Latest Windows 10 Preview Build Brings Slew of Enhancements 214
Deathspawner writes: Following its huge Windows 10 event last Wednesday, Microsoft released a brand-new preview build to the public, versioned 9926. We were told that it'd give us Cortana, Microsoft's AI assistant, as well as a revamped Start menu and updated notifications pane. But as it turns out, that's not even close to summing up all that's new with this build. In fact, 9926 is easily the most substantial update rolled out so far in the beta program, with some UI elements and integral Windows features seeing their first overhaul in multiple generations.
meh (Score:4, Informative)
meh
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
That's the best Windows review I've seen in a long time.
Exactly. Much better than the typical review of Windows 8.x which is "HOLY FUCK WHAT IS THIS SHIT?!?!?!!".
9926 is so awesome (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
S.O.P. for the New Improved Slashdot (a subsidiary of Dice Holdings, Inc.).
They've still got a couple of Win10 posts to go in this round - last time it was (IIRC) 5 separate posts in 6 days.
Re: (Score:2)
And no, we're still not getting our start menu back (despite 2 headlines on /. suggesting otherwise).
Well we've sure as hell lost the start screen, I tried to like the start menu on previous build but reverted to start screen which I've always found much more efficient, now that option is gone - it's start menu only and search for applications is completely broken.
Change for change's sake (Score:4, Insightful)
Because people have been using largely the same UI for the last 19 years, and are used to it. Thats a good enough reason the screw it up isn't it.
Re:Change for change's sake (Score:4, Insightful)
Because people have been using largely the same UI for the last 19 years, and are used to it. Thats a good enough reason the screw it up isn't it.
It is for Microsoft. If they don't make a new Windows release visually different in some significant way most people will see no reason to upgrade, which will make the product a commercial failure (or at least, not enough of a success to make Wall Street happy). Now, it's true, if Microsoft were do make a new version of Windows significantly faster performing and more secure then they might get a bunch of people on board even if it had the same interface as before, adding shiny to software is much less work than actually improving the product itself.
Re:Change for change's sake (Score:5, Interesting)
The problem is the previous build was visually different while being MORE functional, this build is less functional if you have 19+ years of Windows experience. The previous build had the Windows 7 Start Menu with the addition of a live tiles dock area to the right, it added new useful functionality to the familiar and functional paradigm, the new build is basically a shrunk version of the Start Screen with all the crap that entails and which the majority of users have derided as being less functional on desktops (still the VAST, VAST majority of Windows machines). We had actually started plans for a Windows 10 rollout to our enterprise based on earlier tech preview builds, but those are now on hold and will be cancelled if they don't reverse the insanity. We can just keep using Windows 7 for the next 5 years.
Re: (Score:2)
The new menu is both less functional than the old menu AND less functional than the old start screen (see my post http://tech.slashdot.org/comme... [slashdot.org] below), and there is now no choice.
Re: Change for change's sake (Score:3)
And fugly flat looks. Besides, what good is better battery life if you have no battery?
Re: (Score:2)
I like the flat look except for one massive flaw - buttons have no outline. Look at the screenshot of the calculator in TFA. What part of the window is a clickable button and what isn't? Not knowing means my brain automatically lines the cursor up with the small numbers, which is much more effort than just getting somewhere over the button which is probably quite large.
The rest of it looks fine. The icons are a bit "1987 made-in-Deluxe-Paint for a PD library" design, with thin and awkward looking lines in p
Re: (Score:2)
a new version of Windows significantly faster performing and more secure
Then you'll LOVE Windows 10. Because it's mostly just Windows 7 faster and with more battery life.
So was Windows 8...
Re: (Score:2)
Have you tried using Windows XP on a touch device?
Re: (Score:2)
Microsoft is being audacious in unifying the tablet and PC operating systems. The changes in Windows 8/Windows 10 is necessary to this end. Windows 7/Vista are painful with a touchscreen. I think we should recognize what Microsoft is trying to do is very daring. I don't see Android trying to reach the desktop (other than through the browser) and I don't see Apple unifying iOS and MacOS.
I won't be surprised if we're all running full-blown Windows on our phones within five years. Processors keep getting small
Re: (Score:2)
I skipped Windows 8 and at this rate i'll skip Windows 10 as well.
I was one of the guys who used Windows 2000 and Windows Vista. Still I just don't see what is the point of these changes. Windows 2000 had increased system stability with the NT kernel and Vista at least had proper 64-bit architecture support. Windows 7 is Vista without the warts. But Windows 10 seems like a pointless waste of time on a desktop.
Smartphone processors are probably going to hit a brick wall on the next year. Apple and Qualcomm a
Not that great of a preview (Score:2)
"This is a full build, and it will be installed as an in-place upgrade, so you’ll go through those colorful “installing your apps” screens again. This is because your account is being re-provisioned after the upgrade."
So you lose your current OS, not being able to install it elsewhere.
"You’ll notice that there is not a separate “Check Now” button here. This is because the button to check for WU updates now also checks for new builds."
I don't see any problems here... Unles
Re: (Score:2)
Take a backup if you are so precious about your current OS, it even tells you how in the Insider documentation - enough has changed that they have to migrate the user account stuff, so that gives an indication of how different things are now.
And yes, you can select your updates, just like before.
Re: (Score:2)
Take a backup if you are so precious about your current OS, it even tells you how in the Insider documentation - enough has changed that they have to migrate the user account stuff, so that gives an indication of how different things are now.
And yes, you can select your updates, just like before.
I don't wish to be "stuck" with Win10 as it's going subscription after a year free. I'm used to dual booting always have, it allows a choice.
Should be a way do this (EasyBCD), I'll figure it out (not asking).
Thanks for the update on the updates. :)
Re: (Score:2)
I don't wish to be "stuck" with Win10 as it's going subscription after a year free.
Where did you get that information from? I saw they are going to charge for it after the first year and that they will obviously charge OEMs for it so they can make money but I didn't see anything about "subscription".
Ugly as it can be? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Yea, at least give an option of having either the classic look or the Windows 7 basic look. But then it wouldn't look like a tablet interface and not as modern. The look the primary reason for my hatred of Windows 8. I can get Start menu by using classic shell, I cannot get a proper interface though.
Re: (Score:2)
Windows 7 !!! I want the Windows 2000 functionality and I have it with Classic start menu.
Re: (Score:2)
It's creating a common skin for phone, tablet and workstation.
modern day ARM GPUs have enough 3D acceleration for eye candy. Simpler rendering conserves battery life, perhaps.
Re: (Score:3)
They made that argument for Windows 8, and one could conceivably buy that argument for the Metro UI running on very low-powered devices, as MS phones often are. However, there's no conceivable reason to skin your traditional Windows applications in the same way, which are obviously going to be running on desktops and laptops. For a modern GPU, whether or not they're rendering a transparent windows or rounding a border isn't even remotely a concern in terms of efficiency.
No, I think this is an aesthetic de
Re: (Score:3)
If you can't see the difference between X11 [sourceforge.net] and Yosemite [arstechnica.net], I'm just going to ignore the rest of what you have to say on the subject of graphics.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Wait, you said they look alike. Now you are touting the differences. Which is it?
Re: (Score:2)
buttons that can't be distinguished from other UI elements
In the X11 graphic, I see at least 4 different button visuals:
- thin border with shadow
- bold border with no shadow
- 3D-style border
- buttons without any border (menu buttons)
And text entry uses a 3D-style border just like some of the buttons.
How exactly is this better?
Re:Ugly as it can be? (Score:5, Insightful)
Sigh... I absolutely agree about the conclusion. But it's a stretch to say this trend is copying Apple. Windows 8 came out long before Apple's new "flat" look came out, unless I'm aware of a trend that started before that in the Apple camp.
Seriously, though, I'm already completely sick of this "flat, clean, simple" trend. But more importantly, the usability is often worse, sacrificed on the alter of the new aesthetic. In the new design language, button borders are uncool, so they've simply done away with them in many cases, and don't offer any indications of what you can click, or where clickable regions are. Windows 8 was particularly bad with this, so we'll see if Windows 10 does any better, despite using the same basic theme. I understand that aesthetics are important, but they should always, always, always take a back seat to functionality and usability.
With any luck, after a few years, when everyone else gets sick of flat, uninspired graphics, someone will create a new, "retro" look and start adding some bevels, gradients, gloss, and transparency back into the UI.
Re: (Score:2)
I think Google started it. Makes sense for web stuff because instead of wasting bandwidth on a button image you just have a flat shaded HTML element. At any rate, Google's web apps started going that way long before either Apple or Windows 8 did.
I think it's mostly fine, the only big issue being that some designers don't make buttons stand out enough. The calculator app in TFA is the worst, with no indication of where the buttons are except for their captions. Apple made Yosemite look very washed out too wh
Re: (Score:3)
But it's a stretch to say this trend is copying Apple. Windows 8 came out long before Apple's new "flat" look came out, unless I'm aware of a trend that started before that in the Apple camp.
Nah - I think the "skeuomorphism considered harmful" movement comes from form-over-function graphic design numpties who were tired of actual content, meaning or useful visual cues for functionality polluting their minimalist design and stealing valuable screen area that could be used for whitespace, irrelevant generic images of shiny happy people or corporate identity guff. It was showing up on websites etc. (Slashdot's Bucking Feta was fairly late to the party) long before Apple went flat. Google have bee
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Ugly as it can be? (Score:4, Informative)
"Why does everybody have to copy Apple?"
As far as UI goes, Apple has been taking cues from Android for years. Remember Apple was all about glossy rounded icons before Android's flat and efficient become trendy.
Re: (Score:2)
Looks Great! (Score:2)
Comment removed (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Have some! (Score:5, Informative)
Select the "Search" option.
You'll now see three new options for what to do. To make it go away altogether hit "Disabled."
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
When you install Windows 8, if the machine is connected to the internet it will ask for a Microsoft ID. You can't seem to skip it either, or at least I couldn't find a way to. You can remove it later, or just disconnect from the internet when booting for the first time.
I have not tried Windows 10 so I don't know if you can skip it now, or if you have to disconnect still.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Thanks, I'll look for it next time I install.
Re: (Score:2)
You have to go "create new microsoft account", and then select "skip creating a microsoft account" at the bottom of that page.
Brought to you by the people who invented "click start to shut down." I like it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, the One Drive is a big disappointment. I guess I'll have to check out Google's NSA/FBI Drive.
Which is clearly better than Microsoft's One NSA/FBI/keylogged Drive.
Nice (Score:3)
Now we have Google Now and Google design in windows without the quality of Google search.
God, what drivel ... (Score:5, Insightful)
OK, I'll preface this with a "get off my lawn" to get it out of the way.
But I have to say, I have precisely zero interest in this. The more I read TFA, the more I cringe.
I don't want my fucking computer to feel like it's on a first name basis with me. I don't want to talk to it. I don't want my computer constantly listening to and parsing everything I say. I sure as shit don't want that crap integrated with an ad platform.
If I want to see the weather, I'll go to the tab I keep open with the weather.
This is a bunch of dreck I can't see myself wanting to use, which is mostly a "make pretend" version of AI which is at best a shortcut to search. I don't see the value in voice commands -- in fact, I see great nuisance in it (like in Offices, or just everywhere).
This sounds like an OS which is heavily focused on "teh social" integration with XBox, with the new lame-ass crayon interfaces Microsoft seems partial to, and a bunch of dorky features which seem like they're trying too damned hard.
I don't see any of these features being useful, I see them as being pointless eye candy, which is full of gimmicks I don't see myself using in the long run -- in fact, I see me disabling as many as possible.
I'm afraid Microsoft's "vision of the future" is a glimpse into hell. At least half of those features sound like shit which will slow down the machine and add zero benefit.
Now, seriously, get the fuck off my damned lawn.
Re: (Score:2)
I've never ever ever got on with voice commands. Whether it is on a desktop or my phone. If we take this one "Hey Cortana", firstly I never say Hey to anyone. It is just not a work I use so that feels bad enough. But next, how do you pronounce Cortana.
Just no.
As an aside - why is everything so flat these days?
Re: (Score:2)
How sensitive is this? Will it come on if I'm watching TV and a MS ad comes on where they say "Hey Cortana"?
Re: (Score:2)
I don't want my fucking computer to feel like it's on a first name basis with me. I don't want to talk to it. I don't want my computer constantly listening to and parsing everything I say. I sure as shit don't want that crap integrated with an ad platform.
While I get it, and I understand... it is the future...
Just not in the current version...
I've played around with Siri on my iPhone, it works, sort of, most of the time...
It needs to work all the time and be smarter... but it will get better...
The "vision" is the way people talk to the computer on Star Trek: TNG. It won't happen in 5 or 10 years, but I think we'll see that within our lifetimes...
Re: (Score:2)
But why would anyone want a Star Trek system? It is just something that looks good, not something that is efficient or practical for the real world.
Voice control and dictating etc. have valid uses but only for a few specific cases. General computer use isn't one of them.
Re: (Score:2)
:) You have to think bigger... to when computers are smarter and we no longer need to sit in from of them as often...
Like I said, we aren't there, and we won't be in 5-10 years... This is long term stuff...
Consider... The Apple Newton was really just a VERY early iPad... But it flopped because the technology and supporting infrastructure wasn't there yet. 15 years later and it was... It needed Wi-Fi, flash memory, Internet everywhere, touch screens, new batteries, low power CPUs, etc.
Re: (Score:2)
Don't know about that. PDAs sold pretty well back then. They basically got subsumed into the smartphone market but they were not a flop.
Also one of the first things Steve Jobs did when he got back into Apple was to kill the Newton. NIH Syndrome.
Re: (Score:3)
You know, you're right. Nobody should ever try anything new with voice interaction. We should leave that shit off because its buggy or only knows how to do web searches based on bad guesses.
We shouldn't spend any time putting this stuff in front of users and learning what works well, what doesn't work, what people like, what they don't like. God forbid we try and see if there are ways to integrate it with how people currently use computers.
Instead, what we should do is wait until the 23rd century, when w
Re: (Score:2)
Re:God, what drivel ... (Score:5, Insightful)
You can disable her.
But why get an OS of which you have to disable half of the features? I don't want Modern UI, I don't want to send information to Microsoft to help to improve my computing experience, I don't want a Windows Live Account, I don't want SkyDrive, I don't want Cortana.
Me no want anything! Waaah!
Re: (Score:2)
Sounds like you want a really cut down Linux system. Perhaps Gentoo? Otherwise you are inevitably going to get stuff you don't want in the default install of every commercial OS. When you start up MacOS or iOS you have to tell Apple to fuck off I don't want an account fuck you very much, and ditto with Android and a Google Account. Ubuntu comes with all kinds of crap installed by default, including sending searches to Amazon.
It's annoying but it's apparently what most people seem to want.
Re: (Score:2)
You can disable her.
But I want to butt fuck her...
You two need to take your date-rapey roofie fantasies elsewhere.
still awful (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It's still a EUFI-using
Even Linux Mint performs an UEFI installation (with an amateurish boot entry called "ubuntu" in lowercase letters).
Not the review I wanted. (Score:3, Insightful)
What I want to know about is performance. I don't care about the changes in explorer, taskbar, or start menu. I don't need them I use Directory Opus.
Here is what I'd like to know about.
CPU Usage of system processes 7/8 vs 10
Memory usage 7/8 vs 10
Services performance 7/8 vs 10
Load times
Thread performance/handling/optimization
Memory leaks
Page file performance
Virtual memory management upgrades?
Indexing performance
I feel like I visited an art gallery, but instead of talking about the pictures they talk about the plumbing. Well in reverse at least O_o..
Re: (Score:2)
So, could we say it's like you visited a plumbing store, and they only wanted to discuss the pictures on the wall?
Start Menu Metro buttons waste too much space. (Score:2)
Seriously. Are mostly-empty SQUARES *really* the best way to organize program launchers in a desktop menu system?
I'd be MUCH happier if they implemented the ability to convert the launchers to bars (see example image, note, I know it's just a crude mockup).
http://www.evilnet.net/Windows... [evilnet.net]
I'd be able to pack more useful programs into the launcher window and have less wasted screen real estate. Seriously, with those Duplo squares, you have an icon, a little text, and roughly 60+% space wastage.
Why? This s
Wow so negative here (Score:4, Insightful)
Yes this is a Linux oriented site yada yada.
But why so strong resistance to change on a technology site of all places? Does anyone else find this weird? Never in my wildest dreams would I picture slashdot turn into +5 comments with "CHANGE FOR THE SAKE OF CHANGE etc" I ask because I am curious and wonder if I am alone? You would not expect to see comments in a fashion oriented blog like "NEW LOOK FOR THE SAKE OF NEW LOOKS" be posted as an example.
It kind of saddens me a little bit as we computer geeks came here because we love technology and like to have new new things. Now that is uncool and I have seen it become more prevalent in other articles. Is it age or just scarred from experience?
What happened?
Anyway my unbiased 2 cents ...
I think this would be a good upgrade for a notebook or tablet. Much improved battery life and the ability to run Netflix and Hulu on the road is really cool. As long as the applets are not like Windows 8 and I can do work too I am fine if they can integrate.
For the desktop? I see little reason to upgrade. Windows 7 works fine. However for those reading my previous paragraphs I do not hate 10. I just think it offers little value besides enhanced security over 7. I probably will upgrade next fall after it stabilizes since the upgrade is free.Now if I bought a new computer with it on it I would not downgrade it. Can't say the same with Windows 8.1 though :-)
On my i7 4770k I have to say I find it faster and more responsive than 7. It was surprisingly stable with just 1 bug with nvidia if I do the dual screen 4k hack to stretch it. A MUST if you already ahve 8.
It is nice modest upgrade for desktop users and a BIG upgrade for mobile users.
Re:Wow so negative here (Score:4, Insightful)
What happened?
I'm guessing that people got fed up with churn and started to realise that change for its own sake is annoying. Getting irritated at having to get used to a new system AGAIN that does things worse in many cases is not unreasonable. Being fed up with churn is not the same as fearing change.
Personally, I like to see "change" actually make things better, because if it doesn't then why bother with the change? And if it makes things worse, then WTF?
A lot is just uninspiring and meh. Going from flat to bevelled to bulbousd and back to flat (hello Athena!) user interface elements is just a huge meh. I mean sure, now they're coloured and antialiased and with nice fonts and whetever, but I really can't feel myself getting excited about "flat" design. Actually, personally I think it's a bit of a usability regression becase it's harder to explain to people which the active user interface elements are.
Change where it's an improvement I like. I like large, high res screens. I like running a modern kernel with all the new power saving features and better, newer filesystems and so on and so forth. I tend to run recentl builds of tools I like like vim and mplayer because the changes make them better than the old version. I keep promising myself I'll finally switch from Xterm to Terminology, but I can't get some of the features to work properly at the moment.
All those things, all those changes have made stuff better. On the other hand, I still run FVWM2. I've tried more modern things, but they all seem to make things worse in interesting ways. I've still adopted some changes, however which make it more modern.
I think there are quite a few people here with similar opinions to me. Another example: the reason that tablet stuff coming to laptops is bad is because a lot of the UI stuff is designed around single, non cooperating, full screen apps. I don't want that, not because I fear change, it's because I changed AWAY from it in the 90s and I have no desire to go back to the bad old days. I remember what it was like all too well (and my phone just keeps on reminding me). What I fear is being dragged back to something I know from experience is inferior.
Re: (Score:2)
I, for one, like new things if, and only if, they are an improvement over the old things. That's why I use a computer in the first place: to improve my life and make things easier. Anything that gets in the way of that gets the vitriol poured on.
For something as fundamental as the UI, I have a substantial investment in the old way of doing things. Throwing that away means I have to start learning again, and it'll take a while to get up to the same speed I had with the old UI. This is all wasted time, so the
Re: (Score:2)
But why so strong resistance to change on a technology site of all places? Does anyone else find this weird? Never in my wildest dreams would I picture slashdot turn into +5 comments with "CHANGE FOR THE SAKE OF CHANGE etc" I ask because I am curious and wonder if I am alone? You would not expect to see comments in a fashion oriented blog like "NEW LOOK FOR THE SAKE OF NEW LOOKS" be posted as an example.
Probably because this is a technology site, and not a fashion site. Fashion love change for change's sake - that's why they parade around on catwalks with ridiculously impractical things like dresses made of cutlery, and someone who wears a side of beef to an event is the centre of attention.
Technology isn't about change, it's about progress. Progress involves change, but just because it's change doesn't make it progress. Change for change's sake is inane. Tell us how the change makes things *better* and we
Re: (Score:2)
I kind of look at an OS as a whole environment.
As a desktop I can see your point. I do like Skydrive as a backup tool and access to share data between my computers and my phone.
These things you hate I kind of would like in a mobile platform on the road for weather as an example or asking it for directions for someplace. I love Google cards on my phone. It tells when I get up how long my commute to work is. It knows I am traveling and always giving an ETA to the airport. It even checks slashdot so I can brow
Re: (Score:2)
Seriously? You had a TV show with both Holodecks and Diana Troy, you you were dreaming of voice commands???
Re: (Score:2)
Search is a great feature! Having a mouse and clicking around a GUI browsing for files was the most gimmicky, mouth-breather way of launching programs that added nothing for users. If you want something then just type it, it's faster than hunting through and clicking ever-expanding menus trying to reveal what you're looking for. Not only that but I don't need to rely on different operating systems having all the items in the same place, for example if I need mouse settings I just search for it and whether i
Polishing the brass on the Titanic (Score:4, Interesting)
Cortana is probably a new and better Clippy. But besides that, the rest seems like polishing the brass on the Titanic.
New folder icons? I remember visiting gnome-look.org for the first time ten years ago and being blown away: page after page of themes, icon sets, etc.
Start menu tweaked again? Why is this so hard? And it still looks awkward to me. Program names are inside squares, instead of just being text items in a list. Or small squares at least, like the launcher in Chrome OS.
I've used Mac since 1984, Windows since 95, and Linux since '05. I've either not minded or actually liked all of the iterations of program launching in Mac and Linux. But I have never, never, like the Windows Start menu.
Let's start with the word Start, which is where you go to Shut Down. Makes sense. And while it was a little more straightforward than today's shenanigans, it wasn't exactly pleasant to dig through. Plus, I was always stymied by why Windows took several seconds sometimes to me just trying to open the submenu --- not launch a program, just open a folder within the Start menu to see what's in there. It's like Windows was going to the bathroom, and I had to wait for it to finish even to answer a simple question.
And then there was the My everything fiasco, where Documents became My Documents, Computer became My Computer, and so on.
There is the trash can that they still won't default to the bottom right, because if you ever resize the screen, it messes up the position, since Windows calculates everything as the number of pixels from the top left, apparently. So they put the trash can in the top left. This never looked right to me. A trashy-looking thing like a trash can should be in a minor part of the screen (bottom right) even if they call it a Recycle Bin. The Macintosh somehow figured out how to do this 30 years ago.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
IIRC, some of my monitors didn't have a uniquely optimum resolution. Very high resolutions could force a lower refresh rate, causing unpleasant visual artifacts. Very high resolutions could also be blurry, if the dot pitch wasn't fine enough. Some refresh rate (or was it resolution? I forget) caused a high-pitch whine that bothered me. Higher resolutions could have interference is
Re: (Score:2)
Linux + systemd = MS-Windows.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Why would anyone still run virus-infested Winders in this day and age? Just use Linux you retards.
I run Windows because of the games I play, sometimes up till 6 AM.
I also have problems installing Linux or to be exact it's placement, three hard drives, and a 2TB USB UEFI drive which pretty much does what it wants to under a bios system.
I create three partitions meant to be swap, main, and storage; formatted in advanced to be such. I get one partition being used and a swap file created elsewhere.
There's more but it doesn't bode well for me or my abilities (which I consider to be, well able) to mention.
I'v
Re:Wiped my Grub though. (Score:4, Informative)
"update"... I think he means he went from one to the other, I'm assuming MS put out Windows Updates to 10 just the same as anything else? But I could be wrong.
However, even so, in the world of UEFI, GPT, etc. why the fuck does Windows still stomp over the boot sector as if it owns it? Add your partitions, mark yourself as active, put an entry in the UEFI if you find it. Otherwise, stop. You don't need to overwrite the boot sector if you've got that far because it worked well enough to boot your installer! And anyone installing non-standard boot sectors will be smart enough to just add your partition in as an option to boot from.
Re: (Score:2)
Because you're installing an operating system, and Microsoft does not make a multi-OS bootloader.
More to the point, people installing an OS have an expectation that it will be virus free. How is Windows supposed to differentiate between a benign non-MS bootloader and a viral one?
Re: (Score:3)
How about ASKING the user if an unknown bootloader is detected during install? "Hey, did you install this here on purpose?"
Re: (Score:3)
Because you're installing an operating system, and Microsoft does not make a multi-OS bootloader.
Sure they do. You can install and boot multiple Microsoft OS's.
Comment removed (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
Actually, pretty much every Linux distribution I've ever played with (that comes with an installer) gives you the option of not installing a boot loader if you don't want to. Some will even make an alternate boot media for you to get into your Linux installation, such as a boot floppy or a USB stick, while others will leave it up to you to figure it out. And if you do choose to install Grub, they will almost always add an entry for any Windows installations it finds.
Of course, there are the Linux distribu
Re: (Score:3)
It's not an update, it's a preview, and it's not in Windows Update, you have to download it and INSTALL it.
Can you explain this then?
http://i.gyazo.com/c6741512c4e... [gyazo.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
it looks EXACTLY like Windows 7
That is patently false. No Aero Glass in 10 so it does NOT look exactly the same. That's before we get to the icon changes, extraneous whitespace that 7 doesn't have, etc. They look more similar but "exactly the same" they do not look.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes there will be aero in future builds [neowin.net] as evident in that screenshot.
Not too much of a biggie as long as the colors are not too bright or pastelish. It seems that is toned down in 10.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
We will see.
I hated the sterile look of 8.1 and I find 10 does bring darker colors in. It is not finished yet. You can have minimalism and still have color. The art professors who are pioneering this new way mention more emphasis on video and color. Not all blinding white like office 2013.
Rounded corners are gone. You can thank Apple for owning a patent on it for that as it is expensive to license the idea of using a shape. gradients and shine like the WIndows 7 bar? That looks to be gone. It may not be too
Re: (Score:2)
The new control panel is all white with gray icons on top. It makes the X Athena Widgets interface seem user friendly in comparison.
Re:Full Screen Start Menu! (Score:4, Informative)
There's still a UXtard in Redmond who needs to be shot for making the resizable start screen nonresizable in 9926. The 9879 build was resizable, so you could make the useful part of it (the list of things on the left, even with the atrocious waste of vertical whitespace) taller. 9926 gives you two options: scroll like a motherfucker or fullscreen shit,.
The start menu of 9926 can be *FORCED* to be as resizable as it was in 9879 as follows: Create a DWORD32 named EnableXamlStartMenu in HKEY_CURRENT_USER>Software>Microsoft>Windows>CurrentVersion>Explorer>Advanced and leave (or set, if it already exists) its value to 0.
Now if only there were a way to restore the wasted vertical space in the task manager. Sigh. The W10 task manager is good, it's just utterly wasteful on space. On W7 I can see damn near everything running. On W10, the UXtard with the vertical whitespace fetish won the debate. For fuck's sake, we gave up the Status Bar in Firefox 4.0 because 10 pixels was too much space to waste... and we got this shit - in Firefox, in ribbons, in Win8/10, and even in goddamn Google's Material Design / Android - in return.
Re: (Score:2)
It's not the start screen though - it's a crippled version of it, with all-apps in a long list instead of over the whole screen. So rather than have everything shown by scrolling over two screenfuls, I have to scroll down over 5 screenfuls and then expand the ones that are hidden in folders. Some applications are randomly in a folder of one item, which has to be expanded before you can click on it. To cap it all they've crippled the search so that you have to click a search bar (it loses focus for no rea
Re: (Score:2)
So what ultimately makes an OS a good one is when end-user application developers write applications for it?
Consider that the lack of applications for Linux is merely the result of design decisions made by software developers who simply feel that Linux's meager overall usage on the desktop does not make it worth their time to make any extra effort to support. So in reality, by your measurement, what actually m
Re: (Score:2)
Except that by the aforementioned definition, what makes something "good enough" is an availability of applications in the first place.
The technical merits of an operating system are not sufficient to drive mainstream application creation.... what ultimately drives it is nothing more or less than human greed, and the desire to get a piece of the action.
Linux was not late to the game at all... it actually predates Windows 95.
Re: (Score:2)
Linux has been going for decades and still nobody wants it, you cant even give it away on the desktop.
This is SO the truth...
Lord, I've been waiting for Linux on the Desktop for 20 years now... installed Linux on a 486 nearly 20 years ago...
It is a great server OS, it is never going to be a widely adopted desktop OS.
Re: (Score:2)
Lord, I've been waiting for Linux on the Desktop for 20 years now... installed Linux on a 486 nearly 20 years ago...
It is a great server OS, it is never going to be a widely adopted desktop OS.
Let me guess.... Linux sucks for you because it won't run Microsoft Office and other Windows applications?
Re: (Score:2)
Let me guess.... Linux sucks for you because it won't run Microsoft Office and other Windows applications?
That is a common reply that I see...
First, yes... Microsoft Office is indeed important... for people who share documents, spreadsheets, etc. with the outside world, using the standard does matter. OpenOffice doesn't convert them perfectly and small errors creep when you try.
Second, yes... other windows applications do matter, many such as Quickbooks are important for many businesses. It is what their CPA uses, so keeping your accounting files in the same format that allows you to easily upload your dat
Re: (Score:2)
I feel like I'm living in bizzarroland, where the shittiest, most customer-hostile companies are somehow the most profitable.
I can't remember when it wasn't like this.