Your Thoughts: Windows 10

So, what do we all think of Windows 10? More specifically, if you watched today's presentation, do you like the fact that Cortana is now on the PC?

They showed off a feature in Outlook on Windows 10 for Phone that lets you swipe left to delete an email, and swipe right to flag it. Now, granted, on iOS the process is a little bit different (you swipe all the way left to delete, and slightly left to show more options), but it seems far to similar to the Mail app in iOS 8.

I'm not a fan of Project Spartan. It seems a little too basic for what I like. I understand that Microsoft are trying to bring people back to their own browser, but unless there's something really groundbreaking in it, I don't think they're going to win many people over from Chrome or Firefox. The design looks of Spartan looks a little too 'Yosemiteish' too.

I'm personally looking forward to the Technical Preview being released. I installed VirtualBox today and now I'm just waiting for the preview to be released.

I am I massive Microsoft nerd. (I say as I type this on an Ubuntu computer on Chrome). I've been righting a lot of Java recently, and you appreciate that .Net got right everything Java got wrong. I love the entire developer ecosystem for .Net and am really excited about the cross-platform stuff coming in Windows 10.

I haven't been following it that much, but am really looking forward to it. I do think it will be much more popular than Windows 8, (it is only every other version of windows is actually good). I just can't wait for C# 6 - though that is totally unrelated to Windows 10.

Perhaps I'm just getting older, but I can't even muster the enthusiasm to go watch whatever presentations are out there. My main "do work" computer runs XP SP2. My laptop runs 8.1. I prefer XP over 8.1, but think that 8.1 is superior to everything released since XP. Will 10 beat either or both? I really find that I just don't care. Over the years they've just been trickling in features I either don't have a use for, or could never understand why they weren't implemented ages ago… while with the other hand they take away features I've come to depend on.

And no, and by missing features I don't mean the Start menu. Metro's better. There, I said it. I mean like how older .NET applications no longer work under later versions of Windows, and how the Explorer interface is going downhill. I understand that maintaining full backwards compatibility involves an impractical amount of work, but if I can do more with an older OS, why upgrade??

Cortana will be just like Siri. Both boil down to the same voice-command software that I ran on my 486 before my age hit double digits, but with about twenty years of polish so you don't have to repeat yourself a bunch of times, and a search engine so they can answer questions. Clever stuff, but… who wants to be seen in public talking to their computer? Personally I can read faster than most people talk, so it's faster for me to do a manual web search in most cases anyways. Most people I know turn off Siri.

I haven't watched the presentation and can't see myself doing so, but I saw something saying it will be free. I really don't quite get the point of this really, as far as I was aware it was their biggest source of revenue (at least I presume). Apart from getting people in to Office subscriptions I don't see how this will make money, although OEM licenses might cost something.

Bomb Bloke, on 23 January 2015 - 01:27 AM said:

Over the years they've just been trickling in features I either don't have a use for, or could never understand why they weren't implemented ages ago… while with the other hand they take away features I've come to depend on.

I completely understand where you are coming from. It's the same with OS X, possible even a bit more so now they're doing releases every year. There isn't really that much they can think of adding, there hasn't really been a big break through in computer interfaces (in terms of how you use it, now how it looks) since the release of OS X (10.0) and XP. I somewhat hope that there will be another break through soon, but releases like OS X Yosemite have been more like steps backward. Part of my thinks that the current way we are interacting with computers will disappear sooner or later.

Lion was a "big" update! It's biggest "feature" was removing Rosetta… for no other reason than that they couldn't be bothered updating it. That went down well, especially since Apple didn't bother to mention it on their product description page. Oh, and it added some gimmicky trackpad-swiping stuff, and a feature which automatically blew through people's internet caps by attempting to upload their iPhoto libraries into the "cloud".

A lot of these "superficial changes" has to do with hardware being way more powerful than what the average consumer actually requires. Sure, if you want to run the latest games, you need a lot of horsepower. For day to day tasks? Not so much, so instead that processor power gets put to work generating translucent windows and other such rubbish. Twenty or thirty years ago, each new hardware revision opened up doorways to new practical features, but then the limits of what hardware could do overtook the limits of what we needed it to do, and since that time interface developers have basically been trying to prove their worth as "artists" moreso than anything else. The fashion world has invaded the tech world, for crying out loud!

But those of us who were around before computers were common place are able to compare modern day progress to the world changing technologies appearing as such machines were initially deployed and refined, and obviously each new feature looks a bit rubbish in comparison.

I doubt much will change until proper VR becomes possible. Though even that won't bring many "surprises" - all the interface designs will simply be rehashes of what we've seen in Ghost in the Shell and the like.

The main area of progress in "recent times" has been in regards to storage and internet access. Those've really shot up in the last few years, and since they were somewhat restrictive not all that long ago, quite a few handy-dandy related features have appeared as a result.

oeed, on 23 January 2015 - 01:49 AM said:

I haven't watched the presentation and can't see myself doing so, but I saw something saying it will be free. I really don't quite get the point of this really, as far as I was aware it was their biggest source of revenue (at least I presume). Apart from getting people in to Office subscriptions I don't see how this will make money, although OEM licenses might cost something.

I assume that the "home" version of 10 will be free. I'd consider it likely that there'll be "pro", "ultimate" and likely "server" editions available for purchase separately.

My laptop runs Lubuntu, and I don't see very many reasons to upgrade to Windows 10. First of all, money.
Second, Windows 10 would be fairly heavy on the thing. It has 1GB RAM, an 80GB (which means seventy-something GB) hard disk, and a modest graphics card. It cannot handle Ubuntu Unity 7, so it cannot handle Windows 10, or 7 or 8 for that matter, very well because they use similar effects. And all special effects like blur and translucency require at least a decent amount of video memory and cpu because of the need to do the 'blur' math for every frame. And for what? So that it looks cool? Lubuntu hasn't caused me any problems.

As for the features of windows 10, if I were to choose it over 8, I would. Windows 8 sucks. Windows 10 did have some nice features, such as this new-fangled start menu (which lub already has) and a browser that is not Internet Explorer. Cortana seems like an interesting experiment, but I wouldn't be comfortable with telling an AI what to do.
It does look sort-of like a Macintosh with a different desktop environment (haha), what with the color scheme and the lack of visible features. The spartan browser looks like a trimmed-down version of Opera, and definitely isn't going to persuade me to use it over Firefox. It may even be as bad as IE; I don't know.

Let's assume I have an ubermachine, with 64GB of RAM, two 1TB SSDs, the best nvidia graphics card, and an octo-core 3.7GHz processor. Would I get Windows 10 on it?
I'd definitely consider it. Either Windows 10 or 7, but I would get an Ubuntu partition for duel-boot.

[SORT-OF OFF TOPIC]

Bomb Bloke, on 23 January 2015 - 01:27 AM said:

My main "do work" computer runs XP SP2.

Why do you have XP SP2 when there was a third service pack?

As I am using Windows 10 since it has been released as a Technical Preview on my main maschine I have to admit that it is good. Yes, it is good. The start menu, the way they moved Windows apps onto the desktop. It is just fine. After Windows 8 I personally never believed that Microsoft would be able to do something right. I also do use Linux a lot. I use it to develop applications, compile my programs or for gaming as far as it is possible. Sadly it is not normal that every game gets released for Linux which is the only reason why I am still using Windows. Sure, it could use Mac OS but I do not accept to pay too much money for a computer just to have a special operating system running on it. For the things I do, Linux is by far the best operating system but I often forget this while using Windows. Not to get me wrong: Windows 10 is great but not for me. For me it is just the only way to play games. Not more. Windows 7 did this, Windows XP did this.
I think Microsoft is wasting time. They should stop messing around with their store and apps and get back to what Windows is: An operating system for people who want to play games or work in an office. There are already Android and iOS for people who want to use a tablet to surf on the internet etc. If Microsoft realizes what Windows is, they might make it better again. I think, they are at the point now, where they realize this.

oeed, on 23 January 2015 - 01:49 AM said:

Part of my thinks that the current way we are interacting with computers will disappear sooner or later.

I have to agree with you but I can only say: Hopefully it won't change. Image, you are sitting in an office working with Excel while touching around on your computer. I hope the way we are using computers will never disappear. Instead they should improve the way we use computers. I think Microsoft's try to implement an AI into a desktop system might be the right way to go. If they always remember that, we will be on the right way.

I don't know if I want Cortana on my task bar. It's really down to whether or not voice-recognition is at a point where it can consistently work to a level where it actually saves the user time. I know that half the time that I try to use Siri, it doesn't understand what I've said, and it's just quicker for me to unlock my iPhone/iPad and do what I want done by myself.

Windows XP was an operating system that lasted a very long time because it was reliable, and people liked it. Now, updates are becoming more and more frequent. Maybe it's because technology is advancing quicker, and there is more competition in the industry, but then maybe it's because computers are everywhere.
When XP came out, computers were still relatively new to the home, so the operating system was designed for work. Even when computers did enter the home, their primary purpose was still for work. Nowadays, everyone in the family seems to be using the computer, and many homes have more than one computer in them. Microsoft seems to be steering away from the full-featured OS they had in the past and more toward an OS that's for the family. What they seem to have forgotten is that Windows is still the most popular OS for the workplace and that people still need advanced features. I think Microsoft need to look at the "work-life balance" in their operating system.

JamsoWamso, on 24 January 2015 - 12:59 AM said:

When XP came out, computers were still relatively new to the home, so the operating system was designed for work.

Weeerrrlllllll, not really. It was hot on the heels of 2000, which was designed for business environments. Probably the most commonly used version of XP is even called XP Home. It was the first Windows release to really start going into "let's make the interface look pretty" territory, with it's "baby's first computer"-style rounded edges everywhere and all that gunk.
Plus a whole heap of changes to dumb-down the interface for the novice user.

Like the search dog. 'nuff said.

My XP system has most of those changes reverted, and thus looks rather more like a '95 system but with a much higher resolution display.

LDDestroier, on 23 January 2015 - 01:13 PM said:

Why do you have XP SP2 when there was a third service pack?

Because I didn't like the third service pack. The most notable change it made was to add in a bunch of indexing stuff which appeared to malfunction and bog down every computer I saw running it. And without that, what did you have? What I already have. Heck, even SP2 brought some detrimental changes. I've learned my lesson - don't fix what's not broke.

oeed, on 23 January 2015 - 01:49 AM said:

I haven't watched the presentation and can't see myself doing so, but I saw something saying it will be free. I really don't quite get the point of this really, as far as I was aware it was their biggest source of revenue (at least I presume). Apart from getting people in to Office subscriptions I don't see how this will make money, although OEM licenses might cost something.

Bomb Bloke, on 23 January 2015 - 01:27 AM said:

Over the years they've just been trickling in features I either don't have a use for, or could never understand why they weren't implemented ages ago… while with the other hand they take away features I've come to depend on.

I completely understand where you are coming from. It's the same with OS X, possible even a bit more so now they're doing releases every year. There isn't really that much they can think of adding, there hasn't really been a big break through in computer interfaces (in terms of how you use it, now how it looks) since the release of OS X (10.0) and XP. I somewhat hope that there will be another break through soon, but releases like OS X Yosemite have been more like steps backward. Part of my thinks that the current way we are interacting with computers will disappear sooner or later.

Bomb Bloke, on 24 January 2015 - 01:48 AM said:

JamsoWamso, on 24 January 2015 - 12:59 AM said:

When XP came out, computers were still relatively new to the home, so the operating system was designed for work.

Weeerrrlllllll, not really. It was hot on the heels of 2000, which was designed for business environments. Probably the most commonly used version of XP is even called XP Home. It was the first Windows release to really start going into "let's make the interface look pretty" territory, with it's "baby's first computer"-style rounded edges everywhere and all that gunk.
Plus a whole heap of changes to dumb-down the interface for the novice user.

Like the search dog. 'nuff said.

My XP system has most of those changes reverted, and thus looks rather more like a '95 system but with a much higher resolution display.

LDDestroier, on 23 January 2015 - 01:13 PM said:

Why do you have XP SP2 when there was a third service pack?

Because I didn't like the third service pack. The most notable change it made was to add in a bunch of indexing stuff which appeared to malfunction and bog down every computer I saw running it. And without that, what did you have? What I already have. Heck, even SP2 brought some detrimental changes. I've learned my lesson - don't fix what's not broke.

what about compatibility
personally, I like 8.1. I recently switched from Mac to Windows(with much joy, actually could play TF2 without my computer freezing!) so I wasn't used to either start menu, therefore I don't miss anything.
The issue with windows, in my opinion, is how much of a mess it is. There's 2 calculators: a "new" one, and an "OLD"(better) one. There's THREE system settings managers, a lot of power shells, 2 photo viewers, and 2 music apps. I get it's hard to win here, but you can always make an option to hide one or the other, but still keep an option for both.
I know keeping backwards compatibility is hard, but I'm honestly half lost trying to navigate my computer.
Not to mention they removed wigits, which just kind of aggravated me since I have to have a 3rd party wigit manager now. I've seen them on my mom's old computer before, and it baffles me why they'd remove such a wonderful feature!
————–

oeed, on 23 January 2015 - 01:49 AM said:

I haven't watched the presentation and can't see myself doing so, but I saw something saying it will be free. I really don't quite get the point of this really, as far as I was aware it was their biggest source of revenue (at least I presume). Apart from getting people in to Office subscriptions I don't see how this will make money, although OEM licenses might cost something.

Bomb Bloke, on 23 January 2015 - 01:27 AM said:

Over the years they've just been trickling in features I either don't have a use for, or could never understand why they weren't implemented ages ago… while with the other hand they take away features I've come to depend on.

I completely understand where you are coming from. It's the same with OS X, possible even a bit more so now they're doing releases every year. There isn't really that much they can think of adding, there hasn't really been a big break through in computer interfaces (in terms of how you use it, now how it looks) since the release of OS X (10.0) and XP. I somewhat hope that there will be another break through soon, but releases like OS X Yosemite have been more like steps backward. Part of my thinks that the current way we are interacting with computers will disappear sooner or later.

sorry but what's with all the talk of OSX on a topic about windows
not to mention frowning upon on the idea of a free update when mac does this too, not to mention paid updates are a stupid idea
I think you just don't want mac to loose that advantage, and you're fearful of even less mac support as people ditch it again. I don't blame you; I was fearful of anything windows did too–mac support is a nightmare

Geforce Fan, on 25 January 2015 - 02:39 AM said:

sorry but what's with all the talk of OSX on a topic about windows
not to mention frowning upon on the idea of a free update when mac does this too, not to mention paid updates are a stupid idea
I think you just don't want mac to loose that advantage, and you're fearful of even less mac support as people ditch it again. I don't blame you; I was fearful of anything windows did too–mac support is a nightmare

I'm not 'frowning' upon the idea of a free update, as a consumer I'd obviously much rather it. The thing is, Windows is probably the largest portion of their revenue, while OS X (when it wasn't free) would've been a tiny factor; so I'm just a little confused from a buisness point of view the merits of doing so. I don't care if people ditch Mac, why should I?

I'm not a 'Mac is the best Windows sucks' person. I use Windows on an almost daily basis. They both have their merits, but that's not really what this discussion is about, so let's all just agree to end the Mac vs Windows thing here.

I'm running the Windows 10 preview on my PC, and I think Windows 8/8.1 is better (Windows 7 is the best, I lost my Windows 8 key because of the new serial key system). Network connection is buggy (well, maybe because it's a preview) and the symbols look ugly, and there are some other things I don't like.

ardera, on 25 January 2015 - 10:53 AM said:

I'm running the Windows 10 preview on my PC, and I think Windows 8/8.1 is better (Windows 7 is the best, I lost my Windows 8 key because of the new serial key system). Network connection is buggy (well, maybe because it's a preview) and the symbols look ugly, and there are some other things I don't like.

I installed the new Technical Preview within VirtualBox on my Mac (I was having trouble with it on my PC) and I really prefer Windows 8.1 over the new Windows. I really don't like the new taskbar design. I think the search bar being there adds unnecessary clutter. I'd rather have the search box only appear when the Start Menu was open, or Cortana was active (and just have the cursor put into the search box automatically). It wouldn't add save any more mouse clicks (although it wouldn't add any), but it would free up some more space on the taskbar. I also don't like the function of the search box. I have a Chrome window open almost all of the time, so if I want to search the web, I'll use the Omnibox in Chrome. I'd rather that the search box in Windows be solely for searching my files.

I also don't like the design of the taskbar, in general. It's a solid colour, which is by default automatically set to the dominant colour of the desktop wallpaper. I'd prefer a design like in Windows 8.1, where the taskbar is translucent, and you can see the wallpaper. Or, maybe a more modern design where only the colour shines through onto the taskbar, like the Finder window in OS X Yosemite.


The folder icon, in my opinion, is horrible, and the colours are all off.

I think Windows have missed the boat on the whole "flat design" this time.

oeed, on 25 January 2015 - 07:28 AM said:

I don't care if people ditch Mac, why should I?

If people ditch MacOSX, why would anyone add support for it
—-
My biggest thought on windows 10: it better be free. People are expecting it, and will be angry if it is not. I highly doubt they'd loose much money as companies who make computers still have to pay for it. Regardless of which windows version you're on, your PC will get out of date eventually.