no point - just I hate W8

Started Feb 15, 2014 | Discussions
Austinian
Austinian Veteran Member • Posts: 7,237
Re: IT guy here

zodiacfml wrote:

If you have a good firewall, WinXP will work very well 80 to 90% of the common things to do as I do in the office. Of course, Vista is pretty bad compared to XP but Win 8/8.1 are atrocious. For example, there's no easy way permanently disable the Touch Keyboard on the taskbar. There's no simple way to disable the transparency of the taskbar. That's only talking about the taskbar.

With a good "Start Menu" replacement, Win 8.1 works just fine for me. Metro is irrelevant; I never see it. Win 8.1 looks much like Win 7 did now.

In fact, I had no idea Win 8/8.1 even had a "Touch Keyboard", much less that it was a problem. Metro doesn't exist for me unless I were to deliberately go into it.

I just don't understand the intensity and fury of the complaints about something so easily fixed for free.

 Austinian's gear list:Austinian's gear list
Sony Alpha a7 II Sony Alpha a7R III Sony FE 28mm F2 Samyang 135mm F2.0 Sony FE 50mm F2.8 Macro +2 more
Austinian
Austinian Veteran Member • Posts: 7,237
Re: no point - just I hate W8

Sean Nelson wrote:

Again, just to keep the record straight - Windows XP did not come "after" Windows ME, it came after Windows 2000, which was in turn a successor of Windows NT. Windows ME came "after" in terms of time, but not in terms of the lineage of the code base.

While Microsoft was selling Windows 95/98/ME which came from a DOS-based 16-bit heritage, they had a completely separate line of 32-bit fully multitasked operating systems which grew out of their failed collaboration with IBM on OS/2.

The whole OS/2 vs. Windows episode was an interesting part of computer history. I had high hopes for OS/2 at one time, but IBM displayed its characteristic instinct to preserve its existing businesses at the expense of its future ones. PS/2, OS/2, DOA.

 Austinian's gear list:Austinian's gear list
Sony Alpha a7 II Sony Alpha a7R III Sony FE 28mm F2 Samyang 135mm F2.0 Sony FE 50mm F2.8 Macro +2 more
Sean Nelson
Sean Nelson Forum Pro • Posts: 12,940
Re: no point - just I hate W8
1

Austinian wrote:

Sean Nelson wrote:

Again, just to keep the record straight - Windows XP did not come "after" Windows ME, it came after Windows 2000, which was in turn a successor of Windows NT. Windows ME came "after" in terms of time, but not in terms of the lineage of the code base.

While Microsoft was selling Windows 95/98/ME which came from a DOS-based 16-bit heritage, they had a completely separate line of 32-bit fully multitasked operating systems which grew out of their failed collaboration with IBM on OS/2.

The whole OS/2 vs. Windows episode was an interesting part of computer history. I had high hopes for OS/2 at one time, but IBM displayed its characteristic instinct to preserve its existing businesses at the expense of its future ones. PS/2, OS/2, DOA.

I used OS/2 on my home machine for a couple of years before Windows NT became available.   Microsoft still hasn't got scroll bars right the way OS/2 did - if you grab a vertical scroll bar and move it up and down, it will snap back to it's original position if you stray too far to the left or right.   A vertical scroll bar should ignore horizontal movements of the mouse like OS/2 did (and a corresponding observation is true of horizontal scrollbars).

Austinian
Austinian Veteran Member • Posts: 7,237
Re: no point - just I hate W8

Sean Nelson wrote:

Austinian wrote:

Sean Nelson wrote:

Again, just to keep the record straight - Windows XP did not come "after" Windows ME, it came after Windows 2000, which was in turn a successor of Windows NT. Windows ME came "after" in terms of time, but not in terms of the lineage of the code base.

While Microsoft was selling Windows 95/98/ME which came from a DOS-based 16-bit heritage, they had a completely separate line of 32-bit fully multitasked operating systems which grew out of their failed collaboration with IBM on OS/2.

The whole OS/2 vs. Windows episode was an interesting part of computer history. I had high hopes for OS/2 at one time, but IBM displayed its characteristic instinct to preserve its existing businesses at the expense of its future ones. PS/2, OS/2, DOA.

I used OS/2 on my home machine for a couple of years before Windows NT became available. Microsoft still hasn't got scroll bars right the way OS/2 did - if you grab a vertical scroll bar and move it up and down, it will snap back to it's original position if you stray too far to the left or right. A vertical scroll bar should ignore horizontal movements of the mouse like OS/2 did (and a corresponding observation is true of horizontal scrollbars).

I wanted a reasonably priced 32-bit OS to take advantage of the 386 clones available around the late-80's, early-90's. The irritation I had over not being able to use that chip's full potential was considerable; all the Unixes I was aware of at the time were quite pricey and short of applications.

My memory that far back is shaky, but ISTR buying OS/2 2.0 in a box with an amazing number of 3.5" floppies. After going through the install ordeal, I sadly discovered that my video card wasn't supported beyond VGA, so no hi-res games...back to DOS+Desqview+QEMM-386 until I discovered Slackware Linux a couple of years later.

 Austinian's gear list:Austinian's gear list
Sony Alpha a7 II Sony Alpha a7R III Sony FE 28mm F2 Samyang 135mm F2.0 Sony FE 50mm F2.8 Macro +2 more
Midwest Forum Pro • Posts: 17,988
Another IT guy here
1

zodiacfml wrote:

as an IT guy and using Windows for years, W8 is the worst for me. It's so greedy and selfish. Using it is just a pain. I prefer Vista wholeheartedly over this.

First - Vista was half-baked. I tried it and hated it and at the time rolled back the machine to XP after finally getting tired of the terrible performance. Windows 7 was actually what Vista should have been; it is an excellent operating system in just about every way.

Now for Win 8 or 8.1:

When I saw the ads for Win 8 on TV what was in them? Someone showing computer neophytes some clever tricks that Win 8 could do. It wasn't IT pros or power users being impressed by new capabilities, it was gee-whiz people who buy most of their PC's at WalMart who were easily impressed by gimmicks.

Windows 8 was simply a bad idea from the start. The evident plan was to make a PC operating system that would make working on a tablet or a PC very much similar. News flash: a PC is not a tablet! A PC is not used in the same way as a tablet! A touch screen is great on a tablet; I do not WANT one on my PC. Why? So I can not only type on a keyboard and move a mouse, but now keep reaching up to touch a screen? Let's talk a new kind of carpal-tunnel syndrome, a new kind of repetitive motion injury caused for no good reason.

My Win7 machines - I have numerous of them and mostly used for productivity - make it easy for me to use all my applications, some of them daily and some rarely, to find and run those applications out of a huge number installed on each machine. I have no use for an ugly purple desktop full of pictures.

So, there is an add-on that makes Win 8 seem almost like Windows 7. That's what I want, to upgrade my computer so that I have to make it work almost as well for me as it did before I 'upgraded'? And that add-on for the Start button does not replace the Windows 7 backup feature that can both back up multiple versions of individual files or folders, but can do a system image onto an external drive as well.

A while back I noticed that at least Dell was pushing Win 8 on almost all their machines; now they have gone back to offering Windows 7 on a substantial number of them likely because people insisted on something workable instead of something gimmicky.

Fortunately, MS is going to support Windows 7 at least until 2020. As much as I despise Win 8 I am totally happy with Win 7. For a long time I thought XP was great and resisted the upgrade but Win 7 quickly won me over with much broader capabilities. Windows 8 is a step in the wrong direction and if that is the best I can get when I someday have to leave Win 7 behind, I'll more likely go to Apple than to a gimmicky OS that was intended to combine a desktop and a tablet.

How about a combination kitchen blender and steam iron? Why not?

gs85739az
gs85739az Senior Member • Posts: 1,339
Re: Windows 'OEM' support responsibility is not with Microsoft...

ty...

-- hide signature --

Gary

1w12q312qw1 Contributing Member • Posts: 732
Re: Another IT guy here

Midwest wrote:

First - Vista was half-baked. I tried it and hated it and at the time rolled back the machine to XP after finally getting tired of the terrible performance. Windows 7 was actually what Vista should have been; it is an excellent operating system in just about every way.

Now for Win 8 or 8.1:

When I saw the ads for Win 8 on TV what was in them? Someone showing computer neophytes some clever tricks that Win 8 could do. It wasn't IT pros or power users being impressed by new capabilities, it was gee-whiz people who buy most of their PC's at WalMart who were easily impressed by gimmicks.

Windows 8 was simply a bad idea from the start. The evident plan was to make a PC operating system that would make working on a tablet or a PC very much similar. News flash: a PC is not a tablet! A PC is not used in the same way as a tablet! A touch screen is great on a tablet; I do not WANT one on my PC. Why? So I can not only type on a keyboard and move a mouse, but now keep reaching up to touch a screen? Let's talk a new kind of carpal-tunnel syndrome, a new kind of repetitive motion injury caused for no good reason.

My Win7 machines - I have numerous of them and mostly used for productivity - make it easy for me to use all my applications, some of them daily and some rarely, to find and run those applications out of a huge number installed on each machine. I have no use for an ugly purple desktop full of pictures.

So, there is an add-on that makes Win 8 seem almost like Windows 7. That's what I want, to upgrade my computer so that I have to make it work almost as well for me as it did before I 'upgraded'? And that add-on for the Start button does not replace the Windows 7 backup feature that can both back up multiple versions of individual files or folders, but can do a system image onto an external drive as well.

A while back I noticed that at least Dell was pushing Win 8 on almost all their machines; now they have gone back to offering Windows 7 on a substantial number of them likely because people insisted on something workable instead of something gimmicky.

Fortunately, MS is going to support Windows 7 at least until 2020. As much as I despise Win 8 I am totally happy with Win 7. For a long time I thought XP was great and resisted the upgrade but Win 7 quickly won me over with much broader capabilities. Windows 8 is a step in the wrong direction and if that is the best I can get when I someday have to leave Win 7 behind, I'll more likely go to Apple than to a gimmicky OS that was intended to combine a desktop and a tablet.

How about a combination kitchen blender and steam iron? Why not?

Midwest,

Excellent sumation of the past several OSs/UIs. I got bashed and battered on this forum for making the same points, especially the one that you can go from W7 to W8 but with an add-on make it act like W7. So what is the point? Or what is the compelling factor for the change?

And when the scuttlebutt came out that the people in Redmond refer to W8 as Vista2.0, that made sense in my mind, at least. And then it came to light that W9 will be beta in just a couple of months, possibly bringing back a tweaked W7 interface, that made sense, too.

Stan

anisah
anisah Contributing Member • Posts: 509
Re: no point - just I hate W8

Sean Nelson wrote:

anisah wrote:

This problem goes back a long way. W95 worked pretty well, but the first version of W98 was pretty awful. The second version of W98 was pretty good, but WMe was about as bad as it gets (or so we thought until Vista). ...

After that came WXP, which so many people still use, as it worked well and met consumer needs...

Again, just to keep the record straight - Windows XP did not come "after" Windows ME, it came after Windows 2000, which was in turn a successor of Windows NT. Windows ME came "after" in terms of time, but not in terms of the lineage of the code base.

While Microsoft was selling Windows 95/98/ME which came from a DOS-based 16-bit heritage, they had a completely separate line of 32-bit fully multitasked operating systems which grew out of their failed collaboration with IBM on OS/2.

Good point, except that my understanding was that both WNT and W2000 were aimed at the business community, while other OS were aimed at the consumer market. In general terms neither WNT nor W200 gained a major foothold in the consumer market. I am aware of the chronology but was merely considering OS used in the consumer market. Following from W2000 WXP became used in both the business and consumer markets, with diferent versions being avialable for home and business use. More recent developments have followed that trend.

-- hide signature --

"The only thing certain about life is uncertainty." (Rabbi Berel Wein)

 anisah's gear list:anisah's gear list
Canon PowerShot G9 Nikon Coolpix AW130 Canon EOS 40D Canon EOS 7D Canon EOS 5D Mark III +13 more
David Tallboys Regular Member • Posts: 270
Re: David - W 8.1 "OK" on tablet?

CAcreeks wrote:

David Tallboys wrote:

Frankly I prefer my windows 7 and XP laptops, but 8.1 is just about Ok on a touchscreen tablet.

That is an interesting remark.

When you say it is just about OK, are you comparing it to an iPad or Android tablet?

Is 8.1 markedly improved from 8 on a touchscreen tablet?

Sorry about all the questions, but I have been ignoring Windows 8 for several months now and this has me curious.

I have an iPad and a Nexus 7. The iPad is the best tablet - it just seems to flow better - but the T100 I mentioned in my full original post is a tablet but with an attachable/detachable keyboard. It is full Windows 8.1 (not RT) so it runs pretty much all windows programs and the machine comes with Excel and Word. So at £350 in the UK - less in the US - I think it is quite a good deal.

In tablet mode the Fisher-Price squares are Ok for those of us who are rotten shots with our fingers. You flick up and down to scroll the screen - but it is not as smooth as the iPad as mentioned earlier.

Clip in the keyboard, add a mouse and you've got a reasonable laptop/netbook. I also have an external screen to use when I want to sit at my desk at home. I wouldn't suggest trying to do photo or video editing. It is a sort of return to the netbook.

I think HP do a similar type of machine but with a bigger screen.

I hope that is of use to you.

 David Tallboys's gear list:David Tallboys's gear list
Fujifilm X100S Canon PowerShot SX280 HS Canon PowerShot S120
CAcreeks
CAcreeks Forum Pro • Posts: 12,530
Re: David - thanks for your remarks!

Very insightful, thanks much.

For me personally on a tablet, it is the mouse that I miss more than the keyboard. I have a Linux laptop and vastly prefer OpenOffice Writer to Word, so the "Office" aspect of a Windows 8.x tablet is pointless for me.

What I like on the Android tablet are Netflix and Kindle, both of which are not really usable on a laptop. Some apps are better than websites, as well. I really do not have any problem typing on the touchscreen keyboard. My sister has an iPad and I like it too, for the same reasons.

David Tallboys wrote:

I have an iPad and a Nexus 7. The iPad is the best tablet - it just seems to flow better - but the T100 I mentioned in my full original post is a tablet but with an attachable/detachable keyboard. It is full Windows 8.1 (not RT) so it runs pretty much all windows programs and the machine comes with Excel and Word. So at £350 in the UK - less in the US - I think it is quite a good deal.

In tablet mode the Fisher-Price squares are Ok for those of us who are rotten shots with our fingers. You flick up and down to scroll the screen - but it is not as smooth as the iPad as mentioned earlier.

Clip in the keyboard, add a mouse and you've got a reasonable laptop/netbook. I also have an external screen to use when I want to sit at my desk at home. I wouldn't suggest trying to do photo or video editing. It is a sort of return to the netbook.

I think HP do a similar type of machine but with a bigger screen. I hope that is of use to you.

Scott Eaton Senior Member • Posts: 2,219
Win8 hate - some justified, some not

Having to deal with Win8 on a mass scale gives me a different perspective, but I think it's safe to say that 99% of the hate directed at Win8 is the Metro GUI and lack of start menu, correct? Not the underlying OS itself.

From a purely OS perspective, Win8 is superior to Win7, especially in mobile form. While many of these differences are subtle, it simply has better power management and resource tweaking that is obvious when you install it on less than state of the art mobile devices compared to that same device running Win7.

Metro, for lack of a better term 'sucks', and contrary to constant advice to install a 3rd party Start GUI this isn't an option in many circumstances I deal with. I then have to support that 3rd party add on and deal with any conflicts. Different story for home use where you can do what you want. It also doesn't negate Metro at all because Win8 will still throw you into difficult to to exit Metro wizards for ambiguous sign-ups to MS live, clicking on media links, etc. Very confusing for workflow minded people I have to support.

Just a side comment about Vista given several people are bashing it. Vista's main problem was lack of hardware support when it was introduced. Unlike Vista, Win7 wasn't greeted with people trying to install it on 2gig P4's running integrated video and other hardware that should have been run through a recycling shredder. I don't run into Vista that much, but when I do it's not much different than Win7 and certainly a step up from XP provided it's running on adequate hardware.

gs85739az
gs85739az Senior Member • Posts: 1,339
Re: Win8 hate - some justified, some not

Never had problems with Vista.

For those that use touch screen laptops and tablets, W8 has it's options..but W8 seems a wasted effort for the 90% here that use non touch desktops...

I'll stick with W7 for the for see-able future...

-- hide signature --

Gary

(unknown member) Contributing Member • Posts: 947
Re: Win8 hate - some justified, some not

Metro, for lack of a better term 'sucks', and contrary to constant advice to install a 3rd party Start GUI this isn't an option in many circumstances I deal with. I then have to support that 3rd party add on and deal with any conflicts. Different story for home use where you can do what you want. It also doesn't negate Metro at all because Win8 will still throw you into difficult to to exit Metro wizards for ambiguous sign-ups to MS live, clicking on media links, etc. Very confusing for workflow minded people I have to support.

Just a side comment about Vista given several people are bashing it. Vista's main problem was lack of hardware support when it was introduced. Unlike Vista, Win7 wasn't greeted with people trying to install it on 2gig P4's running integrated video and other hardware that should have been run through a recycling shredder. I don't run into Vista that much, but when I do it's not much different than Win7 and certainly a step up from XP provided it's running on adequate hardware.

This must be the first time I've ever agreed with anything this poster has written but he's spot on with this one!

The corporate networks I've inherited walking into some IT depts. have been a mix of XP and 7. I rarely see Vista unless it comes as Server 2008.  The latest contract involves upgrading a mix of XP, 7 and even some legacy hardware running W2K. Management has made the decision that the firm will standardise on 7. The irritating part of the new contract is downgrading perfectly good new hardware with 8 on it to retrofit 7. IMHO opinion the GUI on 8 is completely unusable on non touchscreen PC's and even if we did have touch monitors we'd be in for RSI claims within a year.

-- hide signature --

The degree of technical knowledge of the fanboi owner is inversely proportional to the size of his ego.

Cigarguy Regular Member • Posts: 448
Re: Win8 hate - some justified, some not

Scott Eaton wrote:

Having to deal with Win8 on a mass scale gives me a different perspective, but I think it's safe to say that 99% of the hate directed at Win8 is the Metro GUI and lack of start menu, correct? Not the underlying OS itself.

From a purely OS perspective, Win8 is superior to Win7, especially in mobile form. While many of these differences are subtle, it simply has better power management and resource tweaking that is obvious when you install it on less than state of the art mobile devices compared to that same device running Win7.

Metro, for lack of a better term 'sucks', and contrary to constant advice to install a 3rd party Start GUI this isn't an option in many circumstances I deal with. I then have to support that 3rd party add on and deal with any conflicts. Different story for home use where you can do what you want. It also doesn't negate Metro at all because Win8 will still throw you into difficult to to exit Metro wizards for ambiguous sign-ups to MS live, clicking on media links, etc. Very confusing for workflow minded people I have to support.

Just a side comment about Vista given several people are bashing it. Vista's main problem was lack of hardware support when it was introduced. Unlike Vista, Win7 wasn't greeted with people trying to install it on 2gig P4's running integrated video and other hardware that should have been run through a recycling shredder. I don't run into Vista that much, but when I do it's not much different than Win7 and certainly a step up from XP provided it's running on adequate hardware.

Yes I agree that 99% of the hate is with the Metro crap and lack of start menu.  First impression means a lot in most everything.  User interface, habit and pattern also means a lot.  IMO, part of the reason that "classic" style cameras have become popular and loved is because some manufacturer have decided to provide features that people have become familiar with and love.

The other thing I most hate is Microsoft arrogance in forcing this down my throat.  I am glad that the executives involved with this, including Ballmer, have all left or been shown the door.  Hopefully MS will realize that giving what the customer want is not bad thing.

 Cigarguy's gear list:Cigarguy's gear list
Olympus C-8080 Wide Zoom Samsung TL500 Pentax MX-1 Nikon D70 Samsung NX100 +6 more
CAcreeks
CAcreeks Forum Pro • Posts: 12,530
Re: who is responsible for Win8 ?

Cigarguy wrote:

The other thing I most hate is Microsoft arrogance in forcing this down my throat. I am glad that the executives involved with this, including Ballmer, have all left or been shown the door.

Julia Larson-Green still works there. She is one of the ones responsible for the Office "ribbon" which I hate, and which was minimized in the most recent release (yay!). The Wikipedia article also lists her as semi-responsible for Surface.

If you really care about all this executive stuff, Rob Enderle wrote a number of interesting essays about Ballmer.

Microsoft's plan was to use the same OS for everything, or as they say, "one Windows to rule them all." Currently that looks like a bad executive decision, but the jury is still out.

Austinian
Austinian Veteran Member • Posts: 7,237
Re: Win8 hate - some justified, some not

Jaberwok wrote:

. IMHO opinion the GUI on 8 is completely unusable on non touchscreen PC's and even if we did have touch monitors we'd be in for RSI claims within a year.

In my experience, this comment strikes at the heart of the whole notion of touch screens everywhere.

Many years ago I had to operate a machine control unit by inputting the program from a vertical keyboard and screen near eye level.

After holding my arm in the air for just half an hour, I was really hurting. I can only imagine the problems an office could face, especially considering the variety of users' sizes, arm reach, etc. Badly done, touch could be an ergonomic and workers' compensation nightmare.

I can see touch screens for tablets, laptops, and kiosks (where the time of use is short), but I wonder what an ergonomic desk setup for large touch screens would look like.

OTOH, I've never tried a desktop touch screen for more than a few minutes; perhaps the problems have been solved. I'd be interested to know.

 Austinian's gear list:Austinian's gear list
Sony Alpha a7 II Sony Alpha a7R III Sony FE 28mm F2 Samyang 135mm F2.0 Sony FE 50mm F2.8 Macro +2 more
Cigarguy Regular Member • Posts: 448
Re: Win8 hate - some justified, some not

Touch screens are great for tablets, smartphones and possibly cameras. But for desktops, it's not my cup of tea. I have smallish fingers but even then it's hard to be precise for any meaningful work. For clicking on large Metro boxes or web surfacing it's fine.

The other thing I hate about touch screens for desktops is the constant need to clean the screen.

 Cigarguy's gear list:Cigarguy's gear list
Olympus C-8080 Wide Zoom Samsung TL500 Pentax MX-1 Nikon D70 Samsung NX100 +6 more
Austinian
Austinian Veteran Member • Posts: 7,237
Re: Win8 hate - some justified, some not

Cigarguy wrote:

Touch screens are great for tablets, smartphones and possibly cameras. But for desktops, it's not my cup of tea. I have smallish fingers but even then it's hard to be precise for any meaningful work. For clicking on large Metro boxes or web surfacing it's fine.

The other thing I hate about touch screens for desktops is the constant need to clean the screen.

Very true. I want my desktop (even my laptop) screens to be perfectly clean. On a light background, even a tiny spot or speck can be noticeable and distracting.

 Austinian's gear list:Austinian's gear list
Sony Alpha a7 II Sony Alpha a7R III Sony FE 28mm F2 Samyang 135mm F2.0 Sony FE 50mm F2.8 Macro +2 more
David Tallboys Regular Member • Posts: 270
Re: David - thanks for your remarks!

Your remarks on a mouse with a tablet reminded me. There's a little program called touchmousepointer (all one word, I think). It adds a little mousepad to the Windows 8.1 tablet screen, you can move it about where you want and it has right and left mouse buttons. It's quite useful. So you can have a mouse on your tablet without needing to use the usb.

I agree with your comments and elsewhere about the dreaded Office ribbon. Open Office/Libre or whatever I have too, but when people send me work related stuff it is sadly just easier to open it work on it and return in Office (things like IRR calculations just don't always seem to give the same results - sometimes blanks are like zeroes other times not).

Hence a tablet/netbook with Word/Excel included was useful for me.

CAcreeks wrote:

Very insightful, thanks much.

For me personally on a tablet, it is the mouse that I miss more than the keyboard. I have a Linux laptop and vastly prefer OpenOffice Writer to Word, so the "Office" aspect of a Windows 8.x tablet is pointless for me.

What I like on the Android tablet are Netflix and Kindle, both of which are not really usable on a laptop. Some apps are better than websites, as well. I really do not have any problem typing on the touchscreen keyboard. My sister has an iPad and I like it too, for the same reasons.

David Tallboys wrote:

I have an iPad and a Nexus 7. The iPad is the best tablet - it just seems to flow better - but the T100 I mentioned in my full original post is a tablet but with an attachable/detachable keyboard. It is full Windows 8.1 (not RT) so it runs pretty much all windows programs and the machine comes with Excel and Word. So at £350 in the UK - less in the US - I think it is quite a good deal.

In tablet mode the Fisher-Price squares are Ok for those of us who are rotten shots with our fingers. You flick up and down to scroll the screen - but it is not as smooth as the iPad as mentioned earlier.

Clip in the keyboard, add a mouse and you've got a reasonable laptop/netbook. I also have an external screen to use when I want to sit at my desk at home. I wouldn't suggest trying to do photo or video editing. It is a sort of return to the netbook.

I think HP do a similar type of machine but with a bigger screen. I hope that is of use to you.

 David Tallboys's gear list:David Tallboys's gear list
Fujifilm X100S Canon PowerShot SX280 HS Canon PowerShot S120
Jim Cockfield Forum Pro • Posts: 16,338
Even simple things are not very intuitive

Scott Eaton wrote:

Having to deal with Win8 on a mass scale gives me a different perspective, but I think it's safe to say that 99% of the hate directed at Win8 is the Metro GUI and lack of start menu, correct? Not the underlying OS itself.

That's probably correct for the most part; but I've seen some "quirks" with the underlying OS, too.

I wish that Microsoft would quit changing things from one version to the next (settings locations, etc.), as that's just going to increase the learning curve that users upgrading need to go through.

Metro, for lack of a better term 'sucks', and contrary to constant advice to install a 3rd party Start GUI this isn't an option in many circumstances I deal with. I then have to support that 3rd party add on and deal with any conflicts. Different story for home use where you can do what you want. It also doesn't negate Metro at all because Win8 will still throw you into difficult to to exit Metro wizards for ambiguous sign-ups to MS live, clicking on media links, etc. Very confusing for workflow minded people I have to support.

No kidding, as if you don't have file associations setup to avoid the new style (formerly known as Metro) apps, you'll find yourself in a screen that a new user would have a hard time figuring out how to exit out of, not realizing that trying to "grab" the top of the screen and dragging it down to the bottom would be the way to exit a new style application with no other obvious ways to stop it and go back to your normal desktop.

I've seen that kind of thing on my PC (for example, clicking a link to a voice mail message from my e-mail, then finding the file type being associated with a new style app for playing it, with no obvious way to exit the application so I could get back to my desktop apps again). IOW, I found no way to click anything on the screen to exit it, and only using Google to determine how to "grab" the top of the screen and "drag" it down to the very bottom allowed me to close it.

The new style apps are not very intuitive, and that's an understatement, as I've been using computers for decades (including heavy use of DOS, as well as all newer versions of Windows after that) and I still had problems figuring out how to do very simple things (for example, just trying to close a new style Application that was loaded by accident because of a default file association) without using Google or other search engines to find solutions.

So, there are very good reasons that users want to avoid them (and good reasons why they want to avoid using Win 8.x entirely, especially if they're more accustomed to using Win 7 and earlier releases).

With third party utilities (for example, the free Classic Shell, or the inexpensive Start8 shell), you can avoid using the new style Start Screen and have a traditional style Start Menu back again.

But you still need to be careful about file associations so that you don't find yourself in a full screen version of an application that has no obvious way to exit out of (until you figure out how to grab the very top of the screen and drag it down to the very bottom of the screen to exit it). The new Style applications are just not very intuitive (no obvious way to exit them, no way to resize them as desired, etc.), and are just not optimized for desktop users.

-- hide signature --

JimC
------

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads