[OFFICIAL] Windows 10 Insider Program

[ToneKnee]

I'm not. Knowing how ugly is that This PC icon... Everything's possible.

 

Well if it isn't fake then I would imagine they are just placeholders.

[HawkMan]

I didn't design this. It's a screenshot of WfW 3.11. Don't you recognize it?

 

So all you guys think an OS from 25 years ago has a dated UI? LOL MS must be listening to you, because they have designed probably the most ugly and boring UI in history.

 

I know what it is, and it has no relevance, it doesn't look remotely like Windows 8, 8.1 or 10. and it doesn't match anything of what I said in my posts, so your reply and comparison was irrelevant. and as meaningful as the stupid Windows 1 and AOL comparisons. 

 

And yes the OS from 25 years ago looks dated and windows 8-10 doesn't look remotely like it, what was your point again ? 

[insanelyapple]

I've installed Polish 9926 build in Virtualbox 4.3.10 on Xubuntu - because Oracle doesn't allow to run Windows guests in recent builds when uxtheme.dll is patched (machine is immediately stopped with error), for some weird reason.

It's full of English strings which makes really unpleasant feeling when build is claimed to be Polish  - I know 10 is still in development stage but I consider to install it and use with English language pack for the first time when it will be ready.

[Dot Matrix]

Dot, Do you like the icons?

 

Also Cortana loading needs to be sped up. The time from click to opening is slow and even on WP it is slightly sluggish. Yes its a beta, but there have been little to no updates. With siri on the iPad, the microphone activates instantly. I would love to say Cortana take a picture, or Cortana snap a screenshot, or Cortana translate this, or Cortana speech to text, but for little things Cortana is too slow to activate (from cold boot).

TBH... No. I find them too "bright" more than I dislike the design. If it was up to me though, I'd love an icon set that matches the icon set in Office 2013.

[Quillz]

Maybe you should go back to this then:

 

In all honesty, if Windows had a theme like this, I would use it. This, to me, is great UI design. It gets out of the way, it's not distracting. No frills or decorations, it just provides something simple, clean, functional.

 

It would be better without the 3D-bevels on the buttons and scroll boxes, though.

[HawkMan]

In all honesty, if Windows had a theme like this, I would use it. This, to me, is great UI design. It gets out of the way, it's not distracting. No frills or decorations, it just provides something simple, clean, functional.

 

It would be better without the 3D-bevels on the buttons and scroll boxes, though.

 

install BB4W

[Quillz]

install BB4W

What is this?

[HawkMan]

Blackbox for windows. granted it does a bit more than windows themeing  but it's themeing pretty much consist of one colors for title and eventual borders and another for the title text. of course you also get the BB shell so not start menu but a right clock launcher instead so....

[Studio384]

2/16/2015? .... is there somewhere in the world that is 10 days ahead on the rest of us?

Yep. It's called Mock-up Land.

 

Either way, I think the current icons are simply placeholders (or most of them). They all seem to be made by different groups. Usualy, it's one company that designs all icons (Icon Factory for Windows XP, Vista, 7 and 8 if I'm not wrong). These seem to be mixes from different branches that just needed some new high-res icons to experimentate with. I highly doubt this will be the finsihed product. Perhaps they are just testing how they can replace old icons with these new icons to get all of this done, then replace the graphics when the full icon set is ready. We'll see.

[patseguin Global Moderator]

I know what it is, and it has no relevance, it doesn't look remotely like Windows 8, 8.1 or 10. and it doesn't match anything of what I said in my posts, so your reply and comparison was irrelevant. and as meaningful as the stupid Windows 1 and AOL comparisons. 

 

And yes the OS from 25 years ago looks dated and windows 8-10 doesn't look remotely like it, what was your point again ?

Well the relevance is that I think MS is going backwards with their UI design to almost Windows 3.1 graphics. Probably an extreme example, but I'm passionate about it.

In all honesty, if Windows had a theme like this, I would use it. This, to me, is great UI design. It gets out of the way, it's not distracting. No frills or decorations, it just provides something simple, clean, functional.

 

It would be better without the 3D-bevels on the buttons and scroll boxes, though.

Omg, I give up.

[+Fahim S. MVC]

Well the relevance is that I think MS is going backwards with their UI design to almost Windows 3.1 graphics. Probably an extreme example, but I'm passionate about it.

Passionate maybe. Incorrect totally.

First of all there is no such thing as forward or backwards when it comes to design tends - just cyclical. Flat design is the in thing at the moment, not driven buy the same constraints as it was the first time round (which was a complete lack of power to do anything more).

Modern day flat design is driven by a number of factors. These are: plain boredom with skeumorphism (so no glass please), and the requirement for scalability to a number of form factors. Flat design satisfies both of these requirements.

[Quillz]

Well the relevance is that I think MS is going backwards with their UI design to almost Windows 3.1 graphics. Probably an extreme example, but I'm passionate about it.

Omg, I give up.

Why are you giving up? It's just a differing of opinion. I like simple UI, you prefer something different. That's completely fine, and the real issue here is that Windows 10 should provide multiple themes to do their best to satisfy everyone's preferences.

[+Zagadka Subscriber²]

I think what you guys are arguing about has more to do with high contrast design than anything else like "flat" or "modern".

[PGHammer]

Passionate maybe. Incorrect totally.

First of all there is no such thing as forward or backwards when it comes to design tends - just cyclical. Flat design is the in thing at the moment, not driven buy the same constraints as it was the first time round (which was a complete lack of power to do anything more).

Modern day flat design is driven by a number of factors. These are: plain boredom with skeumorphism (so no glass please), and the requirement for scalability to a number of form factors. Flat design satisfies both of these requirements.

Also, a flat design is not as power-intensive as a 3D (even fake-3D) UI design - which is why portable  PCs (even "traditional" laptops and notebooks) benefit, due to that age-old bugbear of anything portable - battery life.

That is one thing I discovered with my own "legacy notebook" that is in the testing pool - it actually originally shipped with Vista.  The Windows 10 Pro technical Preview - for reasons of a flatter UI, among others - has better battery life than the SAME notebook running any other flavor of Windows.  (Remember, if anything, 10 will be on more styles merely of portable hardware than any previous version of Windows - and that is without including phones.)

 

That is, in fact, why I wonder if any of the critics of the flat UI (not just in Windows) even own ANY portable hardware, let alone 10-capable legacy hardware.

[DeadEndAccount]

Either they embrace the Apple Way (if they want to stay) or leave - with OS X, there is no choice at all.  (The difference with iOS, surprisingly, is that there is MORE choice than there is with OS X.)

Speaking of old Things Apple Going Away, have the MacOS/OS X users among us forgotten about "haxies"?  The haxy is the MacOS/OSX version of uxtheme patching - it predates OS X (it goes back all the way to OS 8, in fact), and was used strictly as a dress-up mechanism (the same way uxtheme patching works in Windows).  However, it started getting harder to use haxies with Snow Leopard, and became impossible with Lion.  (I think the developer had a clue - he sold the company behind the haxy to Smith Micro Software before Mountain Lion's launch.)  If anything, OS X developers - those that have stayed - have become as conformist as any dictatorship.  It may be elegant and consistent, but the price paid is conformity and control - both are ceded to Apple.

 

With Windows, on the other hand, there has ALWAYS been installer choice - one of the oldest installers for Windows, in fact, is NOT a Microsoft product; have we forgotten about InstallShield?  InstallShield was, in fact, the default installer for a LOT of desktop software - including the first Win32 versions of Office.  (A copy of it was typically included with Visual Studio - and other IDEs as well, including Borland's, Intel's, and even Symantec's development tools.  Yes - I DID say "Symantec" - while Symantec may be BEST known for security tools, they have a surprisingly LONG history in terms of developer tools - they and Microsoft are the original JOINT stakeholder of the Windows Foundation Classes.)  All the OTHER installers (including Microsoft's own MSI) were designed to provide options to InstallShield - primarily due to cost/price; a full license for InstallShield is quite pricey, and even Microsoft resented getting continually stung.  Lots of choice - Microsoft's guideline are, in fact, just that.  That is, of course, also the reason for the lack of UI (or UX) consistency - some developers (Adobe, for example) use their UI/UX as branding.  In other words, the developers can (and should) share some of the responsibility for the inconsistency of the UI in Windows.

 

The point I have been trying to make is that despite (or even possibly BECAUSE) of the UI/UX inconsistency within Windows, Windows has become known as an operating system for independent thinkers because it is NOT conformist, or even all that elegant.  In other words, Windows actually reflects the country in which it was born - the United States.  It's not Mercedes, or Audi - and it's definitely not Porsche.  It's Chevrolet - and it is as proud of that independent non-conformist attitude as Chevy fanatics are of the "bowtie" logo that Chevrolet has had nearly from the beginning.

 

1) Haxies are completely unrelated to developers and their ability to customise the look and feel of their application. Adobe for years has had their own custom UI out of need to be able to cater for both platforms that they support. I have nothing wrong with a custom look and feel but there are HIG that give plenty of room for 'personality' without completely butchering the interface to the point that is out of step with the rest of the operating system. It has nothing to do with dictatorship and conformity but everything to do with a consistent implementation of the GUI guidelines so that the basic Mac UI skills you acquire over time can be applied to almost any application running on said operating system - learn the fundamentals of navigating a UI and be able to adapt to new applications as they come along.

 

2) Regarding the custom installers, from what I understand even with the introduction of MSI the tools were pretty inflexible and things have only started to improve with recent releases. To be honest I was hoping that Microsoft would replace msi with APPX for both win32 and WinRT applications and have that integrated in with the desktop management software used to deploy updates, upgrades and new software. Microsoft has the talent but the question is whether Microsoft is willing to set the agenda themselves by making sure all their own software is deployed using that in much the same way that Apple will dogfood their own API's and guidelines to set an example to third parties on how things should be done.

 

3) To justify bad UI design as "I'm a free spirit" didn't wash with Linux and GNOME or KDE so it won't wash when it comes to Windows either - there is a fine line between making an application that has a unique look and feel yet still conforms to the basic UI fundamentals that Microsoft lays down. Most of my venting isn't about third parties but the lack of consistency by Microsoft in their own product - Windows. You cannot force third parties to conform to a set of guidelines but one would at least expect that Microsoft would ensure that all the bundled applications and the UI of their operating system was consistent rather than the messy mish-mash of different common control and dialogue due to a failure by them to move their code base forward when they move their foundations forward.

 

Edit: Even with the eccentric nature of their Windows UI I'm still open to moving to Windows 10 if WWDC 2015 turns into a giant lemon of visual tweaks over much needed substance under the hood. Given the come back of Dell as a viable option for me to purchase a laptop and desktop off the need for Apple to lift it's game is higher than ever if they want to win me over as a customer - I've been using Mac's for 10 years but it doesn't mean that I have some sort of loyalty that stops me from considering alternatives. Right now if things keep going the way they do then it'll be an XPS 8700 + XPS 13.3" + HTC One M9 in the future if more fluff comes out like UI tweaks rather than updating the OpenGL, OpenCL, a new file system and fixing the issues under the hood they've been neglecting for years.

[George P Global Moderator]

The icons are still in flux, they're trying out new things to see what works, I doubt anything on the desktop is final except for the new icons in the settings app.  I expect more icons to end up like those actually.

[Prymitywista]

Yep. It's called Mock-up Land.

 

Either way, I think the current icons are simply placeholders (or most of them). They all seem to be made by different groups. Usualy, it's one company that designs all icons (Icon Factory for Windows XP, Vista, 7 and 8 if I'm not wrong). These seem to be mixes from different branches that just needed some new high-res icons to experimentate with. I highly doubt this will be the finsihed product. Perhaps they are just testing how they can replace old icons with these new icons to get all of this done, then replace the graphics when the full icon set is ready. We'll see.

 

 

The icons are still in flux, they're trying out new things to see what works, I doubt anything on the desktop is final except for the new icons in the settings app.  I expect more icons to end up like those actually.

 

 

The funniest things will be, when they will not do anything with those icons on the desktop...

[BoDEAN]

Are the majority of users on here running this daily on their main system as their main os?

 

[DeadEndAccount]

Yep. It's called Mock-up Land.

 

Either way, I think the current icons are simply placeholders (or most of them). They all seem to be made by different groups. Usualy, it's one company that designs all icons (Icon Factory for Windows XP, Vista, 7 and 8 if I'm not wrong). These seem to be mixes from different branches that just needed some new high-res icons to experimentate with. I highly doubt this will be the finsihed product. Perhaps they are just testing how they can replace old icons with these new icons to get all of this done, then replace the graphics when the full icon set is ready. We'll see.

 

You'd think that by now they would have moved to vector based icons but alas both Windows and OS X insist on using bitmap icons because apparently vector look too 'cartoony'. The icons they had in BeOS were nice and if updated I think would make a great icon set:

 

http://www.guidebookgallery.org/screenshots/beos5

 

It'll be interesting to see what happens because there is still a lot of water left to go under the bridge before the release it to the world.

[Dot Matrix]

Are the majority of users on here running this daily on their main system as their main os?

I try to. My setup is on a secondary system, though, so when things don't work, I move back to my desktop running Win8.1

[+Zagadka Subscriber²]

Well, one of the problems they will have with icons is compatibility... even if MS moved to vector icons (which would be a good thing), they would need to also support bitmap icons and run support for the two types simultaneously.

[Pulagatha]

First of all there is no such thing as forward or backwards when it comes to design tends - just cyclical. Flat design is the in thing at the moment, not driven buy the same constraints as it was the first time .

 

That sentence contradicts itself.

[+Fahim S. MVC]

Well, one of the problems they will have with icons is compatibility... even if MS moved to vector icons (which would be a good thing), they would need to also support bitmap icons and run support for the two types simultaneously.

Another complete misconception. At very small sizes you need a different icon. You can't just simply use vector icons.

That sentence contradicts itself.

Which bit?

[PGHammer]

1) Haxies are completely unrelated to developers and their ability to customise the look and feel of their application. Adobe for years has had their own custom UI out of need to be able to cater for both platforms that they support. I have nothing wrong with a custom look and feel but there are HIG that give plenty of room for 'personality' without completely butchering the interface to the point that is out of step with the rest of the operating system. It has nothing to do with dictatorship and conformity but everything to do with a consistent implementation of the GUI guidelines so that the basic Mac UI skills you acquire over time can be applied to almost any application running on said operating system - learn the fundamentals of navigating a UI and be able to adapt to new applications as they come along.

 

2) Regarding the custom installers, from what I understand even with the introduction of MSI the tools were pretty inflexible and things have only started to improve with recent releases. To be honest I was hoping that Microsoft would replace msi with APPX for both win32 and WinRT applications and have that integrated in with the desktop management software used to deploy updates, upgrades and new software. Microsoft has the talent but the question is whether Microsoft is willing to set the agenda themselves by making sure all their own software is deployed using that in much the same way that Apple will dogfood their own API's and guidelines to set an example to third parties on how things should be done.

 

3) To justify bad UI design as "I'm a free spirit" didn't wash with Linux and GNOME or KDE so it won't wash when it comes to Windows either - there is a fine line between making an application that has a unique look and feel yet still conforms to the basic UI fundamentals that Microsoft lays down. Most of my venting isn't about third parties but the lack of consistency by Microsoft in their own product - Windows. You cannot force third parties to conform to a set of guidelines but one would at least expect that Microsoft would ensure that all the bundled applications and the UI of their operating system was consistent rather than the messy mish-mash of different common control and dialogue due to a failure by them to move their code base forward when they move their foundations forward.

 

Edit: Even with the eccentric nature of their Windows UI I'm still open to moving to Windows 10 if WWDC 2015 turns into a giant lemon of visual tweaks over much needed substance under the hood. Given the come back of Dell as a viable option for me to purchase a laptop and desktop off the need for Apple to lift it's game is higher than ever if they want to win me over as a customer - I've been using Mac's for 10 years but it doesn't mean that I have some sort of loyalty that stops me from considering alternatives. Right now if things keep going the way they do then it'll be an XPS 8700 + XPS 13.3" + HTC One M9 in the future if more fluff comes out like UI tweaks rather than updating the OpenGL, OpenCL, a new file system and fixing the issues under the hood they've been neglecting for years.

1.  I never said that "haxies" were for developers - they aren't.  Haxies are, like patched uxthemes, aimed squarely at users.

2.  The primary reason for the newer installers was, in fact, cost/price - as I pointed out, full licenses of InstallShield were pricey.  There were also differences - some quite deliberate - from InstallShield - that was done primarily to avoid being sued out of existence.

3.  I'm NOT justifying bad UI design - from anybody.  I'm simply refusing to blame Microsoft alone - as they aren't the only "guilty party" in the bad-UI department (especially when it comes to applications).  Blaming ONLY Microsoft is a cop-out at best, and disingenuous at worst.  There's plenty of blame to go around.

4.  Lastly, part of the mishmash is due to us as users - have you been following the screaming if there are ANY changes to ANY software from anyone?  Whether it's applications, utilities, or even Windows itself, ANY change - and especially a UI change - brings out the ravenous beast in some users.   (Even the absolutely nitpickish changes in Windows for Workgroups 3.11 were howled at - despite said changes being limited mostly to File Manager - and that was AFTER the review that pointed out the rather obvious in retrospect performance advantages "Windows for Warehouses" offered over Windows 3.1 - on the same hardware.  Some developers - or application development teams at even Microsoft itself - take the safe option and change nothing - if only to keep their eardrums from blowing up.)

5.  GNOME and KDE are self-contained desktop environments - that much IS true.  However, they can also be adopted "piecemeal" - you don't necessarily HAVE to use ONLY applications from the same core as your DE in Linux, or even BSD.  (The only case where you have no choice is OpenSolaris and the forks thereof - as there is no version of KDE there yet.)  While I prefer KDE, I have been known to actually install GNOME-based suite-pieces in it due to reasons of personal preference.  A typical personalized-by-me KDE install looks like the infamous "one-piece-at-a-time" car - stuff from different desktop environments (where they fit my usage) can be found all over - a conformist KDE it isn't.  (The same was true is my GNOME installs - the only exaction - naturally - being GNOME on Solaris/OpenSolaris.)

6.  Backward compatibility is both a blessing AND a curse; the curse part affects everybody - no matter what hardware or operating system you use. An example of the "curse" is the one set of games that doesn't work in the Windows 10 Previews, but DOES work in older versions - including 8.1; the Daybreak/SOE Launchpad.  The issue is in the connectivity to the game servers - it won't link up.  (Not even the Compatibility Wizard has a fix for that.)  The issue isn't even unique to Windows, nor has it ever been.  The problem for developers is how do you fix something in terms of compatibility with a new OS/platform, without causing breakage in existing platforms.  In fact, Android developers, along with Google, are getting TWO earfuls from early adopters of Lollipop with backward-compatibility issues - on both software AND hardware-related issues.

[HawkMan]

You'd think that by now they would have moved to vector based icons but alas both Windows and OS X insist on using bitmap icons because apparently vector look too 'cartoony'. The icons they had in BeOS were nice and if updated I think would make a great icon set:

 

http://www.guidebookgallery.org/screenshots/beos5

 

It'll be interesting to see what happens because there is still a lot of water left to go under the bridge before the release it to the world.

 

vectors are infinitely zoomable, BUT they don't scale well, you can't use the same icon for 32x32 and 256x256 size icons.

 

you have a good icon at the designed size, but make it smaller and it becomes a blurry mess trying to gave to much detail, make it bigger and it's cartoon land.

 

vectors are not a magic bullet for ui and icons.

 

if the GUI is a fixed size me and to be the same physical size or relative size(relative to screen size) at different while being resolution independent, then yes vectors make sense. however that's not what people want or need. that is scalable GUI's. pro users want it small , old people want large stuff.