Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Operating Systems' started by lopri, Nov 20, 2012.
Meh. That would save me less than 20 seconds per day.
well here is a basic list of under hood changes, not really complete but worth mentioning. These mainly effect security and performance.
hardware DEP support mandatory for the first time
win32k.sys now resides in kernel
shared pages for multiples of same process (frees up memory)
memory pages can be deduplicated, reducing the impact of this unused memory
Check out the Windows 8 development blog here -> http://blogs.msdn.com/b/b8/
Some of the blog posts that were reviewed positively.
Hardware accelerating everything: Windows 8 graphics
The Windows 8 Task Manager
Enhancing Windows 8 for multiple monitors
Bringing Hyper-V to “Windows 8”
BTW: Does anyone experience mechanical HDD slowdown after a period of time? (slower than what you'd expect on Windows 7) Windows 8 on my mechanical HDD felt snappy at the beginning but after 2 months of use it feels somewhat sluggish. I know it's something inevitable but performance degrade seems a little too quick. Many here probably run SSDs for OS volume, but I am curious if anyone running the OS on a mechanical HDD experiences the same. I am going to read up blog lists to see if anything relates to my perception.
I agree. This has been my experience, too. I upgraded because of the $14 upgrade promo and because I'm a computer professional expecting friends and family to ask me about Windows 8. I miss the Start button because it's where I access my personal folders (My Documents, Pictures, Music, etc.) in a Windows Explorer shell then drag files into Photoshop, Word, Excel, and other photo-editing tools I use. I think flipping back and forth between Metro and Classic to do real work is silly -- and I'm being very polite at that.
create shortcuts. winkey and click it. That's all your really doing on classic anyway. I have shortcuts to various folders and all my apps. Opening apps is the main importance and if its via a menu, screen, desktop or keyboard, doesn't really matter. anything else that you think prevents you from getting real work done is just an illusion
I'm sure you're right. I'm still new to it. These are just a few I mentioned. One other is remote access via my Android tablet. There's interaction between my Android's cursor and Windows 8's cursor that I couldn't get to work. So I found a workaround. I guess what you're saying is a workaround, among many others I will have to figure out.
EDIT: Another thing, with the shortcuts you mention, will they be additional icons on the desktop? If yes, it's not really what I want because I have to visually locate them or move windows around to see them. It's much easier if they're off the Start menu I think but thank you.
But it does matter. Not in a huge way, I agree, but if it didn't matter, why do I not want to go back to using VMS on a VAX! Why did we invent GUIs at all? People spend a lot of time thinking about these small issues about usablity when developing interfaces.
Insisting so urgently that it doesn't matter just makes you sound a bit too invested in defending MS, to me.
It doesn't matter a vast amount, obviously, calling it even a FirstWorldProblem would be overstating it. But its slightly inferior to the old way of doing it, in terms of both time and concentration and requires workarounds, and that, in my opinion, makes it a bad call by MS. It seems annoyingly obvious that they have done it for _their_ agenda not for that of the users.
But time will tell. Maybe Win8 will flop and win9 will go back to the old way, or maybe not. Perhaps there will be some happy compromise solution.
That is entirely based on the Individuals.
Do most people perform tasks based on habits or efficiency?
I see many people use some very tedious methods to do something, because that is how they learned it and it's now a habit. To them it's efficient because it would require too much concentration and workarounds to do it differently...be it more efficient or not.
Comandline's in Linux to me is not efficient, to others it is. I can't sit here and say it is inferior. Neither should you
The 1st layer of the start menu is a great place to keep shortcuts to programs used somewhat frequently. And when you're not using them they're tucked away...neither cluttering up the desktop nor cluttering up the taskbar as a 'pinned' item.
Even better,the quick-launch taskbar is another perfect place to keep the dozen or moreshortcuts to programs and folders that you use all the time... and it can easily be enabled in windows 7... no text... just a neat little row of distinctive icons sitting at the bottom right corner of the taskbar.
so there you have instant access to pretty much everything...
programs used infrequently? tucked away in the 2nd level of the start menu...out of sight, out of mind until needed... and then easily found within the alphabetical nested 2nd "level" of the start menu.
nothing on the desktop whatsoever
nothing pinned whatsoever
the suggestion that this be substituted by 30 icons floating on the desktop along with the sea of files and folders from the latest projects is embarrassingly patently absurd.
Without setting examples on habits vs efficiency we'll just have to take your word for it. But for me the dual UI -- Metro and Classic without the Start menu at that -- smacks of "intrusive advertising".
I think this is what I did. But I created just one shortcut to my user-name-folder from which I double-click on Documents, Pictures, etc. I haven't tried crowding the quick-launch task bar with individual shortcuts to my folders.
What's the philosophy behind removing the Start menu anyway? I'm thinking it's to force me to use the Metro Start screen instead.
that works nicely too
if you do add folders the icons will be identical... so you can right click >properties >change icon ...to differentiate, after about 4 or so it startsto become excessive though. It does make accessing frequently used folders lightening fast though.
Hmm... Not good.
EDIT: Because it sounds like they're afraid if they leave the Start button then all their efforts on the Metro interface will go to waste? Sounds like a lack of confidence on the Metro interface.
This is almost exactly how i use the windows gui.
All the time stuff on the superbar, frequent stuff in the start menu, infrequent stuff is left in all programs. Only difference is my desktop is a mess of icons heh.
Consistency in interface elements between desktops, laptops and tablets because with new convertible hardware, the line between all of them is easily blended. It also establishes the rule that the Windows key on a keyboard or the tablet always brings up the Start Screen. If the Start menu still existed, then you would expect the Windows key to bring up the Start menu while in desktop, which would be different in the Metro environment where it would bring up the Start Screen (inconsistent). And what key combination would bring up the Start Screen while in desktop?
Lastly, I think there are two options in overall UI design, relying on gut feeling or system analytics. The former is someone's whim, the latter is backed up with data. The last thing I need in an OS is for some random program manager to change the UI much like the stitched leather in Calendar in OS X.
Hmm... That would be really neat. If there's a way for the Start button to be configured to act on the Start menu (if it was there) instead of the Metro-Start screen thus leaving me to decide and not be forced. As I understand it, I can hover to the lower left corner to bring up the Metro-Start screen pop-up button.
It is no surprise.Most of company do not want to invest on a new series of laptops for their workers.So they are sticking with windows 7.
I'm not seeing what's all that different to be honest.
There was an explorer icon in the taskar in 7 and 8. Using the start button to choose Pictures or Documents simply opens the Explorer window to a predetermined location.
You can still just open the Explorer and choose Documents - totals the same amount of clicks. If you just have to have them open to the exact location, there are ways to create a shortcut that does just that.
As for dragging a document to a shortcut, to each his own I guess, but double clicking should open it in the right application. You can also right click and choose open with, and pick the app to run the file with. Both as easy if not easier than dragging it to a shortcut - which could still be done with a shortcut on desktop or taskbar.
"there are ways to create a shortcut that does just that." Um, this is why I miss the Start menu -- I don't have to create workarounds.
"As for dragging a document", I drag 5 or more documents at a time. But that's no problem in Win 8.
I use a Windows desktop at work with the Start menu. I don't think, too, that corporate backoffice stuff need the Metro interface. So from here on out I'll be switching mental gears when I get home working with two UIs. So this may be another thing. We'll see. Don't anyone get me wrong though. I'm still hopeful there's something bigger and better under the hood of Win 8 that it will be all worthwhile. I just don't get it (yet) why the Start button has to go.
I hate the windows 8 apps and start screen as mentioned, but at least there are work arounds. Still, the average user isn't going to find them.
An annoyance for the interface I had this weekend came in the form of using Skype and their new windows 8 interface. To put simply, it blows. Pain in the butt to use, hard to figure out how to use, hard to close it, and it is just way too clunky. Not to mention since it's an app that I have for a multiple monitor setup desktop, I can not move it to a different screen. Every windows app assumes you want it on the main screen and only. You simply can't reposition apps. Which means if you want to view more than 1 app at a time with multiple monitors you can't. This effing blows.
So I wanted Skype running while I was playing an online game. That means I can only see my game, or the skype app for whom I'm talking to. In other words, hardly the functional setup I want. So I had to resort to installing the windows 7 version of Skype to get a "window" version of it. Which means I can now position skype on a different monitor I am playing my game on and still have my browser on yet a different monitor as well. Yay. I can see multiple things at once so long as I don't use those stupid windows 8 apps.
I do like the new task manager though.
things like what you describe and yet there are people saying that they can't tell a difference... or just create 2 dozen icons and spray them across the desktop as a replacement for the start menu and quick launch.
and then there's the computer semi-literate who have a helluva of a time whenever they have to do something that they've never done before on Windows xp/vista/7... people like my parents. Windows 8 will cause these people to pick up their PC's, load them in the trunk of the car and drop a couple of hundred bucks at the local 'repair shop' to have them 'fix it' by installing an OS that they know how to use.
BRAVO Microsoft... bravo
My wife needs a laptop and I am ready to pay a premium just to get a Windows 7 OS on the damned thing. I would get a cheaper Windows 8 laptop but I am worried about UEFI.
Why are you worried about UEFI? I haven't been keeping up on the whole Win8 ordeal but does it not agree with Intels new idea for a BIOS?