing the name of a program and it comes up in the search. Or you can type the name of a control panel applet or setting, and that works too.
What if you don't remember the name of that control panel applet? What if you don't know the application's name, but would otherwise find it if you could browse through menus?
"Just typing the name" of some computer program or appet can be horribly inconvenient.
Um, then you do it the way you would've done it in windows 7. Just open the control panel and clicky clicky.
The control panel can be accessed either by right-clicking the bottom left of the screen, or swiping up from the bottom right of the screen. I found this out by myself, so I'm sure it isn't that hard.
It seems pretty clear that you've never used Windows 8, particularly because you're referring people to the article rather than offering your own experience.
- it more than doubles the number of clicks and moves you have to do to perform normal operations,
When launching applications I actually need to use less clicks than before. I can also type the name of an app rather than hunting through menus. With settings, I can launch the control panel via swiping on the right side of the screen, or right clicking at the bottom left. Again, less clicks. Other than those two things (launching applications and accessing the control panel) everything can be done the same as in windows 7.
- applications (like the weather predictions) keep popping up when you least expect because you made a gesture with your mouse that the horrible horrible UI mistakes as another touch gesture that has nothing to do with what you want to do,
Never had that happen. You could always disable the weather app. I'm pretty sure you need to set this up to begin with before it even works, so if you never went into the app to start with, you wouldn't have this problem.
- you simply cannot find configuration features without knowing the specific keywords, because there are no shortcuts that do not involve typing these specific keywords/ This is something they started with the advanced file search in Windows 7, which is much worse than XPs, but went viral on Windows 8
I'm not sure what you mean. Yes, you can search for configuration options, which is something you could not do in previous versions of windows.
How would you find configuration features in Windows 7? What about XP? and how is that different from windows 8? AFAIK those "old" ways of finding things are still there, but now there is ALSO the ability to type what you want and have windows display settings that match your query.
I tell people that apart from the start menu, you could pretty much use windows 8 exactly like windows 7 and never know the difference.
Surely you could just not use the metro parts and it would be just the same experience as windows 7 (mostly). In fact, I do just that.
I got used to the new start screen - it's not _that_ bad, no worse than hunting through menus to find what you're looking for, and actually better in that you can just start typing the name of a program and it comes up in the search. Or you can type the name of a control panel applet or setting, and that works too.
There are definite improvements over windows 7, even if they are minor. So in general, if all you want is an incremental improvement over windows 7, you can use it just like that.
No one is forcing you to use metro for all your apps.
So yeah, windows 8 is less than ideal in that some settings screens take you to a metro interface (but you could live without them), and metro itself is horrible, but if you use it just like windows 7 and all versions before that, it still works fine.
Of course, it's impossible for someone else to execute code on your windows pc now isn't it? I mean, that's never been done before...?
The danger as I see it is that Windows 8 presumably allows you to share apps and data between windows and mobile devices. Mobile devices tend to store a lot more personal data than windows ever did, and if this data is now synced to your pc and vulnerable to exploitation by the same viruses that have plagued windows since forever, then this gets a bit more scary.
Consider that windows malware that has 'Administrator' access (the default for most windows user accounts?) effectively has 'root' access to your Windows 8 apps (let's hope I misinterpreted what's going on here).
I'm a little bit concerned.
Surely Windows 8 should store Metro App data encrypted and completely separate from the rest of Windows?
Huh? The only annoying part is that you don't like the fact that someone else has told you what you can do with their code (well, when it comes to distribution at least).
I'm not saying either is right or wrong. I generally use the BSD license for my own projects, so I fail to see how that makes me a GPL fanboy. I even started my post by saying: "I can see the argument for why one might choose either license"...
I guess where we differ is that you think a developer should not have the rights granted by the GPL. I disagree - I think the GPL is a valid license and the linux kernel is an excellent example of when it is the right choice (in my opinion).
I don't think the GPL fits in all cases, and neither do I think the BSD license fits in all cases.
Let's think about where the GPL hurts most. It hurts because you have to release your own code under the GPL if you use GPL'd code in your project. And why does it hurt to release your own code? well, obviously because you didn't want that code to be "open" (or you didn't want later developers' code to have to be, and so on).
Let's make this really interesting and say that if there was no such thing as closed-source code, then the BSD license would not offer any advantage over the GPL.
Still, my own personal view is that closed source is not evil, and a developer should be able to choose how to license their code/product. True freedom to me means allowing the developer the right to any license he/she chooses. But the only way that works is if other developers respect that choice.
I can see the argument for why one might choose either license, but at the end of the day of the author of the code wishes that their code always remain free, and so chooses the GPL, I believe that is their right and it should be respected.
Complaining that a third party licensed their code under a particular license is just stupid. It is the same as saying that the original developer should not have had the choice to license their work however they wanted to.
If you use someone else's code then you should respect the wishes of that developer. It doesn't go further than that.
Sure, you can trumpet the benefits if X, Y, or Z license until the cows come home, but if a developer still chooses to license their work under the GPL, that's their right to do so.
You called it "lock-in". I call it "respecting the rights of the author(s)".
That's how it works - more or less - in the PC space
Exactly. If I want to run Microsoft Office on FreeBSD on the new MacBookPro, it's hassle free. Everything just works.
Actually, I believe you're trolling. The bit you quoted from was not claiming that it was "hassle free" nor that "everything just works". It was merely claiming that it is possible to do it. And given your example, I'd say it is possible to do just that:
"On FreeBSD/i386 8.0 and later Wine should work for most user applications including Microsoft Office 2007" http://wiki.freebsd.org/Wine
So let's compare the PC space to the phone/tablet space again...
Can Microsoft make Office for Mac and sell it on their own website? sure, no doubt they already do.
Can Microsoft make Office for iOS and sell it on their own website? well, they could, but no one would be able to install it.
Can Microsoft make Office for Android and sell it on their own website? sure, no problem, so long as the customer's Android build supports side-loading (which it will unless the software provider specifically disabled it).
Actually, Microsoft branded hardware is usually pretty good. I've long been a fan of the MS Natural Keyboard line, and their intellimouse products were a global favourite at one time also.
The GP said nothing about USB mass storage. To the average user when you plug in a GS3, even in MTP mode, it still acts as a USB drive.
The lack of linux support for MTP is a failing of linux, not a failing of the device. Have a read about why Google changed it, and it makes sense.
It is not a major fail. The major fail was that you had to have 2 partitions on your phone so that one of them could be unmounted in order to use USB mass storage. You therefore couldn't access any files on the phone's internal SD card while it was mounted on a PC.
It was a technical decision. The world has moved on. Linux is just a little late catching up.
Slashdot Mirror
Have you used it? I'm willing to bet you haven't.
Let's be objective about it.
What could the old start menu do that the start screen cannot do? Why not challenge yourself to get used to the start screen and then see if launching apps is not actually faster using the new start screen. Same with organising your apps.
As for looking for the name of control panel apps, how is that different to windows 7? At least windows 8 provides the ability to search. Your complaint applies to all previous versions of windows too.
You say MS crippled the UI, but now you need to give examples of how the start screen offers less functionality than what you had before.
I can think of how it offers more functionality (ie. search), but not less.
I'm not interested in metro apps - and you're replying to my post which was all about how you could use windows 8 just like windows 7 with no regressions in functionality nor ease of use.
the start MENU has been changed into the start SCREEN.
It is more in line with OSX launchpad and gnome shell's launcher. Whether that's a good or bad thing is a matter of opinion and preference.
Personally I decided that there wasn't a lot I could do about it, and might as well just get used to it. I tried a start menu replacement app and it was terrible.
Nowadays I actually don't mind the start screen - it is a quicker way to launch my often-used apps than trying to hunt through menus to find them. It's not perfect, but I don't really care.
Worrying about stuff like that just makes your life negative for no good reason. Just live with it and move on. There's always more important things to worry about.
Now you have the problem of trying to explain how this is somehow worse than what we had in windows 7 or any other prior version of windows.
I got used to the new start screen - it's not _that_ bad, no worse than hunting through menus to find what you're looking for, and actually better in that you can just start typing the name of a program and it comes up in the search. Or you can type the name of a control panel applet or setting, and that works too.
What if you don't remember the name of that control panel applet? What if you don't know the application's name, but would otherwise find it if you could browse through menus?
"Just typing the name" of some computer program or appet can be horribly inconvenient.
Um, then you do it the way you would've done it in windows 7. Just open the control panel and clicky clicky.
The control panel can be accessed either by right-clicking the bottom left of the screen, or swiping up from the bottom right of the screen. I found this out by myself, so I'm sure it isn't that hard.
It seems pretty clear that you've never used Windows 8, particularly because you're referring people to the article rather than offering your own experience.
- it more than doubles the number of clicks and moves you have to do to perform normal operations,
When launching applications I actually need to use less clicks than before. I can also type the name of an app rather than hunting through menus.
With settings, I can launch the control panel via swiping on the right side of the screen, or right clicking at the bottom left. Again, less clicks.
Other than those two things (launching applications and accessing the control panel) everything can be done the same as in windows 7.
- applications (like the weather predictions) keep popping up when you least expect because you made a gesture with your mouse that the horrible horrible UI mistakes as another touch gesture that has nothing to do with what you want to do,
Never had that happen. You could always disable the weather app. I'm pretty sure you need to set this up to begin with before it even works, so if you never went into the app to start with, you wouldn't have this problem.
- you simply cannot find configuration features without knowing the specific keywords, because there are no shortcuts that do not involve typing these specific keywords/ This is something they started with the advanced file search in Windows 7, which is much worse than XPs, but went viral on Windows 8
I'm not sure what you mean. Yes, you can search for configuration options, which is something you could not do in previous versions of windows.
How would you find configuration features in Windows 7? What about XP? and how is that different from windows 8? AFAIK those "old" ways of finding things are still there, but now there is ALSO the ability to type what you want and have windows display settings that match your query.
I tell people that apart from the start menu, you could pretty much use windows 8 exactly like windows 7 and never know the difference.
I don't understand it.
Windows 8 is just Windows 7 PLUS metro.
Surely you could just not use the metro parts and it would be just the same experience as windows 7 (mostly). In fact, I do just that.
I got used to the new start screen - it's not _that_ bad, no worse than hunting through menus to find what you're looking for, and actually better in that you can just start typing the name of a program and it comes up in the search. Or you can type the name of a control panel applet or setting, and that works too.
There are definite improvements over windows 7, even if they are minor. So in general, if all you want is an incremental improvement over windows 7, you can use it just like that.
No one is forcing you to use metro for all your apps.
So yeah, windows 8 is less than ideal in that some settings screens take you to a metro interface (but you could live without them), and metro itself is horrible, but if you use it just like windows 7 and all versions before that, it still works fine.
The default position is not that there is a God. I suppose the default position is the agnostic position, that evidence does not exist either way.
Any claim outside of the default position on any topic, carries the burden of proof.
Now you have the 'proof', it's back to you, AC.
The burden of proof with respect to the existence of God is always on the theist, not the atheist.
And no, I am not an atheist.
Of course, it's impossible for someone else to execute code on your windows pc now isn't it? I mean, that's never been done before...?
The danger as I see it is that Windows 8 presumably allows you to share apps and data between windows and mobile devices. Mobile devices tend to store a lot more personal data than windows ever did, and if this data is now synced to your pc and vulnerable to exploitation by the same viruses that have plagued windows since forever, then this gets a bit more scary.
Consider that windows malware that has 'Administrator' access (the default for most windows user accounts?) effectively has 'root' access to your Windows 8 apps (let's hope I misinterpreted what's going on here).
I'm a little bit concerned.
Surely Windows 8 should store Metro App data encrypted and completely separate from the rest of Windows?
Huh? The only annoying part is that you don't like the fact that someone else has told you what you can do with their code (well, when it comes to distribution at least).
I'm not saying either is right or wrong. I generally use the BSD license for my own projects, so I fail to see how that makes me a GPL fanboy.
I even started my post by saying: "I can see the argument for why one might choose either license"...
I guess where we differ is that you think a developer should not have the rights granted by the GPL. I disagree - I think the GPL is a valid license and the linux kernel is an excellent example of when it is the right choice (in my opinion).
I don't think the GPL fits in all cases, and neither do I think the BSD license fits in all cases.
Let's think about where the GPL hurts most. It hurts because you have to release your own code under the GPL if you use GPL'd code in your project. And why does it hurt to release your own code? well, obviously because you didn't want that code to be "open" (or you didn't want later developers' code to have to be, and so on).
Let's make this really interesting and say that if there was no such thing as closed-source code, then the BSD license would not offer any advantage over the GPL.
Still, my own personal view is that closed source is not evil, and a developer should be able to choose how to license their code/product. True freedom to me means allowing the developer the right to any license he/she chooses. But the only way that works is if other developers respect that choice.
Who says it's all one way?
Yep, I started reading the summary and thought "oh goody, a python contest! and there's a prize!....oh wait".
I can see the argument for why one might choose either license, but at the end of the day of the author of the code wishes that their code always remain free, and so chooses the GPL, I believe that is their right and it should be respected.
Complaining that a third party licensed their code under a particular license is just stupid. It is the same as saying that the original developer should not have had the choice to license their work however they wanted to.
If you use someone else's code then you should respect the wishes of that developer. It doesn't go further than that.
Sure, you can trumpet the benefits if X, Y, or Z license until the cows come home, but if a developer still chooses to license their work under the GPL, that's their right to do so.
You called it "lock-in". I call it "respecting the rights of the author(s)".
That's how it works - more or less - in the PC space
Exactly. If I want to run Microsoft Office on FreeBSD on the new MacBookPro, it's hassle free. Everything just works.
Actually, I believe you're trolling. The bit you quoted from was not claiming that it was "hassle free" nor that "everything just works". It was merely claiming that it is possible to do it. And given your example, I'd say it is possible to do just that:
"On FreeBSD/i386 8.0 and later Wine should work for most user applications including Microsoft Office 2007" http://wiki.freebsd.org/Wine
So let's compare the PC space to the phone/tablet space again...
Can Microsoft make Office for Mac and sell it on their own website? sure, no doubt they already do.
Can Microsoft make Office for iOS and sell it on their own website? well, they could, but no one would be able to install it.
Can Microsoft make Office for Android and sell it on their own website? sure, no problem, so long as the customer's Android build supports side-loading (which it will unless the software provider specifically disabled it).
Except for the requirement to use iTunes (I assume it still works that way?). That could be stopping someone from doing it.
And you already mentioned media compatibility. Is it possible to download a third-party media player on iOS?
Aha, but did he invent "wireless charging on a mobile device"?
This is exactly what I was thinking. But I don't think logic and patent law are in any way related.
Well if they're aiming them at earth, that could be earth-shattering (for very small values of "earth")
Fruit flies like a banana.
Yes. Yes they do :)
cool? no, quite the opposite actually...
Actually, Microsoft branded hardware is usually pretty good. I've long been a fan of the MS Natural Keyboard line, and their intellimouse products were a global favourite at one time also.
Well, now that Microsoft wants to compete with Apple, they'll have to deal with over-sensationalist news as well.
Let me be the first to suggest "Covergate". ;)
Surely apple has a patent for that!
How funny would it be if HTC made a phone that looked just like the iPhone and were sued by Samsung for copying their designs?
You're half correct.
The GP said nothing about USB mass storage. To the average user when you plug in a GS3, even in MTP mode, it still acts as a USB drive.
The lack of linux support for MTP is a failing of linux, not a failing of the device. Have a read about why Google changed it, and it makes sense.
It is not a major fail. The major fail was that you had to have 2 partitions on your phone so that one of them could be unmounted in order to use USB mass storage. You therefore couldn't access any files on the phone's internal SD card while it was mounted on a PC.
It was a technical decision. The world has moved on. Linux is just a little late catching up.