Jump to content
Strawberry Orange Banana Lime Leaf Slate Sky Blueberry Grape Watermelon Chocolate Marble
Strawberry Orange Banana Lime Leaf Slate Sky Blueberry Grape Watermelon Chocolate Marble

MSFN is made available via donations, subscriptions and advertising revenue. The use of ad-blocking software hurts the site. Please disable ad-blocking software or set an exception for MSFN. Alternatively, register and become a site sponsor/subscriber and ads will be disabled automatically. 



JorgeA

Windows 8 - Deeper Impressions

Recommended Posts

Amazon Lowers Prices of Kindle Fire HD 8.9, Further Pressuring Other Tablet Makers ( Thurrott 2013-03-13 )

Amazon cuts prices of Kindle Fire HD 8.9 models ( NeoWin 2013-03-14 )

More last-minute Galaxy S IV images, specs and features leak ( NeoWin 2013-03-14 )

BlackBerry: Unnamed partner bought one million BlackBerry 10 phones ( NeoWin 2013-03-13 )

Just a small sample of the many daily stories which spell nothing but trouble for Microsoft, and their genius Plan-A strategy to gain some marketshare in the mobile space by Destroying Windows and having everyone come running to their Playskool Windows ReTard platform. There is action everywhere in the mobile space, except for Microsoft. Apple is working up their next iPhone and iPad refresh and additionally has new form factors such as watches and TVs in the pipeline and probably some other stuff no-one has even thought of, and all that will rack up percentage points in the iOS column canceling out whatever anemic gains "Windows" manages to gain.

I have said many times that even if all companies except Microsoft simply went on vacation for a couple of years releasing no products at all, they still couldn't penetrate this market to any real extent, let alone enough to justify the murder of its signature product and the intentional arrogant insulting of her user base. So even if every company just stopped all production to give Microsoft a chance, buyers would simply run to eBay and buy used devices choosing them over brand new MicroJunk. All that remains to be done is to psychoanalyze the perpetrators of this asinine strategy, the upper level management, their mindless rubber stamp Board of Directors, and all the narcissistic surrogates and enablers around the blogosphere that cheer led them on.

Low Cost Products Drive Forecast Increases in the Tablet Market, According to IDC ( IDC 2013-03-12 )

Report: Windows to Make Small Gains in Tablet Market by 2017 ( Thurrott 2013-03-12 )

Microsoft tablet share predicted to grow to 10% by 2017 ( NeoWin 2013-03-13 )

Keep hope alive! They are just looking at tablets where OEMs are the main driver and allegedly results in a growth from the current 4.3% to 10% penetration in 4 years. Even that is questionable though, because those extra 5.7% percentage points must come from someone else, and that is Android and iOS they believe. Even if true, how does the tradeoff of murdering Windows and customer loyalty justify this little possible gain that practically falls into the statistical noise? Taking all mobile into account, tablets, phones and the new form factors we haven't seen yet, then what happens? Even less gain. The tablet space is the only place they are even vaguely present. The competition on phones is enormous with Blackberry just coming out now and another Galaxy tsunami just over the horizon. The rumored wristwatch and maybe even eyeglass market will also count in "mobile" and there does not appear to be a Microsoft plan in the works yet. The only question is, what will the geniuses in Redmond decide to destroy chasing down a few percentage points in that new arena?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It’s Time to Bring Back NT. Windows NT meant something. It still can ( Thurrott 2013-03-11 )

Paul "The Desktop Must Die" Thurrott in his trademark bipolar fashion is once again testing the waters of sanity, sticking his foot in and sloshing it around, but not yet ready to jump in. To be clear, he is using NT in the generic sense, not the specific enterprise server Windows 3 and mostly 4 versions that were quietly perfected behind the scenes while Win9x was in the consumer spotlight. Many of his commenters cannot quite understand his use of NT as a term for top shelf, practically bug free design of a pure operating system though, so he is forced to explain this over and over in the comments.

In some ways Paul has essentially come around to my own way of thinking now ( Post #1811 ) of the traditional delineation of Server, Client and Workstation. He must be beginning to realize that his many columns have had no influence turning us all into loyal mSheep and so he continues to offer modest half-hearted suggestions to turn around the ongoing Metro fiasco.

Predictably some of his commenters who are even bigger MicroZealots than he is, are irredeemably obstinate when they perceive back-peddaling that threatens their new toy ...

Uber-Fanboy ... I could not disagree more vehemently. I grew up with all that. I suffered the pain of NT 3 until 4 finally got decent. I don't understand all the resistance from so-called power users to embracing Windows 8. I'm not looking back. I'm not stuck in the "way we've always done it" concept. I just feel like lining everyone of these people and slapping them solidly across the face. I am absolutely convinced that Windows 8 and Metro is the way to go and that having this hybrid OS for now is the right thing since A) Metro apps aren't fully mature and B) there are considerably large numbers of legacy programs people need to use. But it's no excuse NOT to push as hard as possible to push Metro into its full potential. I just don't believe you people get what that potential is and how to drive it. Instead, you all seem to want to apply a death grip to cascades of windows and a Start button. NT can die.

The common thread throughout this entire conflict is the clear divide between MicroSheep and all those others that prefer choice. Choice is an alien concept to these dictatorial narcissists and they will have none of it. Furthermore they want none of it for anyone else. They want Microsoft to choose the interface and theme for everyone else. I wonder if uber-Fanboy lets his wife or boyfriend or mother pick out his clothes too?

Historically Microsoft showed this arrogance way back in the 2001 Windows XP cycle when they chose to lock down the UxTheme engine to approved themes, and many of us never forgot that. It was a new paradigm that contradicted the previously open themes dating back to Plus! for Windows 95. Of course we got around this by patching the theme engine in Windows XP and subsequent releases and moved on. But their inexplicable arrogance seems to have just percolated away up in Redmond and is now ubiquitous in every decision they make. Then these enablers step in to justify and rationalize it. The result is that Microsoft is now a morph of IBM and Apple, specifically all their bad characteristics rolled into one corporate entity.

There are a lot of comments at that article, and so many are upset or confused that he immediately clarifies his position in another column ...

Fixing Windows 8: Advice for Users and for Microsoft ( Thurrott 2013-03-13 )

Thing is, he still doesn't really get it at all. The word choice is in very short supply over there. "Choice" is the solution he is always missing. This new interface controversy merely is a small part of the larger concept of freedom of choice, a concept he needs to learn long before his "advice" will ever be useful to anyone.

In the real world we have been experimenting with alternative launchers since Windows 95, and even before that during the entire DOS and WinDOS era. We have always been on the lookout for better interface elements, themes, shells and file managers, etc. These MetroTards simply are unaware of the 3rd party universe and like a person that needs their mommy to pick their outfit, they require Microsoft to pick their interface, right down to the wallpaper and colors. It's a wonder that they didn't all gravitate to Windows "Starter" Editions where Microsoft did just that.

Paul, what is needed is Choice to run Metro and/or a traditional Start Menu ( with subchoices to customize that further since they always introduce aggravating changes with each new version ). Choice to use the Ribbon and/or the traditional Menu Bar. Choice to use Breadcrumb navigation and/or Address Bar navigation and/or traditional TreeView GUI ( with the freakin up-one-level arrow shortcut! ). Choice to use crappy handicap icons and/or full-color icons. Choice to use Metro apps in FullScreen and/or Windowed fashion.

The list is practically endless. And for every one of these new changes that Microsoft foists upon the Windows user base, each one should be required to have a checkbox option to painlessly and seamlessly fall back to the earlier code. It's how it was always done. See here ...

4RTKyc5.jpgWvrh0sz.jpg

If you don't want to see hidden files or have the Run command displayed on the Start Menu that's fine, for you. But you do not unilaterally make such decisions for everyone else.

In the arrogant Microsoft paradigm endorsed by MicroZealots and MetroTards, all the options are simply taken away, with no configuration available. This is what they still don't get. And neither does Thurrott, yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Microsoft abandon the desktop to the Windows Blue

"Clearly, this is a serious change and there are some risks, but the company ready to take that step. This is necessary not only to bring the interface to a single concept, but for ease of reading the OS end users" - said in a private conversation, a source directly involved in the development of new OS.

:realmad: :realmad: :realmad:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JorgeA    607

I see it more about the endless attempts to change the QWERTY (or AZERTY) keyboard layout.

As you might know there are several (mostly anecdotal) explanations why you have before you a keyboard with letters set in what seems (and partially is) assembled casually with keys in a "random" order.

As well there are even more vague "proofs" about the Dvorak layout being more efficient or faster.

There were also some attempts - pointed out as an example in the book I earlier cited - The psychology of everyday things - to put keys in alphabetic order (that obviously failed).

If you ever used a GUI like blackbox, you would see how it represents (as I see it) an evolution, while you still have (if you want) the program bar at the bottom, and even the start button, you do not need to travel with the mouse to lower left corner to "start" something, you instead right-click *anywhere* and get the same menu/choices.

But still,it never took.

Rolling up windows are a much faster (and practical) way to work with more than one window in several cases, yet AFAIK the feature never went "upstream".

Example:

http://www.actualtools.com/windowmanager/help/features/rollup.php

I have to admit, that is a pretty cool tool there. I'd never heard of it.

But maybe that's precisely the reason that these sorts of things haven't caught on: not enough people know about them. The maxim "Build a better mousetrap, and the world will beat a path to your door" isn't quite correct -- the world needs to learn about your better mousetrap somehow. Word-of-mouth can do it, but not every time!

But please consider how these all represent "added" features to the "same" base actions that *every* desktop has in common, and not "replacements", just like a keyboard with the added "multimedia" buttons or the "windows" keys mantain the same exact QWERTY placement keys and adds a few keys.

Yup. Going along with your keyboard analogy, these Start Menu replacements have come into being because Microsoft eliminated (for example) the Delete key, :w00t: and so OEMs and third-party developers have developed various different ways to replace the lost functionality with utilities that issue the necessary commands.

--JorgeA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Microsoft abandon the desktop to the Windows Blue

"Clearly, this is a serious change and there are some risks, but the company ready to take that step. This is necessary not only to bring the interface to a single concept, but for ease of reading the OS end users" - said in a private conversation, a source directly involved in the development of new OS.

:realmad: :realmad: :realmad:

You see that whopper of a lie in there ...

"As the recent survey, the greatest annoyance of users is not the absence of the classic Start menu or the new interface, and dissonance being made by two rather different environment. Users switching between interfaces, there are certain short-term discomfort caused disorientation, which in turn causes a negative subconscious as a product in general, and to the work process. "

A total lie. That is just the opinion of certain MetroTards, the ones that say they didn't get enough Metro and want even more.

This move would be a critical mistake, not for Microsoft, but for MSFT. This would, if government is on its toes, kick in the antitrust actions once the desktop is removed.

Windows 8 with the desktop can at least pretend to be a neutral operating system that allows anyone to develop programs for it. Without the desktop and only having Metro as the interface and environment means that Windows is no longer an operating system at all, but a Microsoft facilitator that allows only programs that pass through their gatekeeping. I hope this rumor wakes everyone up. Microsoft needs to be broken up, at the minimum the OS div needs to be ripped out of there and sent a million miles away with no interaction with Microsoft whatsoever. People need to start the ball rolling by badgering their governments and representatives now.

If true, this is a brazen attempt to convert their "special" long-standing monopoly into a private cash register. It is unethical and immoral. It is also illegal if the past history of monopolies is recalled. Rockefeller, Vanderbilt, Morgan, Carnegie or even the Sopranos wouldn't dream of the scale of this takeover. I have no more patience for these crooks, or those that enable them.

sopranos_stern01.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JorgeA    607

I have said many times that even if all companies except Microsoft simply went on vacation for a couple of years releasing no products at all, they still couldn't penetrate this market to any real extent, let alone enough to justify the murder of its signature product and the intentional arrogant insulting of her user base. So even if every company just stopped all production to give Microsoft a chance, buyers would simply run to eBay and buy used devices choosing them over brand new MicroJunk.

That's the crux of the matter, isn't it.

--JorgeA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
My favorite (not surprisingly) would be fvwm95. What's the closest to it nowadays in the Linux world? I'm talking of course about a Windows-like Linux start menu.

Mainstream UIs like KDE and GNOME are familiar to Windows users. The exception is Unity, which is far closer to Windows 8 in methodology and drew a similar level of controversy. Past these you're into the second tier of window managers, which aren't as well supported. Of the stuff that's not too old, IceWM is probably as close as you get to a design that is intentionally like Windows rather than "inspired by".

EDIT: adding screenshots

Icewmstartmenu.png

Icewm-default.jpg

Edited by HalloweenDocument12

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"The problem (with touch-screen PCs) is the price points are high," IDC analyst Bob O'Donnell told IBD. "And Microsoft has created the impression that you have to have touch (to use Windows 8)."

I did some work for someone on a Windows 8 laptop yesterday, which I think was the first time. This means that my tasks were goal-oriented and that I would be configuring options that are not necessarily within my general usage range. Being that I was in a goal oriented mindset rather than exploratory (such as one is when writing technology reviews), I found Windows 8 drawbacks to be even more noticeable.

For starters, I kept wanting to touch the screen even though it wasn't a touch screen. The interface looking as it does had that effect. It's as if iOS had 'X' buttons on the applications but they were strictly cosmetic. Even if you knew this you'd still want to press the 'X' to close applications. But more importantly, I knew that if it were a touch screen it would operate more intuitively and that mouse navigation was a second class citizen.

Second, regardless of human interface, getting to where I needed to be took objectively longer due to the context changes, mechanical travel (either hand or mouse pointer), and number of clicks to arrive at the desired destination. Having the Charms Bar change context based on location is not something I am mentally prepared for as in my mind it's a floating omni-bar, not the equivalent of a right-click context menu. It looking native to the Metro interface and not Desktop does not help, either. Something else I did, even though I knew what was going to happen, was to move the cursor down to the lower left, clicking in vain for the start menu. It's part of me being used to it, but, I think more importantly, I'm doing this because the interface is not giving me enough clues as to where else to go.

Something missing from most tech reviews is this notion of being exploratory rather than goal oriented. When you're exploring, you're going to be more patient and have more mental resources dedicated to solving interface problems because you simply have nothing better to do. When there's a goal involved you will be much more conscious about how the interface is slowing you down and how you can't spare the mental capacity when you're trying to keep the goal in mind. The reviewers who do understand this distinction were universally negative. Perhaps the best reviews are the ones where test subjects are used with minor goals provided by the host. People will behave differently with even minor pressure to perform. I feel a bit stupid for saying this because I'm describing scientific UI testing, which should be a given, but...well...

And then there's this classic, which for sure has been posted in here (doesn't embed for some reason and doesn't link unless it's youtu.be):

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If you ever used a GUI like blackbox, you would see how it represents (as I see it) an evolution, while you still have (if you want) the program bar at the bottom, and even the start button, you do not need to travel with the mouse to lower left corner to "start" something, you instead right-click *anywhere* and get the same menu/choices.

The right-click program launcher predated the Start Menu with NeXTSTEP. I couldn't find a screenshot demonstrating this but did for AfterStep, which is a clone:

http://systhread.net/texts/2009xvishist-img/afmenu.png

Not only were the menus available everywhere, they were objects that could be stickied if desired, so if you needed quick access to, say, the "open" command, you could sticky the menu column it was in until you didn't need ready access to it anymore.

Edited by HalloweenDocument12

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jaclaz    943

Yes and I had (added as a third party tool) rolling up windows in a Mac OS 7.1, that was 1994 or so.

Here is a Next screenshot with a couple "right click" items expanded and pinned:

screenb.jpg

@Charlotte

Just for your interest, I have a NT 4.00 machine working 24/7 since several years, so not only I don't remember any "pain" (because so many years have passed) but I also completely miss them currently.

As a matter of fact, if you manage to get the "right" hardware (in the sense of getting the "right" drivers for it), a NT 4.00 is still today a pleasure to work on.

jaclaz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While looking at the Windows 8 usability videos I came across one from Chicago, the Windows 95 development project:

The user had uploaded this to demonstrate that users get over UI roadblocks but he overlooked two important things:

1. The final Windows 95 product differed drastically from the one used in this study, and such was driven by testing feedback.

2. People still have problems double-clicking. In fact, the tester said exactly what the problem was in 1993: "Oh. It's too sensitive then." It's also a problem knowing when to double click as opposed to single-clickng, also demonstrated in the video. Microsoft acknowledges this because they've spent significant effort changing clicking behavior over the years.

Edited by HalloweenDocument12

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just for your interest, I have a NT 4.00 machine working 24/7 since several years, so not only I don't remember any "pain" (because so many years have passed) but I also completely miss them currently.

As a matter of fact, if you manage to get the "right" hardware (in the sense of getting the "right" drivers for it), a NT 4.00 is still today a pleasure to work on.

I believe it. They really had their act together in the Cutler days and stayed tight all the way up to Win2k. When they merged everything at WinXP they introduced many avenues of breakage and IMHO never really caught up to all the bugs ever since. Now it would appear they intend to simply wash their hands of the whole matter, service the children and fanboys and win by attrition.

Of course the Uber-Fanboy at Thurrott's site won't believe what you say. :no: And even if he did he would just label you a resistor of change. You will buy MicroToys if you know what's good for you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JorgeA    607

"Deeper Impressions" is back!!

post-287775-0-82107300-1363298879_thumb.

A big Thank You to EVERYONE who's online!

:thumbup

--JorgeA

P.S. And when I submitted it and checked again, the figure was up to 180!! :thumbup:thumbup

Edited by JorgeA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
vinifera    98

Microsoft abandon the desktop to the Windows Blue

"Clearly, this is a serious change and there are some risks, but the company ready to take that step. This is necessary not only to bring the interface to a single concept, but for ease of reading the OS end users" - said in a private conversation, a source directly involved in the development of new OS.

:realmad: :realmad: :realmad:

well let them force their crap

when their stock falls down

when they lose loyal customers and home users (aka desktop users), and those either stay on win xp or "7" or switch to Linux

maybe they'll come to some sense

for now there's no need for panic

both XP and "7" will endure alteast next 2 win versions, if not 3

Edited by vinifera

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×