Really?
All I seen was Live Tiles in the start bar big whoop.
They need to dump Metro all together.
All I seen was Live Tiles in the start bar big whoop.
They need to dump Metro all together.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Microsoft Gives Early Look at Windows 10 Featuring Windows 7 Elements, Broad Adaptability
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
So wait, will this be a good release or a bad one? I'm confused now.
Windows 9 was going to be amazing. So they skipped it.
I can't believe that http://www.infoworld.com/article/2613504/microsoft-windows/microsoft-skips--too-good--windows-9--jumps-to-windows-10.html actually bleeping happened.
Windows 9 was going to be amazing. So they skipped it.
I can't believe that http://www.infoworld.com/article/2613504/microsoft-windows/microsoft-skips--too-good--windows-9--jumps-to-windows-10.html actually bleeping happened.
Sometimes Microsoft does odd things for seemingly no reason. There has been a meeting somewhere at Microsoft HQ where someone convinced everyone that this was a good idea. But why. Could it be that more is better? I mean 9 is more than 8 but definitely not as much as 10! They should just go ahead and call it Windows 2000.
Of all the desktop OSs, this kind of approach makes the least sense for Windows. At least with iOS or Android, there are a lot of people using the devices and a strong ecosystem built around them, so merging the phone and desktop more would make some sense. But why sacrifice usability to make a desktop PC especially compatible and familiar with a phone OS (Windows) that very few people will use and an almost nonexistent ecosystem? If I remember the numbers, most people who use Windows don't have any Microsoft hardware. Even those who have Xbox Ones won't care to merge them with their PCs.
I mean in a product usability way. Maybe they're doing this just for some business advantage.
Last edited:
No doubt. I know MS is a software company, but I should have worded it a bit differently. Are 8/8.1 users going to have to pay for the update, or is it free for them? I'm genuinely curious to see if MS tries to sweep 8 under the rug by offering the upgrade free to 8 users, or if its paid no matter what.
Are the days of gradients gone? No one is putting gradients in the UI anymore? Even MS has gone to flat, uninspired chrome for their windows?
I kind of wish there was a system setting that was a slider that slid between "Flat" and "Aqua".
I kind of wish there was a system setting that was a slider that slid between "Flat" and "Aqua".
Fixed it for you. Your final jab made your parenthetical statement inaccurate. Which was a tad ironic, in an amusing sort of way.
Also fixed a few spelling errors, because my browser was bugging me about them.
It is no big feat to the give same name to different products. For over a decade Microsoft has talked about platform convergence and after failing to do it on a technical basis, they're going for the name.
It is yet to be seen what this supposed convergence will be in actuality.
I think Windows 8 got a raw deal and did not deserve the negativity it got at launch. It mostly boils down to users being set in their ways I guess. I have used it almost since day one and have had no issues at all.
It only takes one press of the Windows button to exit to a desktop that looks and works 99% like Windows 7 - and runs absolutely every piece of software that runs on Windows 7. Yet a huge amount of Windows 8 users do not know this and think you are stuck with the 'tiles', which of course is a hopeless solution unless you have a touch screen.
It is sadly way too much to expect from people that they should spend 5 minutes learning some new basic skills for interacting with an OS every 15 years. I am quite sure that the same people that skip the short tutorials you are offered at startup are the ones that complain the loudest.
This is largely the same thing that have plagued Windows for years and years - people expect new versions to behave just like the previous ones, and furthermore they expect things like their 20 year old dot-matrix printer, 12 year old scanner and version 5 of Photoshop (from 1998) to work with an OS released many many years later. And for the most time it amazingly does, but it clearly holds the OS back and opens up for complications when hundreds of thousands of drivers potentially can conflict with eachother.
I wish Microsoft would draw a line in the sand and outright say that 'hard- and software older than xx years will not be supported'. In other words much like Apple does with OS X - try installing an old (like in 2-3 year old...) version of most major applications (Adobe is a prime example) and you will be told to upgrade - and people accept it. If Microsoft did something like that it would result in the largest sh--storm in computing history.
It only takes one press of the Windows button to exit to a desktop that looks and works 99% like Windows 7 - and runs absolutely every piece of software that runs on Windows 7. Yet a huge amount of Windows 8 users do not know this and think you are stuck with the 'tiles', which of course is a hopeless solution unless you have a touch screen.
It is sadly way too much to expect from people that they should spend 5 minutes learning some new basic skills for interacting with an OS every 15 years. I am quite sure that the same people that skip the short tutorials you are offered at startup are the ones that complain the loudest.
This is largely the same thing that have plagued Windows for years and years - people expect new versions to behave just like the previous ones, and furthermore they expect things like their 20 year old dot-matrix printer, 12 year old scanner and version 5 of Photoshop (from 1998) to work with an OS released many many years later. And for the most time it amazingly does, but it clearly holds the OS back and opens up for complications when hundreds of thousands of drivers potentially can conflict with eachother.
I wish Microsoft would draw a line in the sand and outright say that 'hard- and software older than xx years will not be supported'. In other words much like Apple does with OS X - try installing an old (like in 2-3 year old...) version of most major applications (Adobe is a prime example) and you will be told to upgrade - and people accept it. If Microsoft did something like that it would result in the largest sh--storm in computing history.
I'm a dual Mac / Windows user. Always had Mac laptops since 2004, always had Windows desktops since the late 90's. I'm a Windows 8.1 user and I'm a Mavericks user.
In my opinion Windows 10 shows a definite shift in Microsofts approach to their user base. They tried to do something different with the "Modern" UI. It didn't pay off.
It had some great features like live tiles but it just wasn't usable on a desktop or laptop without touch. I've been using Windows 8 since it launched and I've only ever tested Modern apps. And by that I mean I tried a few, I didn't like them. A few months later maybe I tried a new one, never used it more than a few minutes.
On my day to day system where I get stuff done, be that software development, image editing, gaming, server administration.. whatever it is, I'm never using a Modern application. And that is because they aren't designed for a Desktop system.
Full screen doesn't work when you're sitting in front of a 27" 2560x1440 display or in my case three 30" 2560x1600 displays. It looks silly, just like when you run iPhone applications meant for the iPhone 5 on a 6 Plus. It looks stupid. The applications have to be optimised for the screen size they are running on.
And now it looks like Microsoft gets that. I'm looking forward to Windows 10 for a lot of reasons.
A start menu that isn't just a "We know you wanted it so we brought it back" but is actually an improvement over the one Windows 7 had. Live tiles are a great idea just not when they are full screen.
Drop shadows on windows, whoever thought it was a good idea to remove those in Windows 8 got it wrong. It sometimes is very difficult to tell at a glance which window is in focus because there is no drop shadows. This was not an issue in Windows 7 or OS X as they both had noticeable drop shadows.
And I also like the new Alt-Tab interface. This is a feature I use all the time in OS X but on there it's really the Expose feature that is now a part of Mission Control. I really like that presentation style of application windows and I'm glad Windows 10 is adopting it.
I'm sure a lot of people are going to rag on Microsoft for copying Apple or giving up on their vision, going backwards instead of forwards etc but as an actual user of their products and every OS since Windows 95 and also a very happy Apple user I think this is great stuff. I'm really excited for Windows 10 and that is the complete opposite to how I felt when Modern UI was unveiled with Windows 8.
Just my thoughts
Thank you. Seriously. This was probably the best post we will see on this thread. I am also a dual Win/Mac user and can appreciate your thoughts here.
I'm amazed by the stat that approx a quarter of windows users are still on XP!
That's just crazy..... But I get why.
I have a full size virtual pinball cabinet I built and it's running XP... And I have zero interest in "upgrading" it.
XP was truly a great OS!
That's just crazy..... But I get why.
I have a full size virtual pinball cabinet I built and it's running XP... And I have zero interest in "upgrading" it.
XP was truly a great OS!
MS went that way with Windows because Mac had already put the menu at the top. It has been a terrible idea from the very beginning but MS felt that they had to differentiate. It seems sad and funny at the same time, looking back.
This announcement of Windows 10 reminds me of the Samsung ads that poke fun at Apple, and Android fanboys - "welcome to 2012, Apple users". While those commercials are annoying, you could make a case about the big screens, NFC, etc...
The same here, really. Windows finally getting multiple desktops, a feature that we had in Leopard since 2007. SEVEN YEARS, people. It's scary to think how far behind Windows is compared to OS X.
Like Bertrand Serlet said (during WWDC 2006): "...but, you know, underneath it all, it's still Windows. It still has the registry as its core, it's still .DLL hell, and it has this well-loved feature called activation".
The same here, really. Windows finally getting multiple desktops, a feature that we had in Leopard since 2007. SEVEN YEARS, people. It's scary to think how far behind Windows is compared to OS X.
Like Bertrand Serlet said (during WWDC 2006): "...but, you know, underneath it all, it's still Windows. It still has the registry as its core, it's still .DLL hell, and it has this well-loved feature called activation".
I was actually interested in seeing what MS would release after their big reforms (new CEO, Gates involvement, etc). Not interested anymore.
But they said it.... single store, single app development... the software will know what type of device it is on. The phone will obviously not have a "desktop."
They promised it and it is here.
Microsoft hasn't increased the major build number since Windows Vista. The version number 7, 8, and I assume 10 is just for marketing. I guess the development team feel they haven't made enough significant changes to the kernel, file system, hardware layer etc. to warrant a build increase.
Windows Vista - version 6.0
Windows 7 - 6.1
Windows 8 - 6.2
Windows 10 - ? maybe 6.3 or 6.5 is my guess
The next major build revision is the Windows to watch for. It will probably be a major overhaul of the underlying system, rather than the interface. Maybe the end of 32-bit, end of the registry, a new file system, more .Net and the early deprecation of the Component Object Model...who knows.
Windows Vista - version 6.0
Windows 7 - 6.1
Windows 8 - 6.2
Windows 10 - ? maybe 6.3 or 6.5 is my guess
The next major build revision is the Windows to watch for. It will probably be a major overhaul of the underlying system, rather than the interface. Maybe the end of 32-bit, end of the registry, a new file system, more .Net and the early deprecation of the Component Object Model...who knows.
Microsoft could potentially make more money from the app (and xbox) store revenue than the Windows revenue itself when you factor in a billion or more potential customer.
