(Mockup) Windows 10 IT'S BEAUTIFUL!

By Mr Smith
in The Fast Ring (Insider Previews)

 Share

Recommended Posts

Proficient

nosense

Posted
Posted

How isn't win 10 a big release? Compared to the prevoius releases.

-New Date and Time (shown by reg hack)

-New Icons

-New task bar UI

-Metro apps replacing win32 apps (Calc)

-New windows animations

-New settings menu

-New login screen (Reg hack showed work in progress)

-Metro 2.0

-Updated Windows store and xbox apps

New Features

-Continuum start Menu

-Sparten Browser

-Cortana

-Virtual desktop

-dx12

-Notification Center

-WMP new playback features

-Universal apps

 

They still havent showed the CP version yet and about 8-9 months from release.

  • Mugwump00, Pulagatha and Dot Matrix
  • Like 3
Veteran

Melfster

Posted
Posted

Windows 10 is definitely a big release for Microsoft.  Windows 8 is more like an interim build that that just rushed out.  Windows 10 looks like it is the culmination of Microsoft vision of 3 Screens (Phone, Computer, TV)  & cloud.   If this isn't a big version I don't what is.

  • +Random Stranger and Dot Matrix
  • Like 2
Grand Master

PGHammer

Posted
Posted
  On 18/01/2015 at 02:03, MorganX said:

Might be a first, 100% agree with the Dot!

MorganX - most of those that hate the idea of ModernUI aren't exactly in good field position.

 

First off - as much as they hate the idea - desktop application (not gaming) development has been basically in maintenance mode since 7, if not Vista.  Even Diskeeper (one of the most popular utilities for Windows, and especially NT, since NT was born) was ripe to be plucked - and it was - with Disk Optimizer.  As much as these same critics talk about an "app gap" compared to Android, Windows as a whole has a multi-year development gap - staying put is not only NOT going to fix it, it could actually make it worse.

 

Second, OEMs and IHVs are also no longer in ANY position to slow down.  Companies need more income - that means sales.  (To satisfy stockholders, bondholders, politicians, et. alia.)  Also, PCs are indeed under pressure from just smartphones, tablets, and slates - the longer the PC market stands pat, the greater the pressure.  Smartphones and tablets are getting more capable - and because PC users have, for the most part, stood pat in a poor economy, the gap between the PC and the phone/tablet HAS shrunk.  For all this talk about the smartphone  and tablet being incapable of running high-end software, does it HAVE to be?  Laptops and notebooks didn't have to be - in fact, weren't both considered, in their early days, consumption-only devices?  The trend is certainly capable of repeating itself.

 

Lastly, I seem to remember the same "air of general invulnerability" being around with mainframe-based computing in general - and IBM in particular.  Exactly where is Big Black and Blue today - merely compared to their position in the heyday of OS/2?

 

In short, there is way too much hard data about the safety of staying put - to put it bluntly, it's NOT safe.

Grand Master

PGHammer

Posted
Posted
  On 18/01/2015 at 04:08, 68k said:

All themes and no new ground-breaking features make Windows 10 a dull boy.

68k - The critics not only don't want more new features, if anything, they are insisting on FEWER new features.  They certainly are aware that the gap merely between XP and Vista meant that Windows had to play catch-up - merely to the Windows OEM hardware base - and they still have NOT caught up completely.  Also, what are developers doing in the Windows space in particular?  Other than Microsoft, I'm seeing a heck of a lot of "meh".  I can't blame 8 - the "meh" goes back to 7, if not Vista.  "First you're ripe - then you rot."  (While the quote originally came from the late Robert Heinlein ("Glory Road") - it's being bandied about today - about IBM; and as much as I liked IBM, it's valid.)

 

I don't want to see Microsoft become another IBM - I didn't even want the IBM of 1990 to become the IBM of today.

 

Staying put means you get run over - do you want to discover what it feels like to be buttered and covered in syrup and attacked by hungry fiends wielding sharpened sporks?

Rising Star

onewarmslime

Posted
Posted
  Quote
QuoteQuoteQuote68k - The critics not only don't want more new features, if anything, they are insisting on FEWER new features.  They certainly are aware that the gap merely between XP and Vista meant that Windows had to play catch-up - merely to the Windows OEM hardware base - and they still have NOT caught up completely.  Also, what are developers doing in the Windows space in particular?  Other than Microsoft, I'm seeing a heck of a lot of "meh".  I can't blame 8 - the "meh" goes back to 7, if not Vista.  "First you're ripe - then you rot."  (While the quote originally came from the late Robert Heinlein ("Glory Road") - it's being bandied about today - about IBM; and as much as I liked IBM, it's valid.)

 

I don't know man. What is in your opinion missing from 8 (except the start menu which could have been added in a patch)? Who exactly does microsoft have to catch up with? For all I know Windows XP has all the features most users will ever need (okay, newer hardware isn't supported but that's IT), and it came out in two thousand freaking one. I won't be surprised if people are still using 7,8 and 10 systems in two decades. As far as I'm concerned they could support Windows Vista forever and never have released another OS.

Experienced

NeoWind

Posted
Posted
  On 18/01/2015 at 02:27, nosense said:

How isn't win 10 a big release? Compared to the prevoius releases.

-New Date and Time (shown by reg hack)

-New Icons

-New task bar UI

-Metro apps replacing win32 apps (Calc)

-New windows animations

-New settings menu

-New login screen (Reg hack showed work in progress)

-Metro 2.0

-Updated Windows store and xbox apps

New Features

-Continuum start Menu

-Sparten Browser

-Cortana

-Virtual desktop

-dx12

-Notification Center

-WMP new playback features

-Universal apps

 

They still havent showed the CP version yet and about 8-9 months from release.

:omg:  That's a new theme boy with some minor new feature already available on mobile OS and linux. Besides DX12, nothing is major except the number attempt to deceived as a big release.

One last thing windows 10 need is transparent tiles. 

  On 18/01/2015 at 00:41, chrisj1968 said:

at this point, I like the settings dialog in the screenshot. what would be awesome is, if MSFT could allow for us to color scheme on our own.

 

Black and blue, magenta and red.. whatever the user likes.

 

But I'm liking the color scheme and look of the dialog alot more. My final judgement will be when I can run the RTM version.

That kind of option is similar to XP which also have 3 color to choose but very limited compared to 7/8.1

Grand Master

PGHammer

Posted
Posted
  On 18/01/2015 at 13:55, onewarmslime said:

I don't know man. What is in your opinion missing from 8 (except the start menu which could have been added in a patch)? Who exactly does microsoft have to catch up with? For all I know Windows XP has all the features most users will ever need (okay, newer hardware isn't supported but that's IT), and it came out in two thousand freaking one. I won't be surprised if people are still using 7,8 and 10 systems in two decades. As far as I'm concerned they could support Windows Vista forever and never have released another OS.

Then explain IBM, sir.

 

You simply cannot stay put forever - if you do, your userbase will dwindle down to nothing.

 

Staying put is not, and never has been, a viable strategy.  Not one company - and especially in IT - has survived standing pat.

 

In fact, look at the entirety of the S&P 500 - not just the tech stocks.  Name ONE company that stood pat for even ten years.

Grand Master

Dot Matrix

Posted
Posted
  On 18/01/2015 at 14:11, Master of Earth said:

That kind of option is similar to XP which also have 3 color to choose but very limited compared to 7/8.1

 

God, that was the worst. I can't believe Microsoft ditched Watercolor for that awful Luna theme.

  • +Random Stranger and +Zagadka
  • Like 2
Grand Master

MorganX

Posted
Posted
  On 18/01/2015 at 12:12, PGHammer said:

68k - The critics not only don't want more new features, if anything, they are insisting on FEWER new features.  They certainly are aware that the gap merely between XP and Vista meant that Windows had to play catch-up - merely to the Windows OEM hardware base - and they still have NOT caught up completely.  Also, what are developers doing in the Windows space in particular?  Other than Microsoft, I'm seeing a heck of a lot of "meh".  I can't blame 8 - the "meh" goes back to 7, if not Vista.  "First you're ripe - then you rot."  (While the quote originally came from the late Robert Heinlein ("Glory Road") - it's being bandied about today - about IBM; and as much as I liked IBM, it's valid.)

 

I don't want to see Microsoft become another IBM - I didn't even want the IBM of 1990 to become the IBM of today.

 

Staying put means you get run over - do you want to discover what it feels like to be buttered and covered in syrup and attacked by hungry fiends wielding sharpened sporks?

 

I think consumers want new functionality, they just don't know what, and no one is developing apps to show them. The PC should be doing more for people that Office and games. Cortana on the desktop will go over well I think.

 

PC people also want the OS and apps to be more elegant like the Apple platform only retaining the full functionality of the PC platform. Hence so many talking about the old boring icons and such still in Windows decades later.

Grand Master

MorganX

Posted
Posted
  On 18/01/2015 at 11:59, PGHammer said:

MorganX - most of those that hate the idea of ModernUI aren't exactly in good field position.

 

First off - as much as they hate the idea - desktop application (not gaming) development has been basically in maintenance mode since 7, if not Vista.  Even Diskeeper (one of the most popular utilities for Windows, and especially NT, since NT was born) was ripe to be plucked - and it was - with Disk Optimizer.  As much as these same critics talk about an "app gap" compared to Android, Windows as a whole has a multi-year development gap - staying put is not only NOT going to fix it, it could actually make it worse.

 

Second, OEMs and IHVs are also no longer in ANY position to slow down.  Companies need more income - that means sales.  (To satisfy stockholders, bondholders, politicians, et. alia.)  Also, PCs are indeed under pressure from just smartphones, tablets, and slates - the longer the PC market stands pat, the greater the pressure.  Smartphones and tablets are getting more capable - and because PC users have, for the most part, stood pat in a poor economy, the gap between the PC and the phone/tablet HAS shrunk.  For all this talk about the smartphone  and tablet being incapable of running high-end software, does it HAVE to be?  Laptops and notebooks didn't have to be - in fact, weren't both considered, in their early days, consumption-only devices?  The trend is certainly capable of repeating itself.

 

Lastly, I seem to remember the same "air of general invulnerability" being around with mainframe-based computing in general - and IBM in particular.  Exactly where is Big Black and Blue today - merely compared to their position in the heyday of OS/2?

 

In short, there is way too much hard data about the safety of staying put - to put it bluntly, it's NOT safe.

 

I agree with that. But I do think Modern UI was too kludgy initially, particularly the learning curve and productivity loss in the enterprise. To the end user, Modern apps were as you alluded to, not apps at all, but phone tablet applets lacking functionality of their desktop counterparts. People are used to half-applets on the desktop. Making full features/functional apps, that run in a Window on the desktop will do much better.

 

App devs have to get more innovative as well. New apps must add capability and yes, coolness. Take the MS Modern Alarm app. When it goes off, if I have a mic, why can't I say snooze if I have a webcam/mic attached?

Grand Master

Active.

Posted
Posted
  On 18/01/2015 at 14:51, MorganX said:

 PC people also want the OS and apps to be more elegant like the Apple platform only retaining the full functionality of the PC platform. Hence so many talking about the old boring icons and such still in Windows decades later.

Honestly, one issue with that is that to achieve elegance and great design (as in, 'not just what it looks like') would involve actually making hard choices, which Microsoft traditionally likes to (or is forced to) avoid. Hence the whole no compromises, redundant UI, have your ribbon and Metro too. Now, if we're just talking about icons of course, that one is easier to fix.

Grand Master

PGHammer

Posted
Posted
  On 18/01/2015 at 14:55, MorganX said:

I agree with that. But I do think Modern UI was too kludgy initially, particularly the learning curve and productivity loss in the enterprise. To the end user, Modern apps were as you alluded to, not apps at all, but phone tablet applets lacking functionality of their desktop counterparts. People are used to half-applets on the desktop. Making full features/functional apps, that run in a Window on the desktop will do much better.

 

App devs have to get more innovative as well. New apps must add capability and yes, coolness. Take the MS Modern Alarm app. When it goes off, if I have a mic, why can't I say snooze if I have a webcam/mic attached?

Morgan - the enterprise wants change least, if at all.  Most economic downturns START in enterprises - largely due to their lack of nimbleness.  (Either there or in government - which is just as staid.)

 

I brought up the development gap for a reason - and it ties directly into the lack of advancement in terms of desktop software.  Merely since XP, the leader in terms of advancement in desktop applications has been Microsoft - and Office in particular.  When a productivity suite is the leader in terms of feature advancement, the platform (any platform) has issues,  (The same was, in fact, true of Apple pre-OS X.)  However, what are developers doing, in the Windows desktop application space in particular?  One critic basically dismissed application developers as "sitting on their laurels" - and he's one of those arguing for standing pat.  We agree on the former, yet disagree on the latter.

 

The critics may not like the idea of RT - however, at least apps are actually being written for it - albeit by mobile-focussed developers.  That is still more than "desktop-focused" developers are doing - or even HAVE been doing since at least 7, if not Vista.  Like it or not, RT and ModernUI is actually sparking more development - which the desktop certainly isn't doing.  Yes - it WILL take time to get full-strength RT or ModernUI applications - however, the same was true of Win32 - which didn't really take off until Windows 2000 - and THAT was because it was pretty darn certain that Win16 would have its chop called.  (Remember, ME was driven by OEMs that wanted to stand pat - Microsoft didn't want it, and neither did developers.)

Grand Master

PGHammer

Posted
Posted
  On 18/01/2015 at 14:48, Dot Matrix said:

God, that was the worst. I can't believe Microsoft ditched Watercolor for that awful Luna theme.

Watercolor (Windows 2000 Professional) harkened back to Windows 9x - not NT - any splash of color came from the wallpaper. (In fact, it was Windows 2000 that really started growing the default wallpaper sets; compare merely the number of default wallpapers in 2000 Pro to NT 4.)  Rather amusingly, in a lot of ways, 2000 Professional was a very understated OS - a rather desired change from the brouhaha over NT 4 and the last three Service Packs for it (5, 6, and 6a - all of which included Active Desktop).  However was even 2000 Pro perfect?  Not in the eyes of some - one ding it got was over the "fade in" effect of the Start menu.  (This was new, and something that ME lacked.)  Still, I called Windows 2000 Professional the Buick Grand National of OSes; looked like something middle-management drove to work, but ran like a NASCAR stocker.)

Proficient

nosense

Posted
Posted

What new features would you like in win10?

 

Something like OSX continuity?Which would be hard to impermanent in windows and it only works with Macs early 2012 models and IOS8 phones.

 

People keep asking for new features , yet they have not point out what new features they want in windows 10. 

  On 18/01/2015 at 14:11, Master of Earth said:

:omg:  That's a new theme boy with some minor new feature already available on mobile OS and linux. Besides DX12, nothing is major except the number attempt to deceived as a big release.


One last thing windows 10 need is transparent tiles. 


That kind of option is similar to XP which also have 3 color to choose but very limited compared to 7/8.1

Grand Master

MorganX

Posted
Posted
  On 18/01/2015 at 15:16, PGHammer said:

Morgan - the enterprise wants change least, if at all.  Most economic downturns START in enterprises - largely due to their lack of nimbleness.  (Either there or in government - which is just as staid.)

 

 I agree with this, except for your primary reason, lack of nimbleness. That's not really it and hasn't been for some time thanks to management tools like System Center. It's when change causes upheaval (increasing support costs) and/or retraining. The enterprise is all for performance and stability, and features if it's what the business community is requesting. The initial implementation of 8 caused too much upheaval, retraining, and thus cost and lost productivity all a round.

 

10 looks much much better as far as how it handles the segue between explorer and modern. It also keeps the best of both. MS invested a lot in the Explorer UI, it's silly to think that all of a sudden none of it is productive and efficient, they just got desperate and lazy. They're on the right track now and I think the enterprise is going to eat 10 up. It's going to be a runaway success in the enterprise. Modern apps, we'll that's another story, as you have been so eloquently analyzing.

Grand Master

+Zagadka Subscriber²

Posted
  • Subscriber²
Posted
  On 18/01/2015 at 14:48, Dot Matrix said:

God, that was the worst. I can't believe Microsoft ditched Watercolor for that awful Luna theme.

 

Yes, dear god that was disappointing. That bubblegum look depresses me every time I see it at a workplace (especially a doctor's office).

  • +Random Stranger
  • Like 1
Grand Master

PGHammer

Posted
Posted
  On 18/01/2015 at 17:45, MorganX said:

 I agree with this, except for your primary reason, lack of nimbleness. That's not really it and hasn't been for some time thanks to management tools like System Center. It's when change causes upheaval (increasing support costs) and/or retraining. The enterprise is all for performance and stability, and features if it's what the business community is requesting. The initial implementation of 8 caused too much upheaval, retraining, and thus cost and lost productivity all a round.

 

10 looks much much better as far as how it handles the segue between explorer and modern. It also keeps the best of both. MS invested a lot in the Explorer UI, it's silly to think that all of a sudden none of it is productive and efficient, they just got desperate and lazy. They're on the right track now and I think the enterprise is going to eat 10 up. It's going to be a runaway success in the enterprise. Modern apps, we'll that's another story, as you have been so eloquently analyzing.

Morgan - by lack of nimbleness, I wasn't referring to IT, but the corporate board - and the CFO (previously VP/Finance) in particular.  How many changes that are/were needed (especially security-related changes) get killed over inconvenience and/or cost?  (If anything, bureaucracies are worse in this regard.)

Grand Master

MorganX

Posted
Posted
  On 19/01/2015 at 19:50, PGHammer said:

Morgan - by lack of nimbleness, I wasn't referring to IT, but the corporate board - and the CFO (previously VP/Finance) in particular.  How many changes that are/were needed (especially security-related changes) get killed over inconvenience and/or cost?  (If anything, bureaucracies are worse in this regard.)

 

Cost is always a major issue, you are correct. Particularly with local government as opposed to the feds who believe it or not utilize technology quite well.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing