Windows 8 Must Be Destroyed

If you've seen my tagline for the past month or so, or read DT, there's no need for an explanation. If not, then there is a need but I'd rather not get into it right now.

What I'd like to know is whether anyone's been using Windows 8 for serious, intensive work and how you've managed. Note, this means just Windows 8 without any of the myriad, myriad, myriad shells that make it pass for an actual operating system.

BTW, I may be a bit biased ;)

Thanks.

Needs more "ceterum censeo."

But no, if I'd heard it worked like a dream, I wouldn't touch that thing.

I'm not entirely sure what you mean by "serious, intensive work". I bought a laptop this past December, and it came with Windows 8. The laptop does not have a touch screen, and thus the Metro UI is incredibly annoying.

One of the first things I did was download ClassicShell in order to make it more like Windows 7, and thus something I was used to. After a few months of that, I decided to remove ClassicShell. Not because it didn't work, but because a part of me felt like I might as well get used to Windows 8 the way it was designed, since it's clearly not going away. It may sound silly, but I went through the same thought process with Windows 3.1, Windows 95, Windows XP, Windows 7, etc, etc.

Microsoft clearly has people by the .... OS, and they know it. Whatever changes they decide to make, they're going to make, whether or not it's actually good for the consumers. And most of us have no options in the matter. A good example is what Microsoft did with a lot of their programs in Windows 7, removing drop down menu items, and replacing them with an icon ribbon. It took some getting used to.

There are many, many, MANY things I dislike about Windows 8. I feel that it makes things a lot harder on me. I also know that this is because I'm used to previous versions of Windows. I put many of the programs I use on the Metro UI interface, but ultimately I find myself utilizing the desktop 99% of the time. The lack of a start menu is a bit perplexing, however I have learned to use the Windows-R combination to open up a run menu and then run the application I need. Again, all things that make it more difficult.

My largest grievance is with Windows 8 not 'accepting' certain programs and applications. I have several programs that I use, that when I start the program, I will get a warning screen from Windows. There is no way to remove this warning screen. In Windows 7, you could designate programs as being 'safe' or 'acceptable' and then the warning would no longer appear. This feature has been removed from Windows 8, and is highly annoying. My second large grievance is the fact that I *have* to log in to my laptop. I'm the only person who uses it, and having to log in is annoying. And again, there is no way around it.

My next computer will definitely be a linux box.

Quote: konceptum

My next computer will definitely be a linux box.

My last six or eight computers (everything since an IBM "Portable PC" I bought about 1985) have been Macs. I don't really care how screwed up Microsoft makes Windows; I never felt a need to learn a whole lot about any of the versions. I've always liked that quip, "Computers are a lot like air conditioners -- everything works pretty well until you start opening Windows."

I have used Android OS on my two most recent phones and my Nexus7 tablet, but those are not for any "serious, intensive work."

Thanks! This is very useful, and about what I'd expected.

Quote: konceptum

I'm not entirely sure what you mean by "serious, intensive work".

Writing/editing documents, spreadsheets, massive data input, design of any sort, etc. But in particular using several open programs at the same time.

Quote:

A good example is what Microsoft did with a lot of their programs in Windows 7, removing drop down menu items, and replacing them with an icon ribbon. It took some getting used to.

I'm still mad about Office from 2007 onwards. The funny thing is MS claims the redesign was to expose functionality. Right. I don't know about others but I, and the people I work with, have found fucntions between hard and impossible to find.

Quote:

There are many, many, MANY things I dislike about Windows 8. I feel that it makes things a lot harder on me. I also know that this is because I'm used to previous versions of Windows.

You and I and over a billion other people are used previous versions of Windows. That was why crippling the desktop was the boneheaded move to kill all the boneheaded moves.

Quote:

Again, all things that make it more difficult.

And again, exactly what I expected.

Quote:

My next computer will definitely be a linux box.

I'm thiking along those lines, too. Have you tried to install a Linux partition into your Windows 8 laptop?

Quote: Doc

My last six or eight computers (everything since an IBM "Portable PC" I bought about 1985) have been Macs.

I'd consider a Mac when all other options become extinct, including the abbacus ;)

Seriously, Mac is going to go touch happy, too. I know little about the Apple OS, but I've read it's begun incorporating "gestures" by means of a touch pad. Did I tell you I hate touch pads? The first thing I do with any laptop I must use is disable it and plug in a mouse.

Quote:

I have used Android OS on my two most recent phones and my Nexus7 tablet, but those are not for any "serious, intensive work."

Of course not. No one outside of Redmond would even consider a tablet/phone OS as a plattform for work.

The Metro UI interface seems like a pretty good idea, if you have a touch screen phone or tablet. It's cumbersome if you're not using such a device. The pre-release version of Windows 8 at least had the ability to disable the Metro UI so that you could use the standardized desktop interface. I have no idea why the official version of Windows 8 removed this seemingly reasonable option.

Quote: konceptum

The Metro UI interface seems like a pretty good idea, if you have a touch screen phone or tablet. It's cumbersome if you're not using such a device.

I think we disagree, but I'm not sure. I find touch an especially bad idea in a laptop or desktop PC. Either via touch screen or touch pad. Fingers just aren't precise enough for a desktop or laptop, not for things like spreadheets, documents and such. I've less epxerience in design and photo editing, but I suspect touch would be terrible there, too.

Quote:

The pre-release version of Windows 8 at least had the ability to disable the Metro UI so that you could use the standardized desktop interface.

I could ahve lived with that, assuming they'd left the start menu in place.

Quote:

I have no idea why the official version of Windows 8 removed this seemingly reasonable option.

Because human intelligence may have its limitations, but human stupidity is unbounded.

Quote: Doc

My last six or eight computers ... have been Macs.

A mac is only a halfway step from a smartphone to a computer.

Quote: Nareed

What I'd like to know is whether anyone's been using Windows 8 for serious, intensive work and how you've managed. Note, this means just Windows 8 without any of the myriad, myriad, myriad shells that make it pass for an actual operating system.

Somewhat, as Server 2012.
Windows 8 is a real operating system, better than its predecessor, and even its interface isn't all bad if you know how to use it. In large part, it's a return to good old command console days: 95% of the time you type the program's name to launch it, except now you can type it in the search window. Pretend Win95 shells are useless in my opinion, more about that later.

A criticism of Win 8's UI could be is that it's much harder to learn than the old 4.0 UI. Or, more exactly, the learning curve for Win 95 UI went like this: ,..~^ , while Win 8's goes like _/"'' . In both cases it's very easy to access the already installed software, a bit easier in Win 8, no that first ,.. bit of learning about how menus work.

But the moment you want to install software, or change your settings, or do anything beyond running preinstalled software one instance at a time - then Win 8 slams you with having to learn two separate UI modes, several dozen user-run system executable names, and a number of never-advertised or hidden places you need to go.
Once you learn the new interface, and assuming you stay on top of it, it can be more productive.

If you don't... When I don't know what programs are installed on a particular machine, I use the start menu to check. There isn't one on Win 8 and "shells" only add a useless facsimile: programs don't add themselves to their menus on install. All manually populated menus amount to is timesinks for people with learning difficulties. CP is cluttered with software not meant to be run by the end user, and browsing folders manually is equally time-consuming. The result is that on W8 or W2012 I often run a program install only to find out that another program with almost identical functionality is already there, because there isn't a convenient overview of a machine's software like there used to be since 4.0.

This isn't necessarily a call to change the whole thing. Hopefully someday they get rid of the dual desktops (huge failure of design, it's like a car with a diesel engine for off-roading and a gasoline engine for urban driving), integrate everything, make a reasonable CP and add a software overview interface, hopefully with forced nesting and resilience against user removal.

Quote: P90

A mac is only a halfway step from a smartphone to a computer.

Oh, wow! :)

Quote:

Windows 8 is a real operating system,

Don't get me started.

Quote:

better than its predecessor,

I said "don't get me started" ;)

Quote:

In large part, it's a return to good old command console days: 95% of the time you type the program's name to launch it, except now you can type it in the search window.

So Win8 is almost as good as DOS 4.01? I say almost, because in DOS the program ran once you typed the *.BAT name. In Win8 I'm sure you'll have to pick it off a list and click on it, or touch it.

Quote:

Once you learn the new interface, and assuming you stay on top of it, it can be more productive.

That is simply not possible.

My typical work screen looks like this from left to right on the taskbar:

Start, Firefox, Firefox, Outlook, Windows Explorer, Word, Excel, Excel, quick-launch icons (4 of them), notification area and clock.

All windows run at full size, but I depend on the taskbar to 1) know what I have open and 2) switch between tasks quickly. Often I'm switching like mad copying and pasting from the Word document to the Excel spreadsheets, sometimes from a web site to Word, too.

Now, the "modern" interface has no taskbar. So I can't tell what's open, and if I want to know I need to engage in some red-tape "modern" gestures to find out. Then if I want to switch programs I need to do more of the same.

But as far as I know there isn't even a "modern" version of wither Word or Excel, so I wouldn't even be there. I'd be in the desktop,. with a taskbar chock-ful of quick launch icons, there being no start menu any more, and having to hover the mouse over the icons of the programs I'm using to find out if they're even open.

No thanks.

BTW, what I described above is the usual. I also run Adobe reader quite often, and a utility called ComapreIt which can take any two files and compare their contents (this has been crucial in my line of work), In addition sometimes I need the image viewer, the calcualtor, the control panel, disc-burning utilities, and other less common programs.

BTW II, at work,a dn at home, I most often open Word or Excel by double-clicking on a file in Windows Explorer. The files, adn this is important, are very neatly organized in folders in the office server. File names repeat themselves too often, so it's improtant to keep them in separate folders. This notion of simply searching for things, rather than looking them up where I know they are, would produce a screenful of identically named files, and how do I pick the right one?

Quote: Nareed

So Win8 is almost as good as DOS 4.01? I say almost, because in DOS the program ran once you typed the *.BAT name. In Win8 I'm sure you'll have to pick it off a list and click on it, or touch it.

Typing program name in the console is how you run it in most OS, starting with Unix. It's only with Xerox Alto that the spoiling started.
Win8 has a significantly enhanced Powershell where programs are run as in normal console.

Quote: Nareed

That is simply not possible.

It is more productive. Fast search, instant fullscreen, desktop sliding, native live tiles that are incomparably better than third-party widgets or small windows. It's better. It's just completely non-intuitive - you have to RTFM to learn how to use it, like before 1990, not start and go like in most consumer OS - but once you invest that time, you'll be able to do more things at once.
Of course productivity is only affected in multi-tasking, it doesn't matter what OS you run if you're full-screening one app full-time.

Quote: Nareed

My typical work screen looks like this from left to right on the taskbar:
Start, Firefox, Firefox, Outlook, Windows Explorer, Word, Excel, Excel, quick-launch icons (4 of them), notification area and clock.
All windows run at full size, but I depend on the taskbar to 1) know what I have open and 2) switch between tasks quickly. Often I'm switching like mad copying and pasting from the Word document to the Excel spreadsheets, sometimes from a web site to Word, too.

You fullscreen your browser? It's appropriate for some tiny laptop screen or for portrait mounting (but then you'd have multiple screens. This very website, for instance, is designed for a resolution of 1024x768, which is like "good morning Mr.Reagan, I heard you are going to make a nationwide computer network?"
Anything outside that 1024 pixel column is wasted blue space. And the few sites on the web that do stretch to fill a modern display become a pain to use that way, turning your head to read every line.

If you are C&P from one document from another, just keep your Word on the left side of the screen and Excel or your browser on the right side. Or on left and right portrait screens respectively.
Outlook... you must be working in one big corporation. The only reason to still use Outlook today is if your employer requires it for internal mail.

You shouldn't normally have your taskbar visible; it's a waste of screen space. Switching with the mouse is also a waste of time. Everyone aiming for productivity has been using Alt-Tab to switch for many years. Exception is, switch with the mouse between apps already on the screen.

Quote: Nareed

File names repeat themselves too often, so it's improtant to keep them in separate folders. This notion of simply searching for things, rather than looking them up where I know they are, would produce a screenful of identically named files, and how do I pick the right one?

Place a folder link on your desktop or in another accessible place.

By the way, file names should not commonly repeat under normal circumstances. It's bad practice and the person who implemented it should be talked at. Now that LFN have been native for 15 years, any naming policy should ensure unique names for every file with unique content. This is essential for convenient and reliable use of mail attachments, partial backups, and other services that may not preserve the folder structure.
An exception is for file versioning, in which case identical names are acceptable and often preferable, but timestamps provide a secondary means of conflict resolution.

All of the above addresses a productive working environment, it's not meant to criticize, simply to suggest where you might not have your productivity fully optimized even with the tools provided by current OS, and as such can't benefit from extra tools in these regards.

Quote: P90

Typing program name in the console is how you run it in most OS, starting with Unix. It's only with Xerox Alto that the spoiling started.
Win8 has a significantly enhanced Powershell where programs are run as in normal console.

So it's not as good as DOS 4.01 Somehow I thought things would improve after 20 years.

Quote:

It is more productive.

I just showed you why it isn't. But let's go at it blow by blow:

Quote:

Fast search,

Don't need it.

Quote:

instant fullscreen,

Already have it.

Quote:

desktop sliding, native live tiles

Don't want them.

Quote:

Of course productivity is only affected in multi-tasking, it doesn't matter what OS you run if you're full-screening one app full-time.

If I were going to run a single "app," I'd buy a smart phone.

Quote:

You run your browser at full size?

I run everything at full size, except some games like Free Cell and Hearts.

Quote:

If you are C&P from one document from another, just keep your Word on the left side of the screen and Excel or your browser on the right side. Or on left and right portrait screens respectively.

Beacuse I need to rummage through word, and the font has to be big enough to read, yet small enough not to take three screen apges to display one page of text. I've tried side-by-side-by-side windows. It doesn't work as well. The spreadsheets I work with are not wide, they are w i i i i i i i i i d e, putting them on a third of the momitor, or even half, has me scrolling sideways back and forth all day. I rather switch windows. And please don't say multiple monitors.

Quote:

You shouldn't normally have your taskbar visible; it's a waste of screen space.

No, it's how I know what's open and what's in it. I also have the start menu handy, shoudl I need it (and I do, from time to time). I hate having the taskbar go up and down, it's distracting, and I need to mvoe the mouse just to check. Having to call the bar up is worse.

Quote:

Switching with the mouse is also a waste of time. Everyone aiming for productivity has been using Alt-Tab to switch for many years. Exception is, switch with the mouse between apps already on the screen.

Alt-tab cycles between programs, or you need to choose one with the arrow keys or mouse. Switching with the mouse in the taskbar is faster and more convenient.

Look, the point is that I work that way, other people work in different ways, and we can all do that in the same OS. Win8 robs you of that ability. Besides "Happiness is doing it rotten your way" Isaac Asimov. With Win8 it's MS's way, not yours. "All ways here are MY ways!" The Queen of Hearts in Disney's "Alice"

Quote:

By the way, file names should not commonly repeat under normal circumstances. It's bad practice and the person who implemented it should be talked at.

It's government related work. If you expect rationality, you'll go insane.

In any case, the folders are numbered and labeled per project. Mixing files from different projects is done only with the greatest care. It's government-related, as I said. A minor error on a date can cost us a million-dollar project. And every project needs to have a complete record of all the files we produced for it, plus scans of physical documents related to it. Sometimes there are appeals by the losing bidders, and we need to produce all that for legal proceedings.

Each project has anwyhere from 10 to 30 files. If I need the samples file from project 12, I won't remember what I named it exactly. Suppose I named it "muestrasXCD010513" maybe. Maybe I named it "muestras xcd 010513" or even "muestras xcd 020513." It's a lot easier to open subfolder 12 in folder 2013 and click on the one file with "muestras" in its name, than to do a search even of only a single subfolder. Faster, too.

Quote: Nareed

Don't need it.
Don't want them.

Sorry, but these are productivity increasing tools for a large number of tasks.

Quote: Nareed

I run everything at full size, except some games like Free Cell and Hearts.

Modern working displays are usually 2560 pixels wide, economy models 1920. Few common applications use that much width. When browsing, the only way to make use of the 1536 pixels that are otherwise wasted on 1024-wide sites is to use a custom extension like Tile Tabs. Most of the time it's more efficient to half-screen the browser and the working window. Even a 1920 display is too wide for a full-screen browser.

Quote: Nareed

No, it's how I know what's open and what's in it. I also have the start menu handy, shoudl I need it (and I do, from time to time). I hate having the taskbar go up and down, it's distracting, and I need to mvoe the mouse just to check. Having to call the bar up is worse.

No offense meant, but that's what memory is for. You can also refresh it by alt-tabbing. If you run a lot of tasks routinely (10+), a task manager widget or screen may be appropriate.
You have the start menu handy as it is by using the windows key, between Ctrl and Alt keys. There is no reason to mouse over there.

Alt-tab cycles between programs, or you need to choose one with the arrow keys or mouse. Switching with the mouse in the taskbar is faster and more convenient.
Using arrow keys or mouse on the alt-tab screen is a waste of time. Simply hold Alt, the press Tab several times to get to the program you need.

Quote: Nareed

Look, the point is that I work that way, other people work in different ways, and we can all do that in the same OS.

You see, a lot of the things you say are under the assumption that there is no wrong or right way, that there's my way and your way and someone else's way, and they are all equal. And it would be true in art or music - but in computing, there is no assumption more false.

Operating a personal computer isn't an art, it's a skill. There's novice, intermediate, advanced level of that skill; there are bad, average, good and best ways. A lot of people wrongly cling to "their way", not realizing it's simply their level of skill, not a facet of their individuality.

There are no individuals, disability excepted, for which hunt-and-peck typing is better than touch-typing. There are no people who are better served by rubber domes than by Cherry MX or Topre switches. There are no healthy and able individuals who are better served by a single-button mouse than a multi-button mouse; only bad and good UI design decisions. The lesson to be learned from snowflakes is not that they are all unique, it's that their uniqueness has no bearing on their properties.

Quote: Nareed

Maybe I named it "muestras xcd 010513" or even "muestras xcd 020513." It's a lot easier to open subfolder 12 in folder 2013 and click on the one file with "muestras" in its name, than to do a search even of only a single subfolder. Faster, too.

Well, I'm not trying to tell you how to manage your project - but why not name the file "2013-Dec muestras xcd 5"? Still keeping everything in folders.
A file naming system should not allow for a possibility that, knowing the filename, there would be any ambiguity as to what folder it belongs in. Just good practice, because otherwise in any project large enough files will end up in the wrong folders and go unnoticed or outright be lost.

Search times on modern computers are sub-second even for many thousands of files. Except when using tape or disk drives, but that's covered by the "modern bit"; again, also not a matter of preference, but of worse and better components.

I want to apologize for my tone. I know I come across as angry and bitter, but that's only because I'm angry and bitter and frustrated.

Seriously, consider the issue of live tiles. Since Win XP, and possibly since Win95, there have been third-party gadgets for live info on small desktop screens or other means. Vista and Win7 came with gadgets or widgets to do the same thing. The very first thing I did with my Vista PC was to shut down those things and bannish them from the desktop forever. I certainly never downloaded any gadgets from third-party sites.

Why not? because I find them very distracting. I'm still looking for a way to kill live notifications on Facebook. The simple, unobtrusive icon on the top left is enough for me. The only thing I need to be constantly updated on my desktop is the clock, and that's standard since Win 95. At that, if it took much more than a tiny corner of the taskbar, I'd have bannished it, too.

So you may guess by now how I feel about the live tiles, especially when presented as an upgrade. It's like telling me "There's plenty of fresh seafood and live music!" as an inducement. You migth as well be saying "There's rotting garbage and the loudest car alarm you've ever heard!" At that, rotting garbage makes me less nauseated than seafood. Yuck!

Ok. As to search, I rarely use the search fucntion on my home PC. And I mean months go by between searches. I know where my programs and files are and how to get to them. I don't need to search. And 99% of what I use frequently is either a quick-launch icon on the taskbar, a shortcut on the desktop, or in the left side of the start menu.

I do searches for files more frequently at work, but still not every day ro even every month. And when I do it's because we need some obscure information, or a file that wasn't properly filed. While Iwould appreciate a faster search function for those times, I wouldn't care to cripple my PC in order to get it.

And I've no idea what a sliding desktop is. I took it to mean the tiles in the "modern" interface slide to the side rather than scroll down, but, if that's what ti means, I see no value in it. Quite the contrary. It's completely wrong as compared to my whole life's experience with PCs. When i need to scroll left or right I invariably feel annoyed.

Quote: P90

Sorry, but these are productivity increasing tools for a large number of tasks.

See my post above.

Quote:

No offense meant, but that's what memory is for.

Sure. When i open and close several programs and files in thsoe programs, I've no trouble telling what's on right now,a s opposed to five minutes ago. really. I'm willing to take a more tranquil approach, but don't say things like that.

Quote:

You see, a lot of the things you say are under the assumption that there is no wrong or right way, that there's my way and your way and someone else's way, and they are all equal.

No, they're not all equal. My way may not work for you. from what you've written, your way wouldn't work on me. And Win8's way seems to work on a tiny portion of the population at best. But if you think you can impose one way of working to fit billions of people, then we have nothing more to discuss.

Quote: Nareed

Seriously, consider the issue of live tiles. ... The only thing I need to be constantly updated on my desktop is the clock, and that's standard since Win 95.

I may also need to stay updated on CPU load, network load, storage capacity, etc.
If you're working in a multiple-operator project, it's desirable to stay updated on their progress and on overall project changes.
Really, anything that involves more than you doing things alone in a linear fashion can benefit from a dashboard system. It's just that there aren't always applications and proper UI components to facilitate it.

Quote: Nareed

No, they're not all equal. My way may not work for you. from what you've written, your way wouldn't work on me. And Win8's way seems to work on a tiny portion of the population at best.

Windows 8 is essentially an open beta. They have two OS in one: legacy Windows 7 desktop and their new UI. This is hampering them in major ways. And, like I said, the learning curve for the new UI is steep, it's like in the old days, you have to spend a few hours RTFM'ing rather than just jump in as you could with the 95 UI.

Quote: Nareed

But if you think you can impose one way of working to fit billions of people, then we have nothing more to discuss.

Not me, of course.
Millions of welders all work the same way; for every seam, there is one best amperage and an exact best sequence of hand movements to make it.
Millions of truckers all try to drive about the same way; for every truck and load, there is one best sequence of gears and throttle position, for every destination, one best route.
Millions of engineers all design things the same way; only high-level concept design is different, but there is one optimal way to implement any gear drive, one optimum thickness for every structural part, and one best way to arrive at it. They differ depending on the task, but not on who is doing it.

Computers aren't special. The best way to complete any given task depends on the task, but not on the person. It's just that, unlike with above professions, there isn't serious systematized education or certification for computer use, so most people self-learn, and most of them stop somewhere down the road and settle at some inefficient point once they build up enough false confidence.

The very fact that almost all keyboards still come with letters is a testament to this - though touch-typing takes ridiculously little time to learn compared to the time users waste hunt-and-pecking in just a single year. But they stubbornly stick with it, even if it's as much a way to type as pushing a car is a way to drive. Same thing with mouse grips, a lot of users continue using palm grip instead of growing up to fingertip with wrist support.

Proper k+m use is a big thing. Since both hands have to be on the keyboard to touch-type effectively, good practice is to minimize actions involving the mouse while working with text. When not working with text, good practice is to maximize left-side keyboard use to save on gestures and clicks, while fully eliminating right-side use. Generally, the more experienced a user, the more actions they perform with keyboard commands rather than with the mouse, including navigating menus and launching programs.

Quote: Nareed

I think we disagree, but I'm not sure. I find touch an especially bad idea in a laptop or desktop PC. Either via touch screen or touch pad. Fingers just aren't precise enough for a desktop or laptop, not for things like spreadheets, documents and such. I've less epxerience in design and photo editing, but I suspect touch would be terrible there, too.

I didn't state that using a spreadsheet or any applications was easier with a touch screen. I said the Metro UI wasn't a bad idea for a touch screen. Having what are essentially large buttons to hit with your finger is great. Of course, once that application opens up, you're stuck with a touch screen interface that might not work. Some portion of that blame will, of course, be leveled at application developers. Obviously, Microsoft would prefer that anybody designing an application do so with the intent that it be usable with a touch screen.

Quote: konceptum

I didn't state that using a spreadsheet or any applications was easier with a touch screen. I said the Metro UI wasn't a bad idea for a touch screen. Having what are essentially large buttons to hit with your finger is great.

Think it over. You have the keyboard and mouse right there, while the monitor or screen is relatively far away. You need to lift your arm, extend your shoulder and touch the screen. Think how often you use a mouse, now imagine doing that by touch. If you don't have permanent nerve damage within two years, great!

Quote:

Of course, once that application opens up, you're stuck with a touch screen interface that might not work. Some portion of that blame will, of course, be leveled at application developers. Obviously, Microsoft would prefer that anybody designing an application do so with the intent that it be usable with a touch screen.

And then there's that. For a spreadsheet going solely by touch you'd need huge cells and buttons. I don't even want to imagine such a nightmare.

Quote: Nareed

Think it over. You have the keyboard and mouse right there, while the monitor or screen is relatively far away. You need to lift your arm, extend your shoulder and touch the screen. Think how often you use a mouse, now imagine doing that by touch. If you don't have permanent nerve damage within two years, great!

Again, my original comment was:

Quote: me

The Metro UI interface seems like a pretty good idea, if you have a touch screen phone or tablet. It's cumbersome if you're not using such a device.

IE, devices which do NOT have a mouse or keyboard.

My statement stands. Using a touch screen phone or tablet, the Metro UI is probably not such a bad idea. On the other hand, for the normal desktop and/or laptop, I still don't like it.

Quote: konceptum

My statement stands. Using a touch screen phone or tablet, the Metro UI is probably not such a bad idea. On the other hand, for the normal desktop and/or laptop, I still don't like it.

Oh, then we don't disagree at all.

Found this article interesting. Apparently, the nebulous "they" are blaming Windows 8 for the drop in laptop sales, which also means now could be the best time to buy a new laptop. Hmmm. Do I need a new laptop?

Quote: konceptum

Found this article interesting. Apparently, the nebulous "they" are blaming Windows 8 for the drop in laptop sales, which also means now could be the best time to buy a new laptop. Hmmm. Do I need a new laptop?

But can you find a new laptop without Win8?

I can't believe I forgot to mention this, as it took me about a week of wrangling to get fixed. I don't understand all the specifics on it, but apparently Microsoft decided that with the release of Windows 8, they would write their own drivers for certain things. Including drivers for USB ports. And, since they have their own drivers, they preclude the ability to update those drivers, as by default the Microsoft drivers are considered up to date. So the problem I ran into was that my laptop included two USB-2 ports and two USB-3 ports. USB-3 ports are supposed to be up to 10 times faster than USB-2 ports. I started noticing that I wasn't noticing any difference between the two types of ports.

It took a lot of research and attempted fixes on my part. I first assumed that the drivers for the USB controllers were outdated, and tried to get updated ones from Acer. I also tried to get updated drivers from the devices I was using. I then found this article, and using the information there, I was able to get USB-3 speeds from my USB-3 ports.

Obviously, the blame game goes around and around, and nobody is really at fault, it's always the other guy. But man did this wrack my brain around for far longer than it really should have.

Quote: konceptum

I can't believe I forgot to mention this, as it took me about a week of wrangling to get fixed. I don't understand all the specifics on it, but apparently Microsoft decided that with the release of Windows 8, they would write their own drivers for certain things.

Back when Win98 was released I upgraded a Win95 PC to 98. At the time I was playing Rollercoaster Tycoon daily. the game started crashing, depsite having run without problems in that amchine for years. Eventually I noticed it crashed every time music from a ride began playing. So I looked at the driver for the sound card and found it was an MS driver that came with the new OS. I hunted online (not as easy back then, what with 96K modems, no broadband, etc),and found the manufacturer's driver. I installed it, and then the game stopped crashing.

I'm looking at buying a new laptop soon. I see quite a few with win7 still available, however I'm going with 8.

Windows 8 must be embraced :)

Let's suppose a car manufacturer came up with a new type of car. This is a great innovation in fuel consumption, as it gets you 100 miles to the gallon. Improvements under the hood also cut down the need to change the oil, eliminate oil leaks entirely, reduces the need for antifreeze, makes better use of brake fluid, among other things.

great, right?

Well, maybe not. As this new car has a top speed of 30 mph, which the manufacturer determined from telemetry of its customers few people exceed on average city driving, so there's no need for more. Also you steer with the pedals, signal with the steering wheel, accelerate with a new throttle lever placed on the right side of the driver, break with a lever on the left side, has hidden controls for the winshield wipers and A/C and heating, so as to amke better use of the dashboard (which now displays your position, the radio station, CD or MP3 you're listening to, the weather, your email, facebook and twitter updates, etc). Sure, you can't just sit down and drive, you need to read the manual first. But there's a tutrial in the dashboard. When you put the key in the ignition (now located on the floor so as not to get in your way), the dash display says "LOOK AROUND!"

Of course this is a bold experiment to break the pedal and steering-wheel paradigm. But it is the wave of the future. And see how much gas you'll save! Of course, you can't go voer 30 mph, but average city speeds are lower than this, so it's enough for you, yes? Isn't it enough for you? isn't it?

I personally enjoy your facetious example.

What's interesting to me with technology, sometimes, is that certain things that maybe don't need to be changed, are changed, and other things that should be changed, aren't. One good example, I believe, is the 160 character limit on text messaging. In 1984, nearly 30 years ago, it was determined, by analyzing *postcards* and *telex* messages that nobody needed to send a message more than 160 characters long. So for 30 years, the cell phone companies have stuck with this limit. Even though multiple data messaging services have sprung up because of the fact that 160 characters isn't enough anymore. And it seems that nobody wants to fix the traditional text messaging services to be able to handle more than 160 characters through the wireless signal.

Ok. So maybe this is just a personal thing for me. I enjoy text messaging, and do it quite a bit. Unlike the vast majority of people, I refuse to shorthand my messages or assume that "PWFOWITTSFAA"(*). Thus my messages are WELL over 160 characters in length. But, my point being, Windows, to me, was fine the way it was, and text messaging is not. I really would have rather that someone fix the text messaging issue rather than make Windows into something I don't like. But the stupid world won't do what I want!

(*) People Will Figure Out What I'm Trying To Say From Arbitrary Acronyms

Quote: Nareed

Let's suppose a car manufacturer came up with a new type of car. This is a great innovation in fuel consumption, as it gets you 100 miles to the gallon. Improvements under the hood also cut down the need to change the oil, eliminate oil leaks entirely, reduces the need for antifreeze, makes better use of brake fluid, among other things.
...
Well, maybe not. As this new car has a top speed of 30 mph ...

Except that's not the case. This new OS - car if you will - is actually faster than the old one. It goes 0-60 faster, tops out higher, and, if you get the performance (S2012) model, it's crash-resistant at higher speeds due to ReFS.

A better analogy would be that to get this new car over 30 mph, you need to RTFM first. Learn where the electronic speed limiter is located in the dashboard menus and what to do to unlock higher speeds. You have to connect the GPS, so the car can confirm you're not inside a 30 mph zone, turn on the proximity cameras, pick your local speed limit, pick the tolerances, and the car will stay within set tolerances from surrounding traffic and your road's speed limit.

Or, if you're a power user, type in an unlock command to disable these restrictions, but then the automatic gear changes will turn off and you'll have to drive stick, like power users do by definition.

Quote: Nareed

Also you steer with the pedals, signal with the steering wheel, accelerate with a new throttle lever placed on the right side of the driver, break with a lever on the left side, has hidden controls for the winshield wipers and A/C and heating, so as to amke better use of the dashboard (which now displays your position, the radio station, CD or MP3 you're listening to, the weather, your email, facebook and twitter updates, etc).

Nope. Nothing so fundamental has been touched. Steering is the mouse and pedals are the mouse buttons. 3 pedals+gear lever and 3 buttons+wheel.

But you're right about the wipers and AC and heating. There are no more knobs, switches and buttons for them. Instead all that stuff is controlled through menus on the touchscreen dashboard. Which you have to RTFM to start using, or be an experienced driver to understand without reading. And yes, there is a learning curve, and some things now take more time to do; but others take a lot less.

OR, you can say "screw this touchboard", cover it with tinfoil, and just drive with your gut. Of course, since you didn't disable the 30mph limiter, not being able to see the speed isn't a problem, nor do you need to see the revs because it's locked in automatic mode. But this way you can avoid learning these new "how do ya say, el-lo-tonics?" and QQ.

Quote: Nareed

the ignition (now located on the floor

Believe it or not, Saab located the ignition switch on the floor manby years ago. A friend was a Saab salesman which is how I happen t know.

Maybe the Chiese will relocate it in the headliner.

Quote: konceptum

I personally enjoy your facetious example.

Thanks.

Up to a point they're cathartic to write.

Quote:

What's interesting to me with technology, sometimes, is that certain things that maybe don't need to be changed, are changed, and other things that should be changed, aren't. One good example, I believe, is the 160 character limit on text messaging.

That's an excellent example. That's also why most people use other things rather than their native text message function, too.

Quote:

Ok. So maybe this is just a personal thing for me. I enjoy text messaging, and do it quite a bit. Unlike the vast majority of people, I refuse to shorthand my messages or assume that "PWFOWITTSFAA"(*). Thus my messages are WELL over 160 characters in length.

I'm like that, too. I'll shorthand a bit when necessary. otherwise I send multiple texts if that's what it takes.

Quote:

But, my point being, Windows, to me, was fine the way it was, and text messaging is not. I really would have rather that someone fix the text messaging issue rather than make Windows into something I don't like. But the stupid world won't do what I want!

Windows was great the way it was. Or, rather, the Windows desktop was great the way it was. had MS left the start menu in place, I'd have upgraded by now. And, yes, it's that important. I was apprehensive about the touch/modern thing, but when I saw the crippled desktop that was it.

I'm 99% sure, though, I'll wind up getting a Win8 PC with some shell utility to bypass "modern" and let me have a near-proper desktop; and with a Linux partition. Why? because then I'll be ready to switch to an all-Linux PC when MS goes over the edge and kills the desktop.

Quote: chickenman

Believe it or not, Saab located the ignition switch on the floor manby years ago. A friend was a Saab salesman which is how I happen t know.

I quite believe it.

In the 70s, some automatic cars ahd the high-beam headlight switch on the floor, too. I recall my dad griping about how hard he had to press to get it to come on.

Quote: Nareed

I quite believe it.

In the 70s, some automatic cars ahd the high-beam headlight switch on the floor, too. I recall my dad griping about how hard he had to press to get it to come on.

If I understand you here, meaning not in the directional or wipers "stalk" but the floor button for high beams dates back at least to the mid-fifties

Quote: chickenman

If I understand you here, meaning not in the directional or wipers "stalk" but the floor button for high beams dates back at least to the mid-fifties

I dind't know that. I'm not that old :)

I did own a Renault R-18 which had the horn control in the headlights lever. But that was better than the old R-4 which had the stick shift in the dashboard.

Also, while at that, the Model S dashboard (close-ups).



I see in my polycarbonate ball a lot of complaints, about 10% of them constructive.

How does one measure miscalculation?

Early on in the Win8 debacle, I rana cross an article that succeeded in infuriating me. The author wrote, mroe or less "The fact is that Windows 8 has everything you've been clamoring for. You wanted a touch interface. Done! You wanted iPad-style gestures. Done! You wanted a fast boot time. Done!"

Now, I admit I paid little mind to Windows 8 or to tablets before January 2013, but I think I'd been aware if there had been a general clamor for touch PCs or gesture controls in PCs. I did know people wanted faster boot times.

So what say you? Was there a large popular demand for touch-screens on PCs, and for gestures as controls?

If there was, then why is Win8 selling more poorly than Windows Vista ever dreaded?

Quote: Nareed

So what say you? Was there a large popular demand for touch-screens on PCs, and for gestures as controls?

As far as laptops go, from any reasonable replacement for my aging VPCZ I'll be expecting, at a minimum:
* 6hr+@<3lbs extensible to 18hr+ battery life
* Preferably implemented via detachable tablet section
* 1080p MVA or IPS touchscreen
* Windows 8.1 or higher


For my PC, I tried implementing a separate control touchscreen. Professional workstations have all been depending on touchscreens for many years - the lower screen is a touchscreen, used to control the system.
Unfortunately modern consumer OS just don't work like that, hasn't occurred to their makers to allow for starting programs from one touchscreen, but launching them on primary displays right away.

For what it's worth, here's what I'd like to see hit the market shortly so I can buy it:
Detachable ultrabook format -- removable touchscreen tablet plus keyboard dock
All-day use when docked; half-day tablet only is fine
Keyboard dock supports two external monitors without a $200 docking station

Then for normal daily use, I leave the dock attached to the monitors and use it as a laptop, with external keyboard/mouse, and have 3 monitors working: the two external and laptop display (I hear Win8 can do this?) Then I can detach the tablet and wander around the house or do tablet websurfing in the evening. For travel I unhook the whole thing and go.

There are two devices on the market right now that are close -- the Lenovo Helix and the Toshiba U10t -- but I don't think the battery life is there yet. The new Haswell chips have significantly better battery life and GPU performance, and to my knowledge there are no ultrabook detachables with Haswell yet.

Quote: Nareed

What I'd like to know is whether anyone's been using Windows 8 for serious, intensive work and how you've managed

I also didn't have time to mess with Microsoft's latest nonsense. Here is the cure:

http://www.stardock.com/products/start8/

This add-on only cost $5 (after a 30 day free trial) and it makes Windows 8 act like the older version of Windows we all are used to. This was the best $5 I ever spent

Quote: MathExtremist

There are two devices on the market right now that are close -- the Lenovo Helix and the Toshiba U10t -- but I don't think the battery life is there yet. The new Haswell chips have significantly better battery life and GPU performance, and to my knowledge there are no ultrabook detachables with Haswell yet.

Sony Vaio Z's have been offering 14-hour life with extended battery for years, and did so with full voltage quad-core CPU, 13.1" display, discrete GPU, SSD RAID. They've even been doing so with much older 32nm CPU, bluray drives (that can be replaced with more storage), and even after you add an extended battery to all that, still weighing in ultrabook range. Not a convertible, of course, but goes to show what's possible.

So not having Haswell shouldn't be an excuse; if it can be done with Clarksfield, it can be done with IB. But everyone tries to parrot Apple's styling - and aluminum's low strength and high weight means less to spare for the battery.
Convertible layout makes matters worse, and until this fashion for beer can metal passes, a lot of the weight budget has to go into the chassis. Battery gets the short stick, and it goes against the smooth lines to make it detachable - which would be of immense value to a convertible laptop due to varying requirements and hot swap possibility.

Quote: jon

I also didn't have time to mess with Microsoft's latest nonsense. Here is the cure:

http://www.stardock.com/products/start8/

This add-on only cost $5 (after a 30 day free trial) and it makes Windows 8 act like the older version of Windows we all are used to. This was the best $5 I ever spent

Thanx for the link, will give it a spin.

Quote: jon

I also didn't have time to mess with Microsoft's latest nonsense.

Oh, that's priceless!

Seriously, I know about Start8, and Classic Shell, and Pokki, and many others. I mentioned here or on DT they're a possible solution. But, and this is what really worries me, I think Microsoft will eliminate the desktop by Windows 9. Sure, one could keep running Win8, or better yet the superior Win7, for years and years. But there won't be as much development for desktop-based programs if Win9 ships without one. That means no new browsers, office suites, utilities, etc etc.

Still, as I ponder my options it seems likely I'll wind up in a few months with a Win8 (yuck!) PC with some shell utility to make it work, and a Linux partition to get used to that.

On a completely unrelated matter, Windows 8 must be destroyed.

Quote: Nareed

But, and this is what really worries me, I think Microsoft will eliminate the desktop by Windows 9. Sure, one could keep running Win8, or better yet the superior Win7, for years and years. But there won't be as much development for desktop-based programs if Win9 ships without one. That means no new browsers, office suites, utilities, etc etc.

I don't care about new office suites per se; I've been using Office 2002 for 12 years now. What I do care about is the ability to work with large amounts of information at once. I have 2 27" monitors going and can realistically view 4 full-sized documents simultaneously (or 6-8 if I get creative). I vastly prefer that to either (a) hitting alt+tab and going back and forth, or (b) printing everything out. Currently open on my desktop is a spreadsheet with 1300 rows, two different 200+ page PDFs, and a 16-page word document.

Quote: MathExtremist

What I do care about is the ability to work with large amounts of information at once. I have 2 27" monitors going and can realistically view 4 full-sized documents simultaneously (or 6-8 if I get creative).

What I'm willing to wager is that you control all that with a keyboard and mouse, and would suffer great hardship if you had to rely on a touch screen. Possibly also if you had to rely on "gestures" with the mouse rather than simple point and click. But you'd know better than I.

I've never used more than one monitor at a time. Largely this is because I've never had more than one monitor at a time. At work I don't even ahve room for another one.

Quote: Nareed

What I'm willing to wager is that you control all that with a keyboard and mouse, and would suffer great hardship if you had to rely on a touch screen. Possibly also if you had to rely on "gestures" with the mouse rather than simple point and click. But you'd know better than I.

I do, yes, and I obviously need a keyboard for rapid data entry. However, a touchscreen in addition to a mouse would be welcome. I'm not going to replace my 2 large monitors, but a 3rd smaller one in front of me would be just fine. I do a lot of back-and-forth between scrolling and typing, and if I could scroll with my hands as in "Minority Report," my life would be better:

(though no overhead spotlights, and I definitely want to keep my window)

Quote: MathExtremist

I do, yes, and I obviously need a keyboard for rapid data entry. However, a touchscreen in addition to a mouse would be welcome. I'm not going to replace my 2 large monitors, but a 3rd smaller one in front of me would be just fine. I do a lot of back-and-forth between scrolling and typing, and if I could scroll with my hands as in "Minority Report," my life would be better

Are you up for a bet? This is, after all, a gambling site :)

Here's the bet: if you get a touch screen and use it, I bet you'll develop arm/shoulder trouble within six months. For stakes I proppose $10. What say you?

BTW, if I had to scroll a la Minority Report, my arms would fall off ;)

Quote: Nareed

Are you up for a bet? This is, after all, a gambling site :)

Here's the bet: if you get a touch screen and use it, I bet you'll develop arm/shoulder trouble within six months. For stakes I proppose $10. What say you?

BTW, if I had to scroll a la Minority Report, my arms would fall off ;)

I am honorable, so I can't take the bet. I already have arm/shoulder trouble, and I have cause to believe that the ergonomics involved with the touchscreens I would actually use would improve my situation, not worsen it. The last thing I'd be doing is reaching out two feet in front of me all day long...

And I think scrolling a la Minority Report would likely make you stronger over time. Of course, proper technique would require training:

Quote: MathExtremist

I've been using Office 2002 for 12 years now. What I do care about is the ability to work with large amounts of information at once.

We frequently work large data sets ~~ 1 million rows and found that Power Pivot for Excel (free add in) is pretty good but requires, I believe, Excel 2010 or later but I hear what you are saying about older versions of Office - mostly as good as the latest since many of the "upgrades" were cosmetic

Still using XP on this machine and is fine, but also need for some legacy apps

Quote: MathExtremist

What I do care about is the ability to work with large amounts of information at once. I have 2 27" monitors going and can realistically view 4 full-sized documents simultaneously (or 6-8 if I get creative).

Oh, yeah, pain in the back, you have to live with bezels just so you can have adequately sized working space. I can't wait till they mass-implement proper 4K interfaces on TVs. There already are affordable 4K TVs on the market, but there's no point in having that resolution if you can't actually deliver 3840x2160 picture. As for 4K monitors, there's no point in having so many pixels if the screen is so small that you have to double-size everything.

HDMI is as always the antithesis of what its name implies, it's been holding back increases in display resolution for years. Most modern high-grade 1080p TVs' panels already run at 1920x2160 internally, though they do make use of these extra subpixels for color accuracy. Had a better interface like DisplayPort been standardized upon, we'd already have brands competing through gradual resolution creep-up.

Quote: MathExtremist

I am honorable, so I can't take the bet. I already have arm/shoulder trouble, and I have cause to believe that the ergonomics involved with the touchscreens I would actually use would improve my situation, not worsen it.

Well, then. $10 says a touch screen will not improve your situation. How about it?

Quote: Nareed

Well, then. $10 says a touch screen will not improve your situation. How about it?

And how do you propose to evaluate the result of the wager?