Sign in to follow this  
Xanather

So, windows 8?


Recommended Posts

Madhed    4095

Voted dislike.

First, I see no urgent need to upgrade from Windows 7 at the moment.

Second, as many have already said here and elsewhere, I just don't get the new desktop philosophy (if there is any). Cramming two completely different UI into one OS which I am forced to use if I don't write scripts seems silly. It would have been nice to give the user an option to select their default login UI (boot to desktop vs. boot to Metro).

I don't know if this is still true, but I have seen in reviews that some system settings are only accessible from metro, so I am really forced to go back and forth.

 

IMO they should have gone the iOS route and build separate UI for desktop and mobile, sharing just a common codebase.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ChaosEngine    5185

These days my computing is split between productivity work on win 7 (~50%), gaming on steam (~30%) and browsing/email/whatever on iPad/iPhone. I have no philosophical objection to win8, but haven't really seen a reason to upgrade.

 

From the people who have used windows 8, if I don't have a touch screen, are there any compelling benefits to updating from windows 7?

 
 
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
tstrimp    1798
From the people who have used windows 8, if I don't have a touch screen, are there any compelling benefits to updating from windows 7?

 

Faster

Better Task Manager

Better Explorer

Better Multi-Monitor Support

Better Integrated Search

Includes Hyper-V in the Pro Version

Better File History

 

I'm sure there is more, but this is just what I've noticed in my use.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ChaosEngine    5185
[quote name="tstrimple" post="5021268" timestamp="1358137418"]   Faster Better Task Manager Better Explorer Better Multi-Monitor Support Better Integrated Search Includes Hyper-V in the Pro Version Better File History   I'm sure there is more, but this is just what I've noticed in my use.[/quote] Good info, thanks. Almost none of the reviews I've read have mentioned any of that and instead focused on metro.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
way2lazy2care    790
From the people who have used windows 8, if I don't have a touch screen, are there any compelling benefits to updating from windows 7?

 

Faster

Better Task Manager

Better Explorer

Better Multi-Monitor Support

Better Integrated Search

Includes Hyper-V in the Pro Version

Better File History

 

I'm sure there is more, but this is just what I've noticed in my use.

Elaborating on "faster" startup times are much better.

 

edit: Control panel options are a lot easier to get to if you don't know which part of the control panel they are under. I think in 7 it will only search for the different option windows, but in 8 I think you can search for individual settings. In general Windows key + search is now my preferred way of navigating most of windows whereas on 7 it was a nice alternative.

 

I find the ratio with which I use keyboard/mouse/touch screen to much more favor the keyboard for most tasks now. I use the touchscreen on my laptop more than I ever did with 7, but the amount I use the keyboard vs. the mouse has gone up a lot as well. I don't have enough experience with 8 on a system without touch to say a lot on that though. Might install it on my desktop this weekend to fiddle with WP8 apps.

Edited by way2lazy2care

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jHaskell    1856
Windows 8 is a Tablet focused UI being forced upon desktop systems.

Metro's biggest seeling point is that it's touch friendly.  My desktop does not, and likely will never have a touchscreen.

 

I'll upgrade from Windows 7 when Microsoft releases an OS clearly designed for my computer.

Windows 8 is tablet focused in that you can use it on a tablet without wanting to throw your computer into the wall. It's not tablet focused in that things are more difficult on a desktop than they were before.

 

Relative to Windows 7, I absolutely consider Windows 8 more difficult to use.  Do I consider it more difficult to use in an absolute sense, of course not.  I do, however, consider Windows 8 a clear step backwards in terms of usability from the perspective of a desktop computer with a full keyboard and mouse.  All the various reasons why that is the case have been hashed out repeatedly across all the Internet for months now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
mdwh    1108
All the various reasons why that is the case have been hashed out repeatedly across all the Internet for months now.

I've yet to hear an example of something with keyboard/mouse that is harder - do you have an example?

The only thing forced is the changed start bar[*], which works the same way with keyboard (hit Windows key, start typing) and mouse (click lower left, then select application icon). I admit it's odd they removed the visual icon to click on. But I am glad they seem to be making full use of Fitt's Law in Windows 8. Also remember that MS change the start bar in almost every single version of Windows, some people like some versions better than others. I hated the XP start bar the worst, and prefer 7/8 most of all - on XP I always switch back to the 2000 start bar (and in 8, you can get a tool which switches it back to the one in 7).

The more controversial thing is the new former-Metro UI, which I can see arguments for and against. But your existing software will work in the same way just as before, with the same UI, so it's not forced. And I think UIs and apps optimised for different devices (but sharing a common platform) is better than either a single UI for both, or completely different platforms. There'll always be demand for people to continue writing and supporting such software, and I think that will only change if the new former-Metro evolves to encompass the best of both UIs anway, if such a thing is ever desirable.

[*] Also renamed to start screen, which has led to the "They removed the start bar" myth, but renaming is just a matter of semantics.
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
CryZe    773
The poll would've been more interesting if there were 3 options: "I tried it and I like it", "I tried it and I don't like it", "I haven't tried it".

The thing is, Microsoft is marketing Windows 8 completely wrong. The thing is Microsoft wanted to create a mobile operating system, just like Android and iOS. They did that and called it Windows RT. Obviously they needed a new interface for a mobile operating system and it's pretty obvious that currently applications wouldn't run on it. So they needed to create the Modern UI and the Windows Store Apps.
They also developed the successor to Windows 7 at the same time. So they included all the features of Windows RT as a BONUS. There's no need to use it and all the features of Windows 7 are still in there. They just allow you to run these mobile apps additionally on your Desktop PC if you want to.

I've been using Windows 8 for quite some time now, and overall it is the better Windows 7. And for all those asking: Nope, I was not forced to use any Windows Store App ever at all. I've been using the Desktop the whole time and only need to use the new Start Screen. But what's so bad about it? The tiles? Come on, the desktop with its icons is nothing else... The only difference to the old start menu is that it's full screen. But why would I want it to be as small as it was before? I use it to open a program... I don't need to see the rest of the windows in the mean time. It's basically the desktop as a start menu. And the tiles are actually better than simple static icons, since they can show you additional information. Edited by CryZe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Xanather    782

The poll would've been more interesting if there were 3 options: "I tried it and I like it", "I tried it and I don't like it", "I haven't tried it".

Yeah, should have done that, oh well.

 

I see the discussion for this is still happening.

 

I remember near the beggining of the poll the majority liked Windows 8, but over the last month that slowly changed to the majority disliking windows 8. I don't know if that means anything, just mentioning that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Landshark    182

I've been using Windows 8 Pro for about 2 weeks now.  So far, I absolutely enjoy it!

 

I do gaming, social media, movies, music, C# and Java development and just about everything with it.

 

The major complaints are kind of odd, imho.

 

---- People say, "It's basically the same thing with a little better memory management" then go on to say "It's a regression", yet give no reasons why it's a regression.  

 

----"It's designed for tablets" isn't really a negative comment about Windows 8.  Instead, the comment is just a simple fact, the new start menu is much more usable for a tablet than the old start menu (from Windows 7).  But did you also notice the new start menu is more usable for desktop/laptops as well, when compared to the start menu from Windows 7?

 

----"History shows us every other Windows OS release is bad".  Are you going to base your judgement of Windows 8 based on that statement alone?  MEME's on the Windows 8 logo isn't really a professional or logical way to review an OS.  Think about how ignorant that thought process is.  

 

Windows 8 seems faster and cleaner to me.  All of the desktop/start menu clutter is now gone and I'm left with a much more usable desktop interface.  I almost never have to use the new start screen, but when I do it's faster than using the old start menu.  I can also have 'metro style' apps running in the background (great for iHeartRadio and other music apps) that don't clutter up my workspace.  

 

Windows 8 is almost exactly like Windows 7, except it now has a MUCH more robust start menu and better search function.  It also supports multi-monitors in a much more functional way.  For example, I can have my taskbar items only show up on the monitors that they are open on, which is very useful (and again removes clutter).  Another example, those linux users who gloat about having multiple desktops at once can now lavish in the ability to do just that with Windows 8.  You have the traditional desktop and you have a new 'metro' style desktop, both can be open at the same time and multiple monitors running different apps (granted, the metro 'desktop' only runs metro apps).  Try and think about the usefulness of the new setup.  Personally I've found it very very useful to have 2 desktops running at the same time.

 

The problem is, I believe people WANT to hate it before they use it.  So, when they finally do use it they only see the negative, but ignore that fact that nothing has been taken away from their regular desktop experience.  In fact, the new start menu, search function, and ability to install metro style apps greatly enhances the Windows OS experience.

 

Anyway, I haven't seen a logical reason for why Windows 8 is worse than Windows 7.  I have, however, experienced a lot of reasons for why Windows 8 is much improved over Windows 7.

Edited by Landshark

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
tstrimp    1798

I watched an interesting critique of windows 8 the other day. I can't say I agree with everything he says, and given I still haven't really used win 8 for anything other than a few minutes play in a shop, I'm not really in a position to comment. Anyone else care to comment on it?

Meh... a better use of 20+ minutes if you're interested in Windows 8.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5BSmmSU-UZU

 

Or the condensed version.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wi8NpwiEuzc&list=UUL-fHOdarou-CR2XUmK48Og&index=4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dynamo_Maestro    769

It isn't as easy when you consider NT and 2000 actually come from a separate branch (they got unified back with XP, which I remember caused a lot of uproar back then since XP wasn't anywhere as good running DOS programs as 95 and 98 were).

 

This highlights some of my amusement about the dislike of Win8; when XP first came out it was rounded on for not being as good as 98 in some cases and for being too colourful and dumbed down when compared to Win2k; between the massive 'start' button and the colour scheme people took the 'we will not upgrade from Win98/2k!' stance! (I stayed with Win2k for a long time, but that was in part pragmatic as Win2K served my needs and part because I didn't like the colour scheme, never did).

 

Vista then comes out and XP is suddenly 'the best OS MS have ever done!' and everything was ruined and the sky was falling and the like. Win7 appeared with some fixes but, importantly, mature drivers around and suddenly it is hailed by some as 'the best OS MS have ever done!' - some continue to hang stubbornly onto XP of course but in more cases some cosmetic changes and some minor fixes was all that was required to make people happy.

 

Heck, when Win95 was released the start menu itself wasn't met with universal acceptance either as it seemed alien to so many yet 17 years on people are crying about a change to the very same.

 

People are fickle; the UI will evolve and issues will get ironed out as wider usability is taken into account and when the next change comes along people will cry about that as well.

 

 

I always remind people of the 'old' whining and compare to the new, yet its the same complaints over and over, im so glad someone else mentioned this before I had a chance.

 

Also Windows 7 went from "Just a vista clone + bug fixes" to "a decent step up to XP".

 

I use windows server 2012, in June I will prob be developing for windows 8, but so far I have no real complaints about the OS, I feel a few weeks ago I might have, but I cant remember what they were.

 

I have 4 buttons on normal desktop eitherway and maybe this is just me but I use to pin popular apps to the taskbar anyway, if anything the start menu served very little use, something I only really became aware of when using windows 8.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
way2lazy2care    790

I watched an interesting critique of windows 8 the other day. I can't say I agree with everything he says, and given I still haven't really used win 8 for anything other than a few minutes play in a shop, I'm not really in a position to comment. Anyone else care to comment on it?

I'm still watching it, but so far here's what I have to say. I'll update as I watch.

 

  • He complains about things 'just happening'. His example is the weather app popping up at random times. I do not know how he got Windows 8 to do that, but I have literally never experienced something similar thus far.
  • He complains that apps are full screen in metro. Metro is designed for the average user who generally only cares about doing one thing. Had they not also included desktop this would be a totally valid complaint, but as most power users can and should just avoid metro in most cases, I don't think it holds water. Also they aren't always full screen.
  • He complains he can't close apps. If he had watched the video during the installation he would know you just drag down from the top or mouse to top left and right click the app.
  • He says it treats the touchpad like a tablet touch screen. This is a driver issue. Not a windows 8 issue afaik.
  • He complains about swyping gestures being similar. That's true, but they are different. Dragging from left off the screen will switch apps. Dragging from left anywhere else works the way you'd expect. Windows 8 is designed around using the edges of the screen as control anchors; I feel like he just couldn't get over this paradigm.
  • He couldn't find the control panel. The control panel options are now all searchable and separate results, so the control panel as we know it is pretty much deprecated. His example "Start->Control Panel->Period" is 1. actually more like "Start->Control Panel->Audio Devices" 2. is now done like "Windows key->'audio devices'"
  • "Nobody uses the windows key," he should be hit in the face with a phonebook for saying this.
  • He has a lot of arbitrary complaints. "Why is it called the charms bar?!" Who cares?
  • He complains that live tiles are confusing. Some are, but I find them many times more useful regardless of how confusing they are. If you prefer a non-confusing icon, you can use the min sized version and it will be an icon. He then says they are not 'information dense'. They aren't dense with information about the app, they are dense with information about what you would use the app for. In many cases this means I don't even have to open an app anymore because the live tile tells me most of what I want to know.
  • No white/blank space on the start screen. This is fairly subjective. I personally disagree, but to each his own.
Edited by way2lazy2care

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
CryZe    773

He couldn't find the control panel. The control panel options are now all searchable and separate results, so the control panel as we know it is pretty much deprecated. His example "Start->Control Panel->Period" is 1. actually more like "Start->Control Panel->Audio Devices" 2. is now done like "Windows key->'audio devices'"

Right click on the lower left corner of the screen and you can access some kind of "old start menu" where you actually have more interesting choices than in the old start menu. From there you can easily access the control panel.

Also, what I just realized: Metro is perfect for a second screen. Having Youtube videos, Twitter or Skype open all the time while also filling the whole screen is perfect when you are working or playing a game on the other screen:

BBeK7xsCQAAtiMz.jpg

I mean it's not much different as to what you could do with windowed applications. But metro applications simply "feel" much better than windowed applications on the second screen. I don't even know how to describe it xD Edited by CryZe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also Windows 7 went from "Just a vista clone + bug fixes" to "a decent step up to XP".

To be fair, many people kept calling it "what Vista should have been". 7 had it easy, really.

 

He complains he can't close apps. If he had watched the video during the installation he would know you just drag down from the top or mouse to top left and right click the app.

I can see from where this comes. Some time ago Microsoft sent in one of their newsletters some PDF teaching programmers how to get started making Metro apps. I assume it was already outdated, because it had quite a large bunch of wrong information. One of the things it mentioned is that apps can't be closed. Apps were expected to save their status when they lost focus, and when the system started running out of memory Windows would automatically start closing apps as needed.

 

Not sure how much of an issue would that be unless Windows failed miserably at managing memory (though it was never stellar in that sense), but whatever, in the end you can close apps. Another thing that PDF said was that apps couldn't be run in the background...

 

He couldn't find the control panel. The control panel options are now all searchable and separate results, so the control panel as we know it is pretty much deprecated. His example "Start->Control Panel->Period" is 1. actually more like "Start->Control Panel->Audio Devices" 2. is now done like "Windows key->'audio devices'"

I can see this being an issue if you don't know exactly what to write. Isn't there a proper settings menu anyway?

 

"Nobody uses the windows key," he should be hit in the face with a phonebook for saying this.

[url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=z86ziWw8TGg#t=318s]Just call this guy[/url] -__-'

 

Serious question, how does Metro fare when it comes to shortcuts? I'm not going to switch back to Windows, but I'm curious, I'm a very keyboard heavy user and make use of shortcuts a lot. I would see a legitimate reason to get upset if the use of shortcuts has been dumbed down, a mouse is simply slower. It doesn't matter there are desktop programs, I see no reason why Metro apps couldn't make good use of shortcuts too, so I'd like to know how well is that handled.

 

In the end my biggest worry isn't the GUI anyway, it's the direction Microsoft is taking with the store. Metro apps are expected to be the future of Windows, but the only way to get a Metro app is through their store =/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
benryves    1999


He complains he can't close apps. If he had watched the video during the installation he would know you just drag down from the top or mouse to top left and right click the app.

I can see from where this comes. Some time ago Microsoft sent in one of their newsletters some PDF teaching programmers how to get started making Metro apps. I assume it was already outdated, because it had quite a large bunch of wrong information. One of the things it mentioned is that apps can't be closed. Apps were expected to save their status when they lost focus, and when the system started running out of memory Windows would automatically start closing apps as needed.
 
Not sure how much of an issue would that be unless Windows failed miserably at managing memory (though it was never stellar in that sense), but whatever, in the end you can close apps. Another thing that PDF said was that apps couldn't be run in the background...


This was the case in the first preview release, and it was quite irritating as applications would be permanently stuck in the task switching order so if you accidentally launched an application you didn't mean to it would keep popping up as you switched between tasks. You could only terminate apps via task manager or rebooting - fortunately they gave us a way to close them in the next preview release.
 

Serious question, how does Metro fare when it comes to shortcuts? I'm not going to switch back to Windows, but I'm curious, I'm a very keyboard heavy user and make use of shortcuts a lot. I would see a legitimate reason to get upset if the use of shortcuts has been dumbed down, a mouse is simply slower. It doesn't matter there are desktop programs, I see no reason why Metro apps couldn't make good use of shortcuts too, so I'd like to know how well is that handled.

Metro apps tend to be pointer-happy, though they do respond to keyboard input - Alt+F4 closes them, as you'd expect, and there are some new standard Win+key shortcuts for use inside apps (Win+Z brings up the toolbar that appears when you swipe the top/bottom edge and Win+I brings up the settings bar that appears if when you swipe the right edge, though these can also be invoked by hovering the mouse to the right edge of the screen or right clicking). Beyond that it's up to individual apps for how well they support the keyboard - they tend to respond to cursor keys and tab as you'd expect, however.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
FLeBlanc    3141

I've been trying to put my finger on why, exactly, I am not enjoying Windows 8. (To be fair, I [i]did[/i] go into it with the expectation that I would hate it, though even then I didn't know [i]why[/i] I thought I would hate it.) But I think I've pinned it down. It's because of this:

 

He complains that apps are full screen in metro. Metro is designed for the average user who generally only cares about doing one thing. Had they not also included desktop this would be a totally valid complaint, but as most power users can and should just avoid metro in most cases, I don't think it holds water. Also they aren't always full screen.

 

This, right here, is why I hate Windows 8. It violates the guideline of modelessness. I actually hate modes when dealing with my UI. I hate that my computer might behave radically differently when it is in one mode as opposed to another. This means that when, for example, I have to help my technologically handicapped family sort out their problems, I have one more point of data to consider (are you in Metro mode?) that can significantly alter the nature of the solution I provide.

 

I hate this. I don't think I can properly express how much I hate the idea of Metro on my PC, or on any PC I might have to work with. Sure, I can always just switch to desktop mode and forget about Metro... at least until my idiot sister calls me up at 3AM because her computer isn't working the way she expects and she can't get on facebook so she can read about her stupid friends' little rat dogs or find out all about how her ex-boyfriend passed out puking drunk at a frat party. Then I have to think about Metro, because she's exactly the sort of developmentally arrested customer Microsoft had in mind when they created Metro in the first place.

 

Call me a backwards Luddite, mock me for detesting change, whatever. I don't give a shit. I think there is a reason the Windows 8 launch went so poorly, and I don't think it was fully because MS confused their message.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
tstrimp    1798

I've been trying to put my finger on why, exactly, I am not enjoying Windows 8. (To be fair, I did go into it with the expectation that I would hate it, though even then I didn't know why I thought I would hate it.) But I think I've pinned it down. It's because of this:

 

 

He complains that apps are full screen in metro. Metro is designed for the average user who generally only cares about doing one thing. Had they not also included desktop this would be a totally valid complaint, but as most power users can and should just avoid metro in most cases, I don't think it holds water. Also they aren't always full screen.

 

 

This, right here, is why I hate Windows 8. It violates the guideline of modelessness. I actually hate modes when dealing with my UI. I hate that my computer might behave radically differently when it is in one mode as opposed to another. This means that when, for example, I have to help my technologically handicapped family sort out their problems, I have one more point of data to consider (are you in Metro mode?) that can significantly alter the nature of the solution I provide.

 

I hate this. I don't think I can properly express how much I hate the idea of Metro on my PC, or on any PC I might have to work with. Sure, I can always just switch to desktop mode and forget about Metro... at least until my idiot sister calls me up at 3AM because her computer isn't working the way she expects and she can't get on facebook so she can read about her stupid friends' little rat dogs or find out all about how her ex-boyfriend passed out puking drunk at a frat party. Then I have to think about Metro, because she's exactly the sort of developmentally arrested customer Microsoft had in mind when they created Metro in the first place.

 

Call me a backwards Luddite, mock me for detesting change, whatever. I don't give a shit. I think there is a reason the Windows 8 launch went so poorly, and I don't think it was fully because MS confused their message.

 

I don't understand your problem. Metro applications behave MUCH more consistently than before Windows 8. You search, access settings, manage permissions and share data the same way across all metro applications. You don't have to hunt through various toolbars and hope the developers stuck to convention. This is a huge step forward for providing tech support for your families. That being said, I don't use metro apps on my laptop at all. I am in the desktop the entire time. In normal usage, most people wouldn't even notice I was using Windows 8. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
cowsarenotevil    3003

So I finally installed Windows 8 on my Macbook. Installation didn't go perfectly smoothly (although I think this is almost entirely the fault of the Mac hardware/boot camp not officially supporting Windows 8) but everything seems to be working now. I haven't had enough time to really get familiar with it, but so far I've found some good things and some bad things.

 

It seems like the Windows Classic interface is no longer supported in desktop mode, which is notable only because until now I've had my UI elements styled exactly as in Windows 95. The good news is that the Windows 8 desktop interface is also the only one that I actually like as much as the Windows 95 one. I am a huge fan of the solid-color title bars and buttons and minimal borders. It reminds me a lot of the interface in Microsoft Encarta 95 which, at least from my perspective is a good thing. It's pretty much the polar opposite of Windows XP's cartoony, unnecessarily "shaded" UI chrome, which, in my opinion, was outdated as soon as it was released.

 

I've had a couple of weird issues so far, though. The first is that some difficult-to-disable "adaptive brightness" was capping my screen brightness for seemingly no reason until I looked up how to disable it. I'm not sure what it's supposed to do or if it works for anyone, but it definitely didn't work for me.

 

The second problem I've noticed is that if I sort my desktop icons (though to be honest I normally have them disabled altogether) by, for instance, file type, it seems to order them vertically before horizontally. This is fine, but if I try to select a run of them with the "shift" key, it seems to think they should be sorted horizontally before vertically, and selects them in a completely unhelpful way. This is hard to explain, so let me try an example: I sort them by type, and I get three vertical columns of .pdf files. I click on the first .pdf, hold shift, then click on the last one. Instead of selecting all three columns of .pdf files, it selects several rows of irrelevant files, as if it's expecting the icons to be sorted into rows instead of columns. It's not a huge issue, but it's annoying and stupid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
tstrimp    1798

So I finally installed Windows 8 on my Macbook. Installation didn't go perfectly smoothly (although I think this is almost entirely the fault of the Mac hardware/boot camp not officially supporting Windows 8) but everything seems to be working now. I haven't had enough time to really get familiar with it, but so far I've found some good things and some bad things.

 

It seems like the Windows Classic interface is no longer supported in desktop mode, which is notable only because until now I've had my UI elements styled exactly as in Windows 95. The good news is that the Windows 8 desktop interface is also the only one that I actually like as much as the Windows 95 one. I am a huge fan of the solid-color title bars and buttons and minimal borders. It reminds me a lot of the interface in Microsoft Encarta 95 which, at least from my perspective is a good thing. It's pretty much the polar opposite of Windows XP's cartoony, unnecessarily "shaded" UI chrome, which, in my opinion, was outdated as soon as it was released.

 

I've had a couple of weird issues so far, though. The first is that some difficult-to-disable "adaptive brightness" was capping my screen brightness for seemingly no reason until I looked up how to disable it. I'm not sure what it's supposed to do or if it works for anyone, but it definitely didn't work for me.

 

The second problem I've noticed is that if I sort my desktop icons (though to be honest I normally have them disabled altogether) by, for instance, file type, it seems to order them vertically before horizontally. This is fine, but if I try to select a run of them with the "shift" key, it seems to think they should be sorted horizontally before vertically, and selects them in a completely unhelpful way. This is hard to explain, so let me try an example: I sort them by type, and I get three vertical columns of .pdf files. I click on the first .pdf, hold shift, then click on the last one. Instead of selecting all three columns of .pdf files, it selects several rows of irrelevant files, as if it's expecting the icons to be sorted into rows instead of columns. It's not a huge issue, but it's annoying and stupid.

 

Agreed on all points. The adaptive brightness was annoying and I'm chalking it up to a bootcamp / Windows 8 quirk as I've not seen anything similar on "made for windows" devices. Also, I just noticed the problem you're having on the desktop icons, and it's definitely weird. Another reason to not use the desktop to store files!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
swiftcoder    18426

there are some new standard Win+key shortcuts for use inside apps (Win+Z brings up the toolbar that appears when you swipe the top/bottom edge and Win+I brings up the settings bar that appears if when you swipe the right edge, though these can also be invoked by hovering the mouse to the right edge of the screen or right clicking).

After 2 decades, Microsoft finally realises that combining the CTRL and META keys was a horrible idea? Now if only Linux distros would realise this too...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this