I specifically mentioned the Finder for document browsing, not apps. I wouldn't use it for apps, either (but neither do I use the dock).
The landing area for the start screen might be smaller, but I'd be surprised if most people didn't move the cursor to the old button the same way you move it to the hot corner--namely, by hurling the cursor into the corner. It's faster than trying to pinpoint a button (even a relatively large one), and you don't have to look at the screen to do it.
You can shut down from any screen in Windows 8, not just the start screen--but I will concede this is an area where the UI is obtuse. You can also shut down by hitting Alt+F4 on the desktop.
As for control panels: While I don't need to use them much, when I do, I just hit Win+W, then type in what I'm looking to do.
Maybe the reason I'm as pleased with Windows 8 as I am is that it's so keyboard-friendly. I hardly ever need to use the mouse when navigating the UI.
How can you be a Mac user and like the new Windows?
Try putting a link to your Applications folder on the Dock - one click access to every app installed there.
I have my Applications directory on the dock, and I never use it. It's much slower than Alfred, or even Spotlight. It's nice for the Downloads directory, though, as I usually keep that pretty small. Any directory large enough to require scrolling, or any that has multiple subdirectories, is better suited for the Finder in column view.
The new Start/Metro interface is actually harder to get to & more complicated than the old Start menu.
It is because of comments like this that I am convinced most Windows 8 complainers on Slashdot have never actually touched Windows 8. You can access the start screen in exactly the same way as the old start menu. Either move your mouse to the lower left corner or press the Win key on your keyboard.
most techs-savvy users, or people who know what they're doing just click 'no' to any such data collection prompts so the sample is going to be severely skewed towards people who have ended up with this bundled and know no different.
So basically, the most computer-illiterate people are having an easy time with Windows 8?
A start menu would mean that I could have a word document open on my screen and hit the start menu to open another app, without losing site of the word document that might actually contain the credentials I need to enter into the other program.
And as soon as you click that app, it brings you back to the desktop with your Word document. Wait, you aren't actually using Metro apps, are you? (I won't even ask why you keep credentials in Word files...)
eReaders aren't designed for PDFs. In theory, the DX was, but it hasn't been updated in years. I do think that 6" is a bit small for a paperback--an "A" format paperback (mass-market) is about 8" diagonal. I think a good compromise would be a 7" screen, as this would still give room for a bezel around it without it being too much bigger than a paperback. The benefit of this is more words on the screen at a time, meaning less page turns and (probably) longer battery life. The disadvantage would be higher cost and increased size/weight. I find it interesting that Kobo has the Mini. That seems way too small, but maybe there's a market for it.
Speaking of the Kobo...for all that I love my Kindle, Amazon has serious problems in the ergonomics/aesthetics department. I get that it's a cheap device that probably has razor-thin margins (or break-even), but when you compare it with the Kobo or the Nook, it just doesn't look very good, and the other devices are more comfortable to hold (particularly the Kobo). This is true both for eReaders and tablets (the new Kindle Fire HD7 is possibly the ugliest tablet out there, even if it's a nice device). I also think Amazon's insistence on removing physical buttons is misguided.
I tried switching to the Nook. I liked it a lot at first, but it left a lot to be desired in the area of syncing. It would often take the device a long time to sync reading positions, and sometimes it would not even sync at all. This, combined with a lack of syncing of non-B&N stuff, led me to come back to the Kindle. I would have tried a Kobo, but their eBook market seemed lacking at the time.
A good suggestion; however, I'm often reading on my phone or tablet, and the syncing functionality is invaluable to me. It would be a bit of a hassle to constantly turn WiFi on and off. Charging it every 10 days or so isn't so bad.
Oh, you don't seriously think that they walk into the Apple store and leave just having bought a naked MBA. They'll get talked into buying the extended maintenance ("since it's such a valuable laptop"), sleeves, maybe an extra charger, USB sticks, and god knows what else, all crap you don't need with a Chromebook.
And you don't think the salesguy would try to upsell you on that stuff if you bought a Chromebook? Hell, retail stores try to sell you extended warranties on $60 video games; of course they will try to sell you one for a $200 computer.
I have a Kindle Paperwhite. Before that, I had a Nook and a Kindle Touch. Before that, I had a first-gen iPad. Way before that, I had a Compaq iPAQ on which I once read Dracula, so I'm counting it here.
Reading ebooks on the dedicated eReaders is superior to a first-gen iPad (and the iPAQ, natch). However, I recently got a new (retina) iPad, and, well...in some ways it's better than the Kindle. Despite the lighting and battery issues, the iPad has clearer text. This is a combination of vastly superior contrast, perfect screen refreshes, higher DPI, and a more even backlight. It also switches pages faster than a Kindle, and thanks to the perfect refresh, it never has text artifacts (you can enable this in the Kindle, too, but the screen flickers black every page turn and it eats up battery faster).
The Kindle, though, still has some advantages. You don't need to look at it straight-on; it's clear from any angle. Its battery lasts longer, though I find I still need to recharge every 7-10 days. There's less eyestrain--but I think a better way to describe that is it's slightly easier for me to focus on the text than it is on an LCD. The device weighs less, and I can easily hold it in my hand (I could probably do this with an iPad mini or a 7" tablet). You can read it in direct sunlight--in fact, it looks better this way!
The point to all this is that tablets have made strides in the eReader field. They used to suck, but they've gotten quite a bit better. I wouldn't be surprised if they supplant the dedicated readers altogether at some point. They're good enough for most people. I think the ideal situation would be an LCD/eInk hybrid screen, an idea that has seen something of a resurgence of late.
I would be willing to see it in 48fps (as a second viewing), but likely never will get the chance to see it, because that version is only offered in 3D. Beyond the fact that I don't see any benefit to 3D, it gives me a massive headache within minutes.
I still don't understand the industry's obsession with 3D. Even my young nieces and nephews don't care about it. Never mind...I do understand. They get more money for it. I wonder if that actually makes 3D a boon for theaters too small to afford the new projectors.
"Helping" fight cybercrime probably just means that they act as a consultant for law enforcement agencies--the guys who actually conduct the criminal investigations.
Apple was in a lose-lose situation. On the one hand, they needed turn-by-turn and other features out-of-the-box to stay competitive with Android. They had a map app that wasn't yet ready for prime-time. They could have licensed the technology from Google, but they didn't want to give their chief OS competitor access to even more data on their users.
So they had 4 main choices:
1. Keep using the old Maps app and continue to be lacking in core functionality that Android has. Wait until iOS 7. 2. Delay the release of iOS 6. (A slight variation on #1.) 3. Agree to Google's terms and use their maps while still working on their own replacement. 4. Dump Google and release their app which still needed more work.
From a user standpoint, and from what I know of the issue, I tend to think that they should have opted for #3, but then again, I'm not privy to the actual licensing terms. I can understand why they went with #4, though.
(They could also have spun the old app off as something you must download from the App Store, but I can only imagine the outcry if they'd done that. People freaked out over Youtube, even though the old app was atrocious and there was a far superior replacement available in the App Store.)
This, exactly. When people say that they miss the old Maps app, I always wonder if they were using the same app as I was, because the old one was nigh unusable for me. No turn-by-turn, have to have the app open for it to be of any use, poor Siri integration, slow-rendering raster tiles... It just sucked.
So Apple dumps it for a variety of reasons and releases a new app based on their own data. The interface is far superior to the old app, it has vector tiles, turn-by-turn, and Siri integration. The problem? For lots of people, the map data itself isn't as good. Being kicked out forces Google to release their own, competitive app with the previously missing features. Since it will presumably have better map data, or at least POI data, this will force Apple to improve their own product.
This is how the free market is supposed to work. It's unfortunate Apple apparently rushed its inclusion of Maps in iOS 6, but every iOS user today is better off than they were with iOS 5.
There is one thing about this story that is odd, though, and that is that it took Google so long to make an app. The writing was on the wall for quite some time before iOS 6 was announced (let alone released), and yet they still seemed caught flat-footed. Also, I enjoy that everyone who claimed Apple would never allow this app into the store were all proven wrong.
You have me tempted to fire it up again...but it's hard to muster the interest at this point. It's not that I disliked the game (in fact, I loved it at first), it's that it just got very boring very quickly, to the point where I had almost no energy to do anything after beating normal mode.
Obviously you've never met me (well, most likely you haven't), but I used to use FreeBSD in the early-to-mid-2000s, back before I went to OS X. I always liked it a lot--more than any of the *nixes I used, with the possible exception of Arch.
Folders have the exact same potential pitfall as you describe with labels. All you need to do to use labels effectively is to have a predefined structure (Gmail does allow nesting of labels, by the way) and only use that structure. Sounds a lot like your description of proper folder use.
On top of that, labels offer a flexibility that folders don't have. If you don't want to use that flexibility, though, you can use labels exactly as you would folders.
Labels are *retarded*. Because you can never ever tell whether an object (in this case a mail) is really deleted and gone or still in some other "label".
I'm actually fine with not having a direct sequel to PST. The game was wrapped up as it was; a sequel is unnecessary. With that said, I'm looking forward to Project Eternity.
You can drag things in Gmail, and labels are superior to folders (objectively so--they do the same thing as folders, only with an added feature). I...really don't understand how threading is weird. It's the primary reason I switched to Gmail in 2004.
I could see a kickstarter campaign being successful. The game definitely has a following, even if it's still cult status. Space sims are pretty niche these days, and yet Star Citizen did amazingly well.
Planescape is one of my favorite games, and may objectively be one of the best RPGs out there, especially if you're old-school and actually want to "play" a role in the game. If you think that games like Dragon Age and The Witcher present a lot of player choices, well, they're nothing compared to Planescape.
It does involve a lot of reading, and therefore time--especially if you really want to delve into the story (GOG claims 5000 pages of dialogue, and I believe it). I think it's worth it, but I know that isn't everyone's cup of tea. If you do wind up getting it, then be sure to apply the community patches. In particular, the high-res patch is essential. There's a discussion on the GOG forums all about it.
A spiritual successor to the game would be welcome news. It'll be a hard name to live up to, but fantastic if they pull it off.
Slashdot Mirror
I specifically mentioned the Finder for document browsing, not apps. I wouldn't use it for apps, either (but neither do I use the dock).
The landing area for the start screen might be smaller, but I'd be surprised if most people didn't move the cursor to the old button the same way you move it to the hot corner--namely, by hurling the cursor into the corner. It's faster than trying to pinpoint a button (even a relatively large one), and you don't have to look at the screen to do it.
You can shut down from any screen in Windows 8, not just the start screen--but I will concede this is an area where the UI is obtuse. You can also shut down by hitting Alt+F4 on the desktop.
As for control panels: While I don't need to use them much, when I do, I just hit Win+W, then type in what I'm looking to do.
Maybe the reason I'm as pleased with Windows 8 as I am is that it's so keyboard-friendly. I hardly ever need to use the mouse when navigating the UI.
Touche!
How can you be a Mac user and like the new Windows?
Try putting a link to your Applications folder on the Dock - one click access to every app installed there.
I have my Applications directory on the dock, and I never use it. It's much slower than Alfred, or even Spotlight. It's nice for the Downloads directory, though, as I usually keep that pretty small. Any directory large enough to require scrolling, or any that has multiple subdirectories, is better suited for the Finder in column view.
The new Start/Metro interface is actually harder to get to & more complicated than the old Start menu.
It is because of comments like this that I am convinced most Windows 8 complainers on Slashdot have never actually touched Windows 8. You can access the start screen in exactly the same way as the old start menu. Either move your mouse to the lower left corner or press the Win key on your keyboard.
most techs-savvy users, or people who know what they're doing just click 'no' to any such data collection prompts so the sample is going to be severely skewed towards people who have ended up with this bundled and know no different.
So basically, the most computer-illiterate people are having an easy time with Windows 8?
A start menu would mean that I could have a word document open on my screen and hit the start menu to open another app, without losing site of the word document that might actually contain the credentials I need to enter into the other program.
And as soon as you click that app, it brings you back to the desktop with your Word document. Wait, you aren't actually using Metro apps, are you? (I won't even ask why you keep credentials in Word files...)
eReaders aren't designed for PDFs. In theory, the DX was, but it hasn't been updated in years. I do think that 6" is a bit small for a paperback--an "A" format paperback (mass-market) is about 8" diagonal. I think a good compromise would be a 7" screen, as this would still give room for a bezel around it without it being too much bigger than a paperback. The benefit of this is more words on the screen at a time, meaning less page turns and (probably) longer battery life. The disadvantage would be higher cost and increased size/weight. I find it interesting that Kobo has the Mini. That seems way too small, but maybe there's a market for it.
Speaking of the Kobo...for all that I love my Kindle, Amazon has serious problems in the ergonomics/aesthetics department. I get that it's a cheap device that probably has razor-thin margins (or break-even), but when you compare it with the Kobo or the Nook, it just doesn't look very good, and the other devices are more comfortable to hold (particularly the Kobo). This is true both for eReaders and tablets (the new Kindle Fire HD7 is possibly the ugliest tablet out there, even if it's a nice device). I also think Amazon's insistence on removing physical buttons is misguided.
I tried switching to the Nook. I liked it a lot at first, but it left a lot to be desired in the area of syncing. It would often take the device a long time to sync reading positions, and sometimes it would not even sync at all. This, combined with a lack of syncing of non-B&N stuff, led me to come back to the Kindle. I would have tried a Kobo, but their eBook market seemed lacking at the time.
A good suggestion; however, I'm often reading on my phone or tablet, and the syncing functionality is invaluable to me. It would be a bit of a hassle to constantly turn WiFi on and off. Charging it every 10 days or so isn't so bad.
Oh, you don't seriously think that they walk into the Apple store and leave just having bought a naked MBA. They'll get talked into buying the extended maintenance ("since it's such a valuable laptop"), sleeves, maybe an extra charger, USB sticks, and god knows what else, all crap you don't need with a Chromebook.
And you don't think the salesguy would try to upsell you on that stuff if you bought a Chromebook? Hell, retail stores try to sell you extended warranties on $60 video games; of course they will try to sell you one for a $200 computer.
I have a Kindle Paperwhite. Before that, I had a Nook and a Kindle Touch. Before that, I had a first-gen iPad. Way before that, I had a Compaq iPAQ on which I once read Dracula, so I'm counting it here.
Reading ebooks on the dedicated eReaders is superior to a first-gen iPad (and the iPAQ, natch). However, I recently got a new (retina) iPad, and, well...in some ways it's better than the Kindle. Despite the lighting and battery issues, the iPad has clearer text. This is a combination of vastly superior contrast, perfect screen refreshes, higher DPI, and a more even backlight. It also switches pages faster than a Kindle, and thanks to the perfect refresh, it never has text artifacts (you can enable this in the Kindle, too, but the screen flickers black every page turn and it eats up battery faster).
The Kindle, though, still has some advantages. You don't need to look at it straight-on; it's clear from any angle. Its battery lasts longer, though I find I still need to recharge every 7-10 days. There's less eyestrain--but I think a better way to describe that is it's slightly easier for me to focus on the text than it is on an LCD. The device weighs less, and I can easily hold it in my hand (I could probably do this with an iPad mini or a 7" tablet). You can read it in direct sunlight--in fact, it looks better this way!
The point to all this is that tablets have made strides in the eReader field. They used to suck, but they've gotten quite a bit better. I wouldn't be surprised if they supplant the dedicated readers altogether at some point. They're good enough for most people. I think the ideal situation would be an LCD/eInk hybrid screen, an idea that has seen something of a resurgence of late.
I would be willing to see it in 48fps (as a second viewing), but likely never will get the chance to see it, because that version is only offered in 3D. Beyond the fact that I don't see any benefit to 3D, it gives me a massive headache within minutes.
I still don't understand the industry's obsession with 3D. Even my young nieces and nephews don't care about it. Never mind...I do understand. They get more money for it. I wonder if that actually makes 3D a boon for theaters too small to afford the new projectors.
"Helping" fight cybercrime probably just means that they act as a consultant for law enforcement agencies--the guys who actually conduct the criminal investigations.
Apple was in a lose-lose situation. On the one hand, they needed turn-by-turn and other features out-of-the-box to stay competitive with Android. They had a map app that wasn't yet ready for prime-time. They could have licensed the technology from Google, but they didn't want to give their chief OS competitor access to even more data on their users.
So they had 4 main choices:
1. Keep using the old Maps app and continue to be lacking in core functionality that Android has. Wait until iOS 7.
2. Delay the release of iOS 6. (A slight variation on #1.)
3. Agree to Google's terms and use their maps while still working on their own replacement.
4. Dump Google and release their app which still needed more work.
From a user standpoint, and from what I know of the issue, I tend to think that they should have opted for #3, but then again, I'm not privy to the actual licensing terms. I can understand why they went with #4, though.
(They could also have spun the old app off as something you must download from the App Store, but I can only imagine the outcry if they'd done that. People freaked out over Youtube, even though the old app was atrocious and there was a far superior replacement available in the App Store.)
This, exactly. When people say that they miss the old Maps app, I always wonder if they were using the same app as I was, because the old one was nigh unusable for me. No turn-by-turn, have to have the app open for it to be of any use, poor Siri integration, slow-rendering raster tiles... It just sucked.
So Apple dumps it for a variety of reasons and releases a new app based on their own data. The interface is far superior to the old app, it has vector tiles, turn-by-turn, and Siri integration. The problem? For lots of people, the map data itself isn't as good. Being kicked out forces Google to release their own, competitive app with the previously missing features. Since it will presumably have better map data, or at least POI data, this will force Apple to improve their own product.
This is how the free market is supposed to work. It's unfortunate Apple apparently rushed its inclusion of Maps in iOS 6, but every iOS user today is better off than they were with iOS 5.
There is one thing about this story that is odd, though, and that is that it took Google so long to make an app. The writing was on the wall for quite some time before iOS 6 was announced (let alone released), and yet they still seemed caught flat-footed. Also, I enjoy that everyone who claimed Apple would never allow this app into the store were all proven wrong.
You have me tempted to fire it up again...but it's hard to muster the interest at this point. It's not that I disliked the game (in fact, I loved it at first), it's that it just got very boring very quickly, to the point where I had almost no energy to do anything after beating normal mode.
Obviously you've never met me (well, most likely you haven't), but I used to use FreeBSD in the early-to-mid-2000s, back before I went to OS X. I always liked it a lot--more than any of the *nixes I used, with the possible exception of Arch.
Folders have the exact same potential pitfall as you describe with labels. All you need to do to use labels effectively is to have a predefined structure (Gmail does allow nesting of labels, by the way) and only use that structure. Sounds a lot like your description of proper folder use.
On top of that, labels offer a flexibility that folders don't have. If you don't want to use that flexibility, though, you can use labels exactly as you would folders.
Labels are *retarded*. Because you can never ever tell whether an object (in this case a mail) is really deleted and gone or still in some other "label".
Did you ever try clicking the delete button?
I'm actually fine with not having a direct sequel to PST. The game was wrapped up as it was; a sequel is unnecessary. With that said, I'm looking forward to Project Eternity.
PC developers already target the low end.
You mean, you want your email *wherever you have an internet connection*.
Gmail has an offline mode. I'd imagine other webmail providers offer something similar.
You can drag things in Gmail, and labels are superior to folders (objectively so--they do the same thing as folders, only with an added feature). I...really don't understand how threading is weird. It's the primary reason I switched to Gmail in 2004.
I just want to create people simply by saying a random name enough times.
I could see a kickstarter campaign being successful. The game definitely has a following, even if it's still cult status. Space sims are pretty niche these days, and yet Star Citizen did amazingly well.
Planescape is one of my favorite games, and may objectively be one of the best RPGs out there, especially if you're old-school and actually want to "play" a role in the game. If you think that games like Dragon Age and The Witcher present a lot of player choices, well, they're nothing compared to Planescape.
It does involve a lot of reading, and therefore time--especially if you really want to delve into the story (GOG claims 5000 pages of dialogue, and I believe it). I think it's worth it, but I know that isn't everyone's cup of tea. If you do wind up getting it, then be sure to apply the community patches. In particular, the high-res patch is essential. There's a discussion on the GOG forums all about it.
A spiritual successor to the game would be welcome news. It'll be a hard name to live up to, but fantastic if they pull it off.
People have similar setups for the Commodore 64. I had one hooked up until the end of summer.