Windows Experience

nospam wrote:
In article , Chris
wrote:

the new settings is *much* better than that mess of control
panels (a few of which still remain).

Settings is *awful*. Even on a 24" 2560x1440 screen I need to scroll up to
find all the settings. Previously everything was viewable on std monitors.
There's so much wasted space and nothing seems to "fit" properly. you need
a 4k screen to be comfortable.

it's a *lot* more organized and easier to use.

Nope. I don't know who's in charge of their HCI but they need a new job.

it's a lot easier to simply scroll one page versus clicking a bunch of
tiny tabs

Where's the research to support that? Or is it simply your opinion as per
usual.

You only know to scroll if more information is signposted somehow. In win10
that is woeful especially as it does the stupid thing of hiding the scroll
bar. Tabs at least are labeled and have meaning.

which sometimes move around, trying to find which ones hold
the relevant settings (and it's often more than one tab), only to find
what's needed is actually hidden behind an advanced button.

Win10 does both: stupid scrolling and hiding settings behind an advanced
button. Clearly poorly designed.

Chris wrote:

You only know to scroll if more information is signposted somehow. In win10
that is woeful especially as it does the stupid thing of hiding the scroll
bar.

Except it doesn't fully hide the scrollbar, it reduces the width until
you mouseover it.

Char Jackson wrote:

"will eventually discover otherwise" sounds a lot like what we heard
back in 2015, when Windows 10 was becoming available and people,
including yourself if I'm not mistaken, suggested that folks should
adopt Windows 10 because that's the direction MS is going and
eventually you'll have to make the switch. Well, here we are, nearly
4 years later, and there's still no need to make that switch.
Someday, perhaps, but not yet.

Saying people should do something because they'll eventually have to
do it is like suggesting that everyone should wear diapers their
entire adult lives, because eventually they'll have to. I don't know
about you, but I'll wait until I have to. It's the same with the
native GUI of Windows 10. Until then, there are multiple solutions
available to address the awful GUI. They're easy to find and easy to
use.

The Start menu alternatives seem more of a bandaid covering a scab.
Microsoft isn't yet done altering their desktop manager. The "10" for
Windows should not be seen as a version number, but as a product name,
as in "Windows 10", or "Windows10", or "WindowsX" or "WinX". They will
be making major changes in the GUI with every major update (at, what, 6
month intervals?). The scabs are going to pile up, so when you remove
the bandaid you won't know how to use WinX because the cumulative
changes made up one big scab, er, change in the resulting GUI. Build
1903 is already making some changes to the Start menu. More are coming.

I don't have the luxury of using only my home desktop PC. I have to use
other WinX hosts, and those won't have Start 10 or some other bandaid
installed. I'll be on those other WinX hosts trying to figure out a
desktop GUI that I've never learned. I help at work. I help friends.
I use computers owned by others. While adoption of WinX has been slow,
it's speeding up. Yep, eventually you'll might need to wear those adult
diapers, just like you'll eventually have to use WinX (the real one, not
the bandaided one).

I remember back in the 9x kernel based days of Windows that alternate
desktop managers was possible. The alternate desktop managers (aka
desktop shell managers) worked by changing a registry entry that pointed
to which program would become the desktop manager (instead of reusing
Windows Explorer as the desktop manager). That probably has not worked
for the NT-based version of Windows, or not for a long time. I've seen
Classic Shell and Start 7/8/10 but those are more like tweakers than
entire desktop managers.

I did find:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...ls_for_Windows

but it's a small list and only a few are listed as compatible with
Windows 10. Four are listed for Win10, but 1 is discontinued, 1 is
stalled, and only 2 are active. The only one that I remember hearing
about is ReactOS, but that's probably because I came across as an
alternate Windows-capable OS; see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ReactOS.
It has always been in alpha state and always been flaky. Not sure
listing ReactOS as an alternate desktop manager is valid since it
actually replaces the Windows operating system. That's like saying
Gnome is an alternate desktop manager for Windows despite you are
actually running Ubuntu as the operating system, not Windows. Oooh,
you're get to use a different desktop manager ... on a different OS!
The Cairo desktop manager doesn't look to be better, just different.

Ken Springer wrote:

Not the UI specifically, but they keep changing things in Settings.
Plus moving things from the Control Panel to Settings.

Their plan is to move all of the Control Panel applets into the Settings
app. They've been overly slow to migrate. The result is users have to
look 2 places to find all settings.

Also remember that not all settings where in the Control Panel, either.
Often there were links in the applets to load other wizards. Go into
Control Panel, click on Network and Internet, click on Network Sharing
Center, and click on your network connectoid (listed in Connections).
That opens a separate wizard dialog. There were and still are a lot of
these disjoint wizards, even when using Control Panel.

Finding all the settings has always been a sore point in Windows. It
isn't just Microsoft. Ever try to find all the settings in the config
UI that Firefox presents? They're not all there. Instead you often
have to delve into the about:config editor to tweak that web browser.

But I need to research and find out if the tiles are always running,
even when unpinned. Most of them I have no use for, so I want them
turned off.

Right-click on a tile. In its context menu, use the More entry and
select "Turn Live Tile Off".

It's the portable version of the full program. Million and millions of
associated files. ROFL. The portable version lets me carry it around
on a thumb drive to someone's house, and I can run it if I have a
question about the condition of their hard drive.

Portable software obviously doesn't install, so it also doesn't update
the Start menu. While hidden, there is still a Programs folder.
Right-click on any file entry (not a folder) in the alphabetical list in
the Start menu and choose More - Open File Location. Likely you open
the C:\ProgramData\Microsoft\Windows\Start Menu\Programs folder in File
Explorer. That the Programs folder for all users. For programs only in
your profile, enter "shellrograms" in the address bar of File
Explorer.

Just because Microsoft changed the Start menu's GUI doesn't mean they
changed the underlying scheme for where to store the shortcuts to the
programs. This is typical of Microsoft: change the UI and then
pronounce they have a whole new version of their product. New makeup on
the same ugly face.

You could see what happens if you go to either Programs folder and add a
shortcut for your portable program and then see if it shows up in the
alphabetical listing in the standard Start menu (that comes with WinX).
I haven't played with that yet. If I were to start playing around with
customizing the alphabetical program listing in the Start menu, I might
try editing the Programs folders to create my own hiearchy of folder to
group programs by type and by company, like Programs - Utilities -
Piriform and put the shortcut for CCleaner under there. Or I might
decide Start 10 is easier for customization, but I'd be learning yet
another Start menu manager and figuring out how to do it their way.

I don't know what, say, Stardock's Start10 uses for its folder in its
menued version of their Start menu, but I suspect they start with the
Programs folders.

On 5/30/19 2:01 AM, VanguardLH wrote:
Ken Springer wrote:

Not the UI specifically, but they keep changing things in Settings.
Plus moving things from the Control Panel to Settings.

Their plan is to move all of the Control Panel applets into the Settings
app. They've been overly slow to migrate. The result is users have to
look 2 places to find all settings.

True. It's things like this that **** off most of the people I meet.
Kind of gives things an "unfinished feel and look", don't you think?

Most people I meet don't want this philosophy of constant migration of
parts and pieces. They want to turn their system on, get there job
done, and get on with life. That seems to be a perspective that people
who are "into computers" can't seem to grasp. Even I've gone this way,
to some extent. My days of spending hours and hours exploring an OS
days disappeared years ago. As has some of my hair! LOL

Also remember that not all settings where in the Control Panel, either.
Often there were links in the applets to load other wizards. Go into
Control Panel, click on Network and Internet, click on Network Sharing
Center, and click on your network connectoid (listed in Connections).
That opens a separate wizard dialog. There were and still are a lot of
these disjoint wizards, even when using Control Panel.



Finding all the settings has always been a sore point in Windows. It
isn't just Microsoft. Ever try to find all the settings in the config
UI that Firefox presents? They're not all there. Instead you often
have to delve into the about:config editor to tweak that web browser.

But I need to research and find out if the tiles are always running,
even when unpinned. Most of them I have no use for, so I want them
turned off.

Right-click on a tile. In its context menu, use the More entry and
select "Turn Live Tile Off".

It's the portable version of the full program. Million and millions of
associated files. ROFL. The portable version lets me carry it around
on a thumb drive to someone's house, and I can run it if I have a
question about the condition of their hard drive.

Portable software obviously doesn't install, so it also doesn't update
the Start menu. While hidden, there is still a Programs folder.
Right-click on any file entry (not a folder) in the alphabetical list in
the Start menu and choose More - Open File Location. Likely you open
the C:\ProgramData\Microsoft\Windows\Start Menu\Programs folder in File
Explorer. That the Programs folder for all users. For programs only in
your profile, enter "shellrograms" in the address bar of File
Explorer.

Just because Microsoft changed the Start menu's GUI doesn't mean they
changed the underlying scheme for where to store the shortcuts to the
programs. This is typical of Microsoft: change the UI and then
pronounce they have a whole new version of their product. New makeup on
the same ugly face.

You could see what happens if you go to either Programs folder and add a
shortcut for your portable program and then see if it shows up in the
alphabetical listing in the standard Start menu (that comes with WinX).
I haven't played with that yet. If I were to start playing around with
customizing the alphabetical program listing in the Start menu, I might
try editing the Programs folders to create my own hiearchy of folder to
group programs by type and by company, like Programs - Utilities -
Piriform and put the shortcut for CCleaner under there. Or I might
decide Start 10 is easier for customization, but I'd be learning yet
another Start menu manager and figuring out how to do it their way.

I don't know what, say, Stardock's Start10 uses for its folder in its
menued version of their Start menu, but I suspect they start with the
Programs folders.



--
Ken
Macos 10.14.5
Firefox 67.0
Thunderbird 60.7
"My brain is like lightning, a quick flash
and it's gone!"

ARRRRGHHHHH!!!! Pressed the wrong button! LOL

On 5/30/19 5:53 AM, Ken Springer wrote:
On 5/30/19 2:01 AM, VanguardLH wrote:
Ken Springer wrote:

Not the UI specifically, but they keep changing things in Settings.
Plus moving things from the Control Panel to Settings.

Their plan is to move all of the Control Panel applets into the Settings
app. They've been overly slow to migrate. The result is users have to
look 2 places to find all settings.

True. It's things like this that **** off most of the people I meet.
Kind of gives things an "unfinished feel and look", don't you think?

Most people I meet don't want this philosophy of constant migration of
parts and pieces. They want to turn their system on, get there job
done, and get on with life. That seems to be a perspective that people
who are "into computers" can't seem to grasp. Even I've gone this way,
to some extent. My days of spending hours and hours exploring an OS
days disappeared years ago. As has some of my hair! LOL

Also remember that not all settings where in the Control Panel, either.
Often there were links in the applets to load other wizards. Go into
Control Panel, click on Network and Internet, click on Network Sharing
Center, and click on your network connectoid (listed in Connections).
That opens a separate wizard dialog. There were and still are a lot of
these disjoint wizards, even when using Control Panel.

At least, you usually had a single starting point to find what you were
looking for.

Apple does similar, moving things around. When I bought my first one,
back in the days of having discretionary income, setting the default web
browser was found in Safari. Now, it's in System PreferencesGeneral tab.

Finding all the settings has always been a sore point in Windows. It
isn't just Microsoft. Ever try to find all the settings in the config
UI that Firefox presents? They're not all there. Instead you often
have to delve into the about:config editor to tweak that web browser.

Thunderbird is the same way. One of the many reasons I don't recommend
either program to people anymore. In fact, I rarely recommend anything,
I tell people of the options I know of, and to go test them to find the
one they like. For browsers, it seems most use Chrome, but I don't know
why. I suspect they just click a button, the same as they do for a PDF
reader.
But I need to research and find out if the tiles are always running,
even when unpinned. Most of them I have no use for, so I want them
turned off.

Right-click on a tile. In its context menu, use the More entry and
select "Turn Live Tile Off".

Yep, but my question is, does unpinning them turn them off? Or, do you
have to go the extra step and turn them off first?

It's the portable version of the full program. Million and millions of
associated files. ROFL. The portable version lets me carry it around
on a thumb drive to someone's house, and I can run it if I have a
question about the condition of their hard drive.

Portable software obviously doesn't install, so it also doesn't update
the Start menu. While hidden, there is still a Programs folder.
Right-click on any file entry (not a folder) in the alphabetical list in
the Start menu and choose More - Open File Location. Likely you open
the C:\ProgramData\Microsoft\Windows\Start Menu\Programs folder in File
Explorer. That the Programs folder for all users. For programs only in
your profile, enter "shellrograms" in the address bar of File
Explorer.

Wonder how long I'll remember this... Not very long is a good bet. :-(
Just because Microsoft changed the Start menu's GUI doesn't mean they
changed the underlying scheme for where to store the shortcuts to the
programs. This is typical of Microsoft: change the UI and then
pronounce they have a whole new version of their product. New makeup on
the same ugly face.

Realized this years ago.
You could see what happens if you go to either Programs folder and add a
shortcut for your portable program and then see if it shows up in the
alphabetical listing in the standard Start menu (that comes with WinX).
I haven't played with that yet.

It does appear to work this way, regardless of which Programs folder
it's in. Caveat... I did this in the admin account, not the standard
account, so I don't know if the results are the same there. Caveat
#2... The files have to be on the computer, not on a thumb drive as
mine is.

I use W10 as a learning platform, very little else. That's why HD
Sentinel is not installed there.

I should mention I'm a couple W10 updates behind on my system.
Apparently, the hardware is now too old for MS to want me to have the
latest and greatest W10. Nothing I've tried has let me get past 17763.

snip


--
Ken
Macos 10.14.5
Firefox 67.0
Thunderbird 60.7
"My brain is like lightning, a quick flash
and it's gone!"

In article , Chris
wrote:

the new settings is *much* better than that mess of control
panels (a few of which still remain).

Settings is *awful*. Even on a 24" 2560x1440 screen I need to scroll up
to
find all the settings. Previously everything was viewable on std
monitors.
There's so much wasted space and nothing seems to "fit" properly. you
need
a 4k screen to be comfortable.

it's a *lot* more organized and easier to use.

Nope. I don't know who's in charge of their HCI but they need a new job.

it's a lot easier to simply scroll one page versus clicking a bunch of
tiny tabs

Where's the research to support that? Or is it simply your opinion as per
usual.

where's the research to support that tabs are better? or is it just
your opinion?

the research is basic ui/ux and discoverability. it's also common sense.

You only know to scroll if more information is signposted somehow. In win10
that is woeful especially as it does the stupid thing of hiding the scroll
bar. Tabs at least are labeled and have meaning.

they're not hidden.

which sometimes move around, trying to find which ones hold
the relevant settings (and it's often more than one tab), only to find
what's needed is actually hidden behind an advanced button.

Win10 does both: stupid scrolling and hiding settings behind an advanced
button. Clearly poorly designed.

how would you make it better?

and keep in mind, what *you* prefer is more than likely *not* better
for a mass market product.

good ui/ux is *hard*.

In article , Ken Springer
wrote:

Apple does similar, moving things around. When I bought my first one,
back in the days of having discretionary income, setting the default web
browser was found in Safari. Now, it's in System PreferencesGeneral tab.

the original idea was that users could choose the default app (browser,
email, etc.) within the app itself rather than dig through system
settings to find where to change it. after all, they're already in the
app, so it's logical to have a 'make me the default' right there. some
apps even asked on first launch to be the default.

that turned out to be very confusing to users, so the setting was moved
to system preferences, where it should have been all along.

in other words, they fixed a mistake.

not wanting change would mean things could never improve. that's bad.

On 5/30/19 7:48 AM, nospam wrote:
not wanting change would mean things could never improve. that's bad.

That's so true. But so is the converse... The changes made may be a
step or two backwards.

And for me, many of the changes over the last few years by MS have been
in the backwards direction for ease of use for me.

--
Ken
Macos 10.14.5
Firefox 67.0
Thunderbird 60.7
"My brain is like lightning, a quick flash
and it's gone!"

In article , Ken Springer
wrote:

not wanting change would mean things could never improve. that's bad.

That's so true. But so is the converse... The changes made may be a
step or two backwards.

that's never the goal, but sometimes companies make mistakes.

more often, anything different is considered to be worse, even if it's
actually better.

And for me, many of the changes over the last few years by MS have been
in the backwards direction for ease of use for me.

perhaps so, but microsoft (or any company) isn't designing products
*just* for you.

what matters is the aggregate.

On 5/30/19 7:48 AM, nospam wrote:
In article , Chris
wrote:

snip

it's a lot easier to simply scroll one page versus clicking a bunch of
tiny tabs

Where's the research to support that? Or is it simply your opinion as per
usual.

where's the research to support that tabs are better? or is it just
your opinion?

the research is basic ui/ux and discoverability.

Any research is subject to mistakes. That's the way humans are,
imperfect. What's easily "discoverable" to one person isn't necessarily
discoverable to the persons on each side of that one person.

Tabs, at least, have text that should be helpful to *most* people. And
a delete icon that has an image that is recognizable as a trash can to
most people is more helpful than a square with a triangle on top.
Google used to use the square + triangle, but I see they've now got an
icon that kinda, sorta, maybe looks like a trash can. LOL

it's also common sense.

Someday, if you're lucky, you'll realize that sentence is hogwash, pure
and simple. "Common sense" is based on what you already know. If the
subject is unknown to a person, that person will have no "common sense"
on that subject. I had this discussion with a friend, probably 30 years
ago, and when we were finished, never again did he use that phrase, AFAIK.

You only know to scroll if more information is signposted somehow. In win10
that is woeful especially as it does the stupid thing of hiding the scroll
bar. Tabs at least are labeled and have meaning.

they're not hidden.

In some cases, they may as well be. That thin line you hover over often
just looks like the window border. Sometimes hovering doesn't always
display the scroll bar. Some monitors may not display the line worth a
damn. (As well as some colors, unfortunately.} I know the last is
fact, as I'm using one right now. :-(

Just put the scroll bars back and stop ****ing users off, and making
things harder to learn.

which sometimes move around, trying to find which ones hold
the relevant settings (and it's often more than one tab), only to find
what's needed is actually hidden behind an advanced button.

Win10 does both: stupid scrolling and hiding settings behind an advanced
button. Clearly poorly designed.

how would you make it better?

This would be a good subject for a new thread, as it would, or should,
encompass all operating systems.

and keep in mind, what *you* prefer is more than likely *not* better
for a mass market product.

I think a good design is something that works the best for the most
users. What I fear is, neither MS nor Apple really have a "good feel"
for what most users would, or do, like. To their credit, MS has added a
lot of "Give us feedback" options, but I'm not sure most people even see
them.

good ui/ux is *hard*.

True again. To me, it's getting worse and not better. :-(



--
Ken
Macos 10.14.5
Firefox 67.0
Thunderbird 60.7
"My brain is like lightning, a quick flash
and it's gone!"

On 5/30/19 9:25 AM, nospam wrote:
In article , Ken Springer
wrote:

not wanting change would mean things could never improve. that's bad.

That's so true. But so is the converse... The changes made may be a
step or two backwards.

that's never the goal, but sometimes companies make mistakes.

It would be nice if they actually admitted mistakes more often. :-)

more often, anything different is considered to be worse, even if it's
actually better.

But better is often subjective. And, even if something different is
demonstrably better, it doesn't always win in the marketplace. Betamax
vs. VHS is one example.

And for me, many of the changes over the last few years by MS have been
in the backwards direction for ease of use for me.

perhaps so, but microsoft (or any company) isn't designing products
*just* for you.

True., but their design path, and to some extent Apple's, is doing a
good job of making it more and more difficult for an increasing number
of users. Part of this is the situaion that, unless you are a member of
that group, you may not realize it.

what matters is the aggregate.

As well as what is included in the aggregate.


--
Ken
MacOS 10.14.5
Firefox 67.0
Thunderbird 60.7
"My brain is like lightning, a quick flash
and it's gone!"

Ken Springer wrote:
On 5/30/19 2:01 AM, VanguardLH wrote:
Ken Springer wrote:

Their plan is to move all of the Control Panel applets into the Settings
app. They've been overly slow to migrate. The result is users have to
look 2 places to find all settings.

True. It's things like this that **** off most of the people I meet.
Kind of gives things an "unfinished feel and look", don't you think?


The fact that the two sets of settings are segregated, is a good thing.

The hamburger icon is already too busy at the top level. And
the Insider Edition has added some "decoration crap" at the top.
They couldn't possibly pour both of those into the same bucket,
without "blowing out the seams".

I think mentally, it isn't that hard to figure out which
area you want. One contains "useful things" (which is why
they removed it from the right-click menu). The other
contains settings for the SmartPhone you don't own
(SmartPhone controls on a Desktop).

I especially appreciate the comedy with respect to my Webcam.
My Webcam has a microphone. The Camera App cannot access the
webcam, unless the microphone preference is turned on
*and* the video preference is turned on. So I can't for example,
run the Camera App with the microphone gated off (and make
a soundless this-or-that). I have to turn on both. And, as
a CS graduate, I'm expected to know that my flavor of webcam
requires this clever logical-AND in order to work. Thank
goodness for friendly design.

Paul

nospam wrote:
In article , Chris
wrote:

the new settings is *much* better than that mess of control
panels (a few of which still remain).

Settings is *awful*. Even on a 24" 2560x1440 screen I need to scroll up
to
find all the settings. Previously everything was viewable on std
monitors.
There's so much wasted space and nothing seems to "fit" properly. you
need
a 4k screen to be comfortable.

it's a *lot* more organized and easier to use.

Nope. I don't know who's in charge of their HCI but they need a new job.

it's a lot easier to simply scroll one page versus clicking a bunch of
tiny tabs

Where's the research to support that? Or is it simply your opinion as per
usual.

where's the research to support that tabs are better? or is it just
your opinion?

So the instant I challenge you to support your assertion you challenge me
back? How about answering the question?

the research is basic ui/ux and discoverability. it's also common sense.

No such thing as common sense.

You only know to scroll if more information is signposted somehow. In win10
that is woeful especially as it does the stupid thing of hiding the scroll
bar. Tabs at least are labeled and have meaning.

they're not hidden.

which sometimes move around, trying to find which ones hold
the relevant settings (and it's often more than one tab), only to find
what's needed is actually hidden behind an advanced button.

Win10 does both: stupid scrolling and hiding settings behind an advanced
button. Clearly poorly designed.

how would you make it better?

A combination of macOS Preferences and the old win7 Control Panel. It needs
more iconography and less empty space. All pages need to fit on 1080p
screens (the most common resolution and displayable by 50% of monitors)
without scrolling.

and keep in mind, what *you* prefer is more than likely *not* better
for a mass market product.

good ui/ux is *hard*.

Agree. MS are doing a bad job compared to previous and others. They have
gone backwards.

Ken Springer wrote:
On 5/30/19 7:48 AM, nospam wrote:
not wanting change would mean things could never improve. that's bad.

That's so true. But so is the converse... The changes made may be a
step or two backwards.

And for me, many of the changes over the last few years by MS have been
in the backwards direction for ease of use for me.

Agree. I like change and novelty, but win 10 is an exception.